It’s not clear it’s a lower bound bc it’s unclear whether fruit flies have the physical and (especially) cognitive capabilities to reconstruct the whole economy. It’s not enough to double quickly. You need to be able to make the robots that make the robots… that make anything.
But I agree that we might do way better than evolution. We might design things that double faster than fruit flies and can reconstruct the whole economy. So I agree i was wrong to describe this as an upper bound.
Seems to me more like an estimate of the upper bound that could be biased in either direction. The upper bound might be faster bc we outperform evolution. Or it might be slower if fruit flies lack the capabilities to reconstruct the whole economy.
Keen to hear about other areas where you think we’re being too conservative. It’s definitely possible to point to particular assumptions that seem too conservative. But there’s often counter-considerations. To give one quick example, only 20% of output today is reinvested, 80% is consumed. If this keeps happening during robot doublings, they’ll happen 5X slower than our analysis. Our analysis implicitly assumes 100% reinvestment.
I’m very confused by this response—if we’re talking about strong quality superintelligence, as opposed to cooperative and/or speed superintelligence, then the entire idea of needing an industrial explosion is wrong, since (by assumption) the superintelligent AI system is able to do things that seem entirely magical to us.
It’s not clear it’s a lower bound bc it’s unclear whether fruit flies have the physical and (especially) cognitive capabilities to reconstruct the whole economy. It’s not enough to double quickly. You need to be able to make the robots that make the robots… that make anything.
But I agree that we might do way better than evolution. We might design things that double faster than fruit flies and can reconstruct the whole economy. So I agree i was wrong to describe this as an upper bound.
Seems to me more like an estimate of the upper bound that could be biased in either direction. The upper bound might be faster bc we outperform evolution. Or it might be slower if fruit flies lack the capabilities to reconstruct the whole economy.
Keen to hear about other areas where you think we’re being too conservative. It’s definitely possible to point to particular assumptions that seem too conservative. But there’s often counter-considerations. To give one quick example, only 20% of output today is reinvested, 80% is consumed. If this keeps happening during robot doublings, they’ll happen 5X slower than our analysis. Our analysis implicitly assumes 100% reinvestment.
I’m very confused by this response—if we’re talking about strong quality superintelligence, as opposed to cooperative and/or speed superintelligence, then the entire idea of needing an industrial explosion is wrong, since (by assumption) the superintelligent AI system is able to do things that seem entirely magical to us.