USD 50.00 Bounty for Idea #4694Beta

Standing bounty✓ Closed
This bounty has ended. Tyler Mills wanted more criticisms of this idea. Additional funds will reopen the bounty.

Idea to criticize

By this standard, a random number generator has universal creativity as well, and is therefore a person. So there must be a standard for personhood other than: able to generate any possible explanation. Such as: can do that tractably.

#4694​·​Tyler MillsOP revised about 1 month ago

Terms

Seeking new, non-trivial, substantive criticisms for why personhood cannot be or should not be defined in terms of tractability (in the complexity theory sense).


Site-wide terms apply. To be eligible for a payout, participants must connect a Stripe account in good standing and submit at least one direct criticism of idea #4694 meeting all bounty terms and having no pending counter-criticisms 7 days after submission. Counter-criticisms do not need to meet the bounty terms.

Funders

Verified payment methods
Multiple people can fund a bounty. Funding is generally assigned in order of submission.
For submission 1✓ ClaimedUSD 50.00
Total USD 50.00

Submissions

A random number generator does not create explanatory knowledge.

#4781​·​Dirk Meulenbelt, 20 days ago
Review deadline: × Rejected

Tyler Mills rejected this submission:

Poster agreed this idea was false after a very quick interaction, so does not meet the terms: "non-trivial, substantive". (Has standing criticisms anyway).

A random number generator does not have universal creativity, because it is not a universal explainer: it can only generate explanations by accident. Universal explainers seek good explanations through conjecture and criticism.

#4809​·​Dirk Meulenbelt revised 18 days ago
Review deadline: × Pending criticisms

I think the core of universal creativity isn't about efficiency, it's the open-ended capacity to restructure what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data. Creativity is (at least partially) the ability to reformulate the problem space itself, not by ironing out implications of existing theories. An AI and computational systems is already good at ironing out the implications in our language and existing knowledge systems. But that's search within a given space, not the creation of a new one. Creativity seems to work on a higher level. It's operating at the level of problem framing, which requires things like relevance. An AI can't create new relevance, because its weights are a statistical compression of what humans have already found relevant. It inherits a frame; it doesn't generate one.

I think this shows that tractability can't do the work the bounty asks. Tractability is defined relative to a fixed problem space. But universal creativity is (at least partially) the capacity to restructure the space, to change what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data.

#4856​·​Knut Sondre Sæbø, 13 days ago
Review deadline: × Rejected

Tyler Mills rejected this submission:

This is a revision (later or earlier) of an idea already accepted.

I think tractibility lacks the open-ended capacity to reformulate what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data. Creativity is (at least partially) the ability to reformulate the problem space itself, not by ironing out implications of existing theories. An AI and computational systems is already good at ironing out the implications in our language and existing knowledge systems. But that's search within a given space, not the creation of a new one. Creativity seems to work on a higher level. It's operating at the level of problem framing, which requires things like relevance. An AI can't create new relevance, because its weights are a statistical compression of what humans have already found relevant. It inherits a frame; it doesn't generate one.

I think this shows that tractability can't do the work the bounty asks. Tractability is defined relative to a fixed problem space. But universal creativity is (at least partially) the capacity to restructure the space, to change what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data.

#4858​·​Knut Sondre Sæbø revised 13 days ago
Review deadline: × Rejected

Tyler Mills rejected this submission:

This is a revision (later or earlier) of an idea already accepted.

I think tractibility lacks the open-ended capacity to reformulate what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data. Creativity is (at least partially) the ability to reformulate the problem space itself, not by ironing out implications of existing theories. An AI and computational systems is already good at ironing out the implications in our language and existing knowledge systems. But that's search within a given space, not the creation of a new one. Creativity seems to work on a higher level. It's operating at the level of problem framing, which requires things like relevance. An AI can't create new relevance, because its weights are a statistical compression of what humans have already found relevant. It inherits a pre-given frame.

I might be confused about what you mean by tractible. But it seems to me that tractability can't do the work the bounty asks. Tractability is formally defined relative to a fixed problem space. But universal creativity is (at least partially) the capacity to restructure the space, to change what counts as a problem, a solution, and relevant data.

#4860​·​Knut Sondre Sæbø revised 13 days ago
Review deadline: ✓ Accepted