It’s an open question. I just don’t know if that is the case and I’m very curious to know more about this. The chimp-human example is very convincing. Further someone with down-syndrome probably cannot understand what you can comprehend. So where is the gap, is there one? It looks like. This says, yes, I should believe what the SIAI claims. However, the original quote claims that “the most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man”. If this was the case, it would hint at the possibility that superhuman AI would merely be superhuman fast and had superhuman memory and ram, yet wouldn’t reside on a different conceptual level.
Both Anissimov and Tolstoy appear to me to be engaging in hyperbole. Further, Tolstoy was writing in the end of the nineteenth century—computers didn’t exist, much less the idea of general artificial intelligence.
I’m not sure what your point is exactly, but if it is anything like “That quote by Anissimov is largely mistaken” then you are correct.
It’s an open question. I just don’t know if that is the case and I’m very curious to know more about this. The chimp-human example is very convincing. Further someone with down-syndrome probably cannot understand what you can comprehend. So where is the gap, is there one? It looks like. This says, yes, I should believe what the SIAI claims. However, the original quote claims that “the most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man”. If this was the case, it would hint at the possibility that superhuman AI would merely be superhuman fast and had superhuman memory and ram, yet wouldn’t reside on a different conceptual level.
Both Anissimov and Tolstoy appear to me to be engaging in hyperbole. Further, Tolstoy was writing in the end of the nineteenth century—computers didn’t exist, much less the idea of general artificial intelligence.