The Complete Theory

a reply to: Peeple / Terpene

Because the essence of intelligence is learning, and you learn by asking questions (this automatically means today's neural networls are not really learning because they cannot ask questions).

I guess the superthing out there already knows that the more questions once feeds into it, the higher the entropy, till you achieve a state of maximum entropy, after which no further change could occur. Everything is learned, no more new things are left to be learned. So you ceases to exist or, at least, your purpose in life is achieved, after which no further change could occur.

Mr. Dyson formulated five laws that any superthing must comply with. Law number three reads this way:

Any system simple enough to be understandable will not be complicated enough to behave intelligently, while any system complicated enough to behave intelligently will be too complicated to understand.

If the universe were simple enough to be understood, then it wouldn't be complicated enough to behave intelligently. But if we assume the universe is complicated enough to behave intelligently, then it is too complicated to understand.

It is an existential dance between those who ask and those who answer, and both need each other. Maybe all of them is the superthing.

a reply to: Direne

Entropy as in disorder?
I don't think so because processing information is the shark in the unprocessed data ocean. It cleans up the trash.
Like we with our intelligence that invents tools processing data beyond our natural ability speaks for a really strong drive of intelligence to order stuff.
Neural networks don't learn?
Are you sure?

Just like I can't follow with the ceases to exist. What would be an example where that is true?
That doesn't happen. With anything.
Maybe it changes because you learn more and put it in more and more smaller categories. But there isn't a single answer where not also a lot of new questions arise.


I liked the lower half
🌺

a reply to: Direne

Any system simple enough to be understandable will not be complicated enough to behave intelligently, while any system complicated enough to behave intelligently will be too complicated to understand

Doesn't that have 3 possible implications, looking at our ability to have a conversation?
1 we're not intelligent
2 we don't understand each other
3 the premise is wrong

a reply to: Terpene

We're part of an encompassing system talking to ourselves.

a reply to: Peeple

You right... I totally missed that angle... What a mind bender...

If we take that as the definition of a system, where is the boundary?
Is it humans, earth, the solar system, the galaxy, or the whole universe?

Does that mean every system we don't understand is intelligent?
Or
Is only an intelligent system able to understand one that isn't?
We can't even understand certain systems that don't behave intelligently, so what's the point of asking the big question?

a reply to: Terpene

Survival.

a reply to: Peeple

Food, water, shelter, and some argue love... But in the end you're still not going to survive...

a reply to: Terpene

The species might if we get our # together. Now.
That's not nothing.

a reply to: Peeple

I walked a mile in atlas shoes too, I'll leave it to him while here.

it's a beautiful journey and we will ultimately reach the same end, I found the lighter the carriage the more I enjoy the journey and the less I worry about the destination...