|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
20th April 2013, 07:30 AM | #1 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
Why does James Randi endorse the Singularity Summit?
James Randi has appeared at the Singularity Summit and is quoted in the site banner.
I wonder why. While the event has recently been overtaken by the Singularity University, it was started by an organization that promotes cryonics as well as odd ideas about Bayess theorem and the scientific method, other crazy ideas besides of course the robot apocalypse. Why does Randi give implicit endorsement to this kind of woo-meisters? It seems contrary to the mission of the JREF. |
22nd April 2013, 05:44 AM | #2 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,084
|
Why don't you ask him? randi@randi.org
|
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him. Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer |
|
23rd April 2013, 04:28 PM | #3 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,899
|
This one is awesome! I realize people may truly be suffering psychological issues here, and that is not to be taken lightly. The above link takes that quite seriously though and I think it addresses the matter quite well. Plus it's really silly to fear someone torturing some future simulation of yourself. That sounds like something some Star Trek writer invented just in order to carry a plot line.
Anyway, I see your point. This seems like some awfully intelligent people putting their talent mostly to waste. Remember, intelligence is not wisdom. |
23rd April 2013, 05:12 PM | #4 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
Perhaps because he believes that it's a subject that's worth talking about?
|
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
28th April 2013, 11:47 AM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
The very fact that they try hardly to censor it out contributes to that it is much more known than it would otherwise be.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it find it rather stupid to worry about getting tortured by a future godlike AI. And people literally having nightmares about it? Geez... Anyways, I would consider it a fraudulent organization. They claim to be uniquely positioned to save humanity (and you can help them save humanity by sending them money!), yet they have almost no interaction with the scientific/scholarly communities that research what they prattle about. How anyone can take this group seriously is beyond me. |
28th April 2013, 11:50 AM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
|
28th April 2013, 08:01 PM | #7 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
If he finds it an interesting subject and worth talking about, why not?
Now as it turns out, Randi is unlikely to find that particular subject interesting. What are the differences between creationism and the singularity that might cause him to endorse one, but not the other? |
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
3rd May 2013, 12:08 PM | #8 |
Scholar
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 53
|
Probably would be worth asking Randi's take on it. he seems quite an adamant skeptic but it always in your best interests to ask. I believe that no matter how sincere the person may seem it is important to question anything that appears out of place. I learnt that lesson the hard way. If you wanted to draft an email to Randi I would be happy to help. |
4th May 2013, 02:14 AM | #9 |
Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 69
|
I think I figured out what he meant by Bayes.
The relevant part of Bayes' theorem implies that if the same evidence is consistent with more than one hypothesis, the hypothesis with the highest prior probability is more likely. Solomonoff induction implies that the theory which is simpler has a higher prior probability. Kolmogorov complexity measures simplicity by the length of the description. He thinks that many-worlds is shorter to describe than quantum collapse. Combining all of this, you should believe many worlds. This is wrong because Kolmogorov complexity is relative to a language and can't say that one theory is simpler than another in an absolute sense. It's also very Rube Goldberg-ish--it's like saying that you should buy the loaf of bread that's on sale by deciding that the cheaper loaf of bread leaves you with more cash in your pocket, and you need to compute the utility function of money to determine that having more money in your pocket is a desirable thing, and by appropriate application of Aristotlean logic you decide that if something that leaves you with more cash is desirable and cheaper bread leaves you with more cash, then cheaper bread is desirable. (Edit: removed reference to Kolmogorov complexity being used to compute outputs. Not as relevant as I thought.) |
8th May 2013, 02:44 PM | #10 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
Well from what I understand the interpretations of quantum mechanics is the same no matter if you favor MWI, Copenhagen or shut-up-and-calculate, that is, they are mathematically and empirically identical. That's why they are interpretations intended to explain QM in human terms, rather than hypotheses.
There is a hillarious comment at another forum about these guys, by someone from what I understand works with AI for a living (real AI, not in a crackpot way):
Quote:
|
8th May 2013, 03:01 PM | #11 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
|
8th May 2013, 03:06 PM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,358
|
|
8th May 2013, 09:14 PM | #13 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
|
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|