An AI skeptic imagines that the highly intelligent fraction of the population are facing an existential crisis.
In the past 3-4 months, people on the high end of the IQ distribution are the ones facing an existential crisis from AI. In the end, a major aspect of IQ comes down to having a vast memory and pulling bits and pieces from it without much effort and putting them together in new combinations. Here, the machine has pulled ahead. Those in the middle to lower end of the IQ range have been surpassed so completely that many of them are unable to discern what has happened. Finally, if you have reached dotage, then you probably feel a bit of Schadenfreude that this is trouble for the generations below you who were edging you out.
ESR himself weighed in to disagree.
I’m on the high end of the IQ spectrum, well into the nosebleed section, and this doesn’t reflect my experience nor that of my immediate peers. We’re not having an existential crisis. We’re going wonderfully nuts using AI as an accelerator for projects we’ve always wanted to do but couldn’t budget the time for.
I absolutely concur. I’m on the high side myself and I calculate that using AI correctly in both collaborative and critical roles gives me an effective 2 SD IQ boost. I’ve been able to accomplish tasks that should require 205-215 IQ, which I definitely do not have. The refutation of evolution by natural selection and the development of the core of Veriphysics pretty much represents the peak of my intellectual capabilities.
The refutation of evolution by neutral theory, the solution of the Agrippan Trilemma, and the refutation of Kant’s das Ding an sich all required AI augmentation.
As with most tools, high-IQ individuals can utilize AI far more effectively than normal individuals. But their ability to do so doesn’t meant they actually will do so, particularly if they decide to use their superior intelligences to rationalize why AI should not be utilized for one reason or another.
