>We don't need every human in the world to learn complex topology math like Terence Tao. Some need to be farmers. Some need to be engineers. Some need to be kindergarten teachers.
It doesn't have much to do with need. Not every human can be as capable regardless of how much need or time you allocate for them to do so. Then some humans are shoulders above peers in one field but come a bit short in another closely related one they've sunk a lot of time into.
Like i said, arguing about a one true definition is pointless. It doesn't exist.
>The definition of ASI historically is that it's an intelligence that far surpasses humans - not at the level of the best humans.
A Machine that is expert level in every single field would likely far surpass the output of any human very quickly. Yes, there might exist intelligences that are significantly more 'super' but that is irrelevant. Competence, like generality is a spectrum. You can have two super-human intelligences with a competence gap.
It doesn't have much to do with need. Not every human can be as capable regardless of how much need or time you allocate for them to do so. Then some humans are shoulders above peers in one field but come a bit short in another closely related one they've sunk a lot of time into.
Like i said, arguing about a one true definition is pointless. It doesn't exist.
>The definition of ASI historically is that it's an intelligence that far surpasses humans - not at the level of the best humans.
A Machine that is expert level in every single field would likely far surpass the output of any human very quickly. Yes, there might exist intelligences that are significantly more 'super' but that is irrelevant. Competence, like generality is a spectrum. You can have two super-human intelligences with a competence gap.