I'm not convinced that bandwidth is the main issue. The fact that we interact with supercomputers over SSH today rather than a live video stream like we could in terms of bandwidth hints at the larger problem.
We really struggle to get computers to understand what we mean. We still largely have to program computers rather than just interact with them to do the sorts of things the GP is talking about. If AGI advances to the point that computers will easily be able to do our bidding using voice, video, or a neural lace, I'm not sure that there will be much need for computers to be directed by humans at all.
Musk is talking about a direct brain to computer interface. Video/typing/etc cannot be compared, even remotely. You're missing Musk's point if you argue down that path.
>Musk is talking about a direct brain to computer interface. Video/typing/etc cannot be compared, even remotely. You're missing Musk's point if you argue down that path.
While I think its clear the direct to brain interfaces are not even remotely similar to video/typing, I don't think that is relevant to the GP's point vis a vis:
>We really struggle to get computers to understand what we mean.
What I mean is that even if we had the rich interaction of a direct brain to compute interface available, it might not be worth much of anything for programming computers, where the problem is about clarifying concepts rather than expressing information. Having said that, one has to imagine that these kind of interfaces could do a lot for artistic projects that can make direct use of information in the brain.
I don't get it. What do you mean by "direct brain to computer interface" and why it is supposed to "not be comparable to video"? Our eyes are already integrated as closely as possible with our brain and you can easily feed enough pixels into your eyes to utilize your retinas fully. Why do you think that "direct interface" will be any better? How do you envision input/output with that?
I have a lot of doubt about prophecies of "brain/computer merger" when the message itself isn't clear enough for another brain to understand it. Like, how can the message can possibly be clearer if it's "transmitted" (which implies articulation of some sort) ten or hundred times faster?
Said another way, interfaces may not mean integration – computing interfaces are starting to become much more pervasive and some parts of our lives are becoming integrated but I don't think it's viable to say that we are integrating with these systems quite yet. We are definitely interfacing more with computers and they are becoming ever more essential for our daily experiences but we haven't merged in the least.
