They already are RSIS, if you believe in the evolution of evolvability, which you probably should. The probable evolution of DNA from RNA, of introns, and of sex are examples of the evolution of evolvability.
There are single-celled organisms that act intelligently despite not having (or being) neurons. The slime mold, for example.
A gene network is a lot like the brain of an insect in which the exact connectivity of every neuron is predetermined. However, its switching frequency is much slower.
More advanced brains have algorithms that can use homogenous networks. That means that you can simply increase the number of neurons made, and automatically get more intelligence out of them.
Organisms have 600 to 20,000 genes. A honeybee has about a million neurons.
There are single-celled organisms that act intelligently despite not having (or being) neurons. The slime mold, for example.
What does “intelligence” mean here?
For context, some more about slime moulds. In that thesis is a detailed model of the whole life-cycle of the slime mould, using biochemical investigations and computer modelling to show how all the different stages and the transitions between them happen.
What does it mean, to say that this system is “intelligent”? The word is used for a very wide range of things, from slime moulds (and perhaps even simpler systems?) to people and beyond. What is being claimed when the same word is applied to all of these things?
Put in practical terms, does a detailed knowledge of exactly how the slime mould works help in constructing an AGI? Does it help in constructing more limited sorts of AI? Does it illuminate the investigation of other natural systems that fall within the concept of “intelligence”?
I am not seeing a reason to answer “yes” to any of these questions.
Put in practical terms, does a detailed knowledge of exactly how the slime mould works help in constructing an AGI? Does it help in constructing more limited sorts of AI? Does it illuminate the investigation of other natural systems that fall within the concept of “intelligence”?
I am not seeing a reason to answer “yes” to any of these questions.
Yes, to all of those questions. I don’t think we currently have the AI technology needed to produce something with the intelligence of a slime mold. (Yes, we might be able to, if we gave it magical sensors and effectors, so that it just had to say “go this way” or “go that way”. Remember that the slime mold has to do all this by directing an extremely complex sequence of modifications to its cytoskeleton.) Therefore, having a detailed knowledge of how it did this, and the ability to replicate it, would advance AI.
They already are RSIS, if you believe in the evolution of evolvability, which you probably should. The probable evolution of DNA from RNA, of introns, and of sex are examples of the evolution of evolvability.
There are single-celled organisms that act intelligently despite not having (or being) neurons. The slime mold, for example.
A gene network is a lot like the brain of an insect in which the exact connectivity of every neuron is predetermined. However, its switching frequency is much slower.
More advanced brains have algorithms that can use homogenous networks. That means that you can simply increase the number of neurons made, and automatically get more intelligence out of them.
Organisms have 600 to 20,000 genes. A honeybee has about a million neurons.
What does “intelligence” mean here?
For context, some more about slime moulds. In that thesis is a detailed model of the whole life-cycle of the slime mould, using biochemical investigations and computer modelling to show how all the different stages and the transitions between them happen.
What does it mean, to say that this system is “intelligent”? The word is used for a very wide range of things, from slime moulds (and perhaps even simpler systems?) to people and beyond. What is being claimed when the same word is applied to all of these things?
Put in practical terms, does a detailed knowledge of exactly how the slime mould works help in constructing an AGI? Does it help in constructing more limited sorts of AI? Does it illuminate the investigation of other natural systems that fall within the concept of “intelligence”?
I am not seeing a reason to answer “yes” to any of these questions.
Yes, to all of those questions. I don’t think we currently have the AI technology needed to produce something with the intelligence of a slime mold. (Yes, we might be able to, if we gave it magical sensors and effectors, so that it just had to say “go this way” or “go that way”. Remember that the slime mold has to do all this by directing an extremely complex sequence of modifications to its cytoskeleton.) Therefore, having a detailed knowledge of how it did this, and the ability to replicate it, would advance AI.