Not even kidding. What is common to genius and low-skill domains is that they tend to be bounded. Genius domains just have more richness for intuition to work on Mediocre intelligences tend to deal with the open, tedious messy domains where neither genius, nor stupidity work
-
-
Show this thread
-
The straight-up arms race scenario of trying to be “smarter” than machines always seemed strategically wrong. John Henry wrong. This “dealing with open systems” is a kind of intelligence but an oblique kind. One that projects to mediocrity on regular intelligence vector.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I wrote about this recently. I’m a big fan of mediocrity across a wide range of domains. It’s much more useful than excellence in one.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"B Ark: not worth the cycles"
-
Precisely. People forget the biggest B Ark lesson: they’re the ones who survive and thrive
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Douglas Adams had a great bit about this in HHGTTG - a colony of humans divided into 3 ships - 1) artists/models/sports stars/CEOs 2) plumbers/carpenters/farmers 3) middle management/sales people (the mediocre) ship #3 was diverted on purpose, ending up on early Earth...
-
Yup the golgafrinchan b ark story
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If intelligence could be traded like derivatives ;) AAA intelligence. Sub-prime intelligence. Junk intelligence
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interested
@robinhanson thoughts on this possibility -
"genius" is too ambiguous a category. High IQ folks would be replaced in a few games and abstract theory tasks, but not in most things, until they replace everyone in most everything.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.