Comment by Footkerchief
3 years ago
We're allowed to assume the existence of cat carriers in this metaphor, but not the existence of the humans that are the sole reason cat carriers exist?
3 years ago
We're allowed to assume the existence of cat carriers in this metaphor, but not the existence of the humans that are the sole reason cat carriers exist?
I was trying to be generous! But you are of course right, in the better analogy Hawking would find himself born into a feline-centric world and face an even harder task.
He’d have to be able to communicate with the cat for it to be a worthwhile metaphor to the ai in a box case and humans.
If he can do that it requires one weak link human over an infinite time horizon.
Humans are already terrible at preventing breaches in a lot dumber circumstances without something smarter than them trying to do it.
You're kind of falling into the fallacy this point is criticizing. You can't assume anything about communication between entities that are orders of magnitude apart in intelligence.
I have a profound understanding of my puppy's psychology, motivations, and capabilities; I even exercise complete control over her physical environment, and yet she ate my fitbit strap (again, goddamit!) as I was typing this very comment.
2 replies →