“No matter how intelligent you are, you cannot override fundamental laws of physics.”
Call me crazy, but I don’t think this is necessarily true. While it’s obviously true, by definition, that you can’t break the fundamental laws of physics, the laws of physics almost certainly don’t neatly map to the mathematical symbol games a bunch of us monkeys derived to describe them. It would be wholely unshocking to me if, for example, something we view as “fundamental” like the laws of thermodynamics are more an artifact of our models than a true facet of reality.
I definitely agree with the rest of your point though. So long as humans aren’t on the pareto optimal frontier of the energy/intelligence tradeoff (and I really doubt that’s the case), you should expect intelligent machines to be strictly superior in capabilities to us in all meaningful ways.
“No matter how intelligent you are, you cannot override fundamental laws of physics.”
Call me crazy, but I don’t think this is necessarily true. While it’s obviously true, by definition, that you can’t break the fundamental laws of physics, the laws of physics almost certainly don’t neatly map to the mathematical symbol games a bunch of us monkeys derived to describe them. It would be wholely unshocking to me if, for example, something we view as “fundamental” like the laws of thermodynamics are more an artifact of our models than a true facet of reality.
I definitely agree with the rest of your point though. So long as humans aren’t on the pareto optimal frontier of the energy/intelligence tradeoff (and I really doubt that’s the case), you should expect intelligent machines to be strictly superior in capabilities to us in all meaningful ways.