1. We are a community of readers. Join us!

    Readup is a social reading platform. No ads. No distractions. No liking or upvotes. We help you pay attention to what matters: reading.

    The New Yorker | Ted Chiang | 3/30/21 | 19 min
    3 reads2 comments
    9.5
    The New Yorker
    3 reads
    9.5
    You must read the article before you can post or reply.
    • bill
      Top reader of all timeScoutScribe
      1 day ago

      Smart.

      This caused me to stop and think:

      There’s no reason to believe that humans born ten thousand years ago were any less intelligent than humans born today; they had exactly the same ability to learn as we do. But, nowadays, we have ten thousand years of technological advances at our disposal, and those technologies aren’t just physical—they’re also cognitive.

    • deephdave
      Top reader this weekReading streakScout
      2 weeks ago

      We’re a long way off from being able to create a single human-equivalent A.I., let alone billions of them. For the foreseeable future, the ongoing technological explosion will be driven by humans using previously invented tools to invent new ones; there won’t be a “last invention that man need ever make.” In one respect, this is reassuring, because, contrary to Good’s claim, human intelligence will never be “left far behind.” But, in the same way that we needn’t worry about a superhumanly intelligent A.I. destroying civilization, we shouldn’t look forward to a superhumanly intelligent A.I. saving us in spite of ourselves. For better or worse, the fate of our species will depend on human decision-making.