This was rejected by Facebook for being over the character limit. Just a fleeting thought I had studying networks in two different classes. Nothing spectacular, more probably later, but in brief:
So if the function of a committee is to take a given situation and resolve an output; and the internal workings of that committee are unknown to the system that interfaces with it (it seems to me that high-level organizations are but object-oriented businesses); and furthermore that a benefit of the committee existing is that it can reach a conclusion on a given issue even if no single party understands every facet of that issue - can not then any such organized group (large corporation, voting body, the Internet, etc.) be said to be a new intelligent existence? Unlike the classic hivemind, no individual has to give up their identity. I mean, I don't know the workings of my brain, and I feel it safe to say that each piece of my brain doesn't know everything about my brain as a whole, but I am still a conscious, thinking person. Is a network of nodes in which each is a composite of intelligent materials itself not but a more apt candidate for the term "intelligence?"
Hope all is well!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting point, Oh Keeper of Logos. If the node may be considered as being akin to the concept of a knot, then is the implication that a defining characteristic of a knot is that it may also be undone?
ReplyDeleteIf that is the case, then an intelligent system would be (in part) defined by a surrounding or impending lack of intelligence.
It would follow that most businesses, governments and other hierarchies would qualify within the parameters of your investigations.