9

Suppose superintelligent AI is possible. Is there any reason its code couldn't be executed by stone-age people rather than a computer? E.g., imagine an order of monks reading and executing commands in a structured way.

This version of AI would obviously be much slower than one run on a computer, but conceptually I can't see why it wouldn't work. Let's leave aside the question of how such a thing would be created.

JDługosz
  • 69,440
  • 13
  • 130
  • 310
Dave
  • 443
  • 2
  • 7
  • 14
    https://xkcd.com/505/ – Dan Smolinske Aug 09 '15 at 05:01
  • @DanSmolinske Perfect! – Dave Aug 09 '15 at 05:10
  • So let's pray that chanting works. – user6760 Aug 09 '15 at 06:11
  • 2
    Google the Chinese room experiment – Serban Tanasa Aug 09 '15 at 11:20
  • See "The Outsourcerers Apprentice". Monks as bits were a thing, just used a reality with alternative time flow to compensate for speed. – Mourdos Aug 09 '15 at 11:52
  • While a computer or Turing Machine may be possible, I wonder how self awareness would be handled in a computer with such enormous latency issues? – Thucydides Aug 09 '15 at 12:20
  • 4
    It's called bureaucracy – punkerplunk Aug 09 '15 at 12:41
  • This reminds me of the whole earth being a computer in The Hitchhikers Guide – ankh-morpork Aug 10 '15 at 02:24
  • Nightmare mode: Society is that AI. We're all unknowing bits in a program. – UIDAlexD Aug 09 '16 at 16:42
  • You would be interested in a long sequence in "The Three Body Problem" by Cixin Liu. He elaborately describes building a giant processor using humans who learn to use flags to replicate binary operations and others to (literally) run the info to other groups of humans. Obviously the problem here is the speed of operations is VERY slow and limited by human potty and feeding cycles. But conceptually it works, – Jason K Aug 09 '16 at 17:04
  • So what exactly do you ask? Do you ask if is it possible to execute/debug a computer program by people manually? How "superintelligent AI" is related? It it is a computer program, the question can be reduced to the more common one. If it is not in your world, please elaborate. – enkryptor Aug 09 '16 at 17:15
  • EXACTLY this idea is one of the main ideas explored by "The Three Body Problem", a novel that won the Hugo Award for best novel in 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three-Body_Problem Alien civ doesn't have the materials to build electronics for a long time, and they advance in math far faster, enough to put together computation by many individuals working together, passing bits around. – SRM Jan 21 '17 at 00:07
  • Now imagine a babbage engine AI. – John Jan 21 '17 at 02:25

4 Answers4

13

Analysis

Best case: code was written by aliens with efficient implementation of thinking algorithms, so there is no need to simulate details of brain chemestry and allow emergent behavior to work itself out.

Revisit this answer for details. Take the specs as:

If you already knew how the brain worked to produce intelligence, writing that program fairly directly would require 1015 FLOPS (Blue Gene/P circa 2007) and 100 Terabytes.

Suppose the smallest item that can be manipulated is the size of a dime. They can be laid out in trays or stacked compactly in rolls if you are careful.

If each dime stores a byte, you normally move them around in bulk and don’t examine the detailed value. But it has a 4×4 grid of dots on each side, or a written hex digit, on each side. Math work could be done on expanded registers (like an abacus?) But main storage is this size.

Each byte is 2½ grams and 500 cubic millimeters. Multiplying out, it totals 50 million cubic meters and 250 billion kilograms. The mass is possible physically, and the size would be 20 of the Great Pyramid of Giza. That’s just the size of the bytes, and warehouses to allow storage and access would be significantly larger.

Copying a block of memory would be the labor (time and logistics) of finding a palette of goods in a warehouse and moving it to another, in a large city. The storage would be over many miles.

I don't think floating-point is that important, and can be a refinement of the abacus technique. A skilled operator using abacus or mental work is limited by how fast he can accept directions. As a bound, let’s over-estimate and say he can do 10 operations per second on bytes, reading the opcodes as distinct pictograms and whizzing through the steps. I think finding the argument values to work with will be a bottleneck. One instruction would need to operate on values large enough to store addresses and reasonable signifacance of quantities, but to get an undisputed lower bound let’s suppose it’s possible with stone-tech and human effort, 10 instructions per second.

1015 instructions would take 3 million man-years.

A million people in a concentrated area is Ancient Rome, not stone age. Say 50,000 dedicated people (more like the pyramid builders) plus the urban infrastructure to feed them. Working 8-hour days, it would take 180 years to compute 1 second of AI program.

As noted, the logistics of bringing the right data and instructions to them would be worse. But you have caching levels, and multiple threads, and designs more suited to the architecture.

In Conclusion

Before the AI could think, “um…” the same effort could invent a modern society and build semiconductors.

JDługosz
  • 69,440
  • 13
  • 130
  • 310
6

Absolutely they could though it would be too slow to be worth it. That's the beauty of a Turing Machine. The results are the same no matter the underlying hardware. While this super advanced AI may need some kind of gel based computation machine in order to work (a la Ex Machina), as long as that gel can emulate a Turing Machine, that code will absolutely work on monk-powered hardware using stones for bits.

Gel brain:

Gel brain!

Green
  • 52,750
  • 10
  • 130
  • 260
  • And as long as you get enough monks and/or LOTS of paper to store the machine state – SJuan76 Aug 09 '15 at 08:19
  • @SJuan76 precisely. – Green Aug 09 '15 at 09:01
  • 2
    I'd say it would be too slow to be even recognizable as AI, let alone some kind of super AI. – hiergiltdiestfu Aug 09 '15 at 09:22
  • 2
    The length of time needed is irrelevant. – Vakus Drake Aug 10 '15 at 08:58
  • This only works if the code is entirely time independent. From what I've seen of development of AI, some noise or randomness is required, as well as parallel processes. The timing and interplay of all those components would not scale the same way from a machine to human operators. – Samuel Aug 11 '15 at 17:09
0

Well it's a good job this is the stone age. There will be plenty of stones around. These will be used for your computer's memory. Draw boxes in the dirt and the presence or absence of a stone in the box represents a binary digit.

Don't restrict yourself to monks. If you do, the calculations will take forever. Maybe have an annual pilgrimage. All the followers of the religion turn up en masse and act as various components of the computer. If there are enough followers they can multi-process. The monks orchestrate the whole thing. They also provide input and read the output.

Oh - I've just noticed this from Dan Smolinske's comment. That about wraps the whole thing up.

chasly - supports Monica
  • 49,370
  • 15
  • 152
  • 305
0

I think this idea has a lot of potential. I picture thousands of monks, scattered across the world, each performing some small task on papyrus or animal skins. Computing esoteric formula on complicated instruments. Some of them are travelers, bringing the work of their conclave to the next monastery so that the results can combined and the work continue. Each century all the results must be compiled, and interpreted by the leaders of this cult and the information acted upon. Kings may be made or fall based on the output. Entire civilizations may be reorganized. New ideas brought to light. Who knows!

If the scale discussed above by JDługosz frightens consider this idea: What if it's not a super intelligent AI? What if it's just an obscure algorithm that the monks believe tells the people what to do or answers the questions of the universe? Maybe it's no more then a very complicated transfer function that takes 100 monks a couple years to solve for a set of inputs. But if the people of this world have absolute faith in the algorithm, it could have very interesting results.