Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Artificial Intellegence?

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 3:47:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Artificial Intellegence, for the purpose of this thread, I'm referring to us (humans) creating something (not a baby through procreation) that has the ability to sense the world around it and learn and think on its own. Meaning that it will see things (assuming we give it photoelectric sensors) and learn on its own from them, we do not have to program all of its knowledge into it.

Do you believe we will ever create something that has this feature? That has intellectual independence? Or do you think we can only get so close but never quite reach it, like the speed of light?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 3:52:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
My big issue with this is the issue of consciousness, what is it, how does it come about. It is in effect my personal God of the gaps, and I entertain the notion that AIs will never posess it.

I rather suspect however that I am wrong, and that fully sentient-sapient AI's are possible. When they are developed the world will become a very strange place indeed.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 9:06:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

I think it would be pretty weird, though I imagine it will turn into the next civil rights era, lol.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 10:37:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 9:06:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

as it stands they have the ability to learn quite a lot, but its only in very limited domains, under somewhat strict parameters

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

I think it would be pretty weird, though I imagine it will turn into the next civil rights era, lol.

lol only if they are sufficiently human-like in appearance and behavior to garner sympathy. otherwise no one but a small minority will care.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 12:42:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 3:47:50 PM, OreEle wrote:
Do you believe we will ever create something that has this feature? That has intellectual independence? Or do you think we can only get so close but never quite reach it, like the speed of light?
Perhaps, but not in the sense that it becomes a normal thing.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 1:46:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

We have not made self-aware robot children. Seriously.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 1:51:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

The development of a true self-aware machine will produce vast amounts of wierdness. It will be a major obstacle for religion to negotiate around, even more so than evolution. It will shatter humanocentric notions. AI's will be given voting rights, will have to call computer programmers or more likely a new breed of psychologists who specifcally specialise in the psyches of AI's in criminal cases. There will be AI pop stars, AI politicians. Marriages between AI's and humans. Humanity will seek immortality by slowly converting most or all of their organic brains to computers. Society will be changed.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 5:46:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 1:51:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

The development of a true self-aware machine will produce vast amounts of wierdness. It will be a major obstacle for religion to negotiate around, even more so than evolution. It will shatter humanocentric notions. AI's will be given voting rights, will have to call computer programmers or more likely a new breed of psychologists who specifcally specialise in the psyches of AI's in criminal cases. There will be AI pop stars, AI politicians. Marriages between AI's and humans. Humanity will seek immortality by slowly converting most or all of their organic brains to computers. Society will be changed.

How so?

I find that that would pretty much be better anyway, and not all that weird. With robots, you increase jobs available, from manufacturers, to the pyschologists, and special robo-trained police, and mechanics that operate like doctors.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 7:58:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 1:51:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

The development of a true self-aware machine will produce vast amounts of wierdness. It will be a major obstacle for religion to negotiate around, even more so than evolution.

I disagree with that, since evolution doesn't go against a god, and neither would AI. They (as a whole, rather then as individuals) would probably just take longer to accept it, as they are with evolution.

It will shatter humanocentric notions. AI's will be given voting rights, will have to call computer programmers or more likely a new breed of psychologists who specifcally specialise in the psyches of AI's in criminal cases. There will be AI pop stars, AI politicians. Marriages between AI's and humans. Humanity will seek immortality by slowly converting most or all of their organic brains to computers. Society will be changed.

funny thing, we are finding that carbon based computers will likely be the way of the future (as we are reaching the limits of silicon).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 8:01:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Now lets alter our view of self aware AI from robots, living in our world. To computer game NPCs "living" in their computer generated world.

We can easily create a very realistic world (if we wish to take the time) since a physical world is nothing but a set of definable laws. Then couldn't we also (given the self-aware AI programing) create a thing in that world that is self-aware of that world?

Could you imagine playing WOW where the NPC were self aware?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 11:28:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Artificial intelligence does not exist. What this thread seems to (partially) be about is artificial cognition.

We do have machines that think, learn, make decisions, take orders, and protect themselves.

Cognition.

We do not have machines that ponder, express themselves, develop attachments, swear allegiance, or integrate abstractions into their decision-making.

Intelligence.

There is a very easy answer to this.

Right now, it is unforeseeable as to whether we will ever have artificial intelligence. We currently do not understand the mind, not our own, and not of any other complex animal capable of cognition. Thus, we do not even know what is necessary to create artificial intelligence. Once we do, we can assess what we have at our disposal and make a more logical determination about its potential.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 11:39:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
How do we know when a robot is perceiving? It's impossible to test. It's impossible to even tell if any other humans perceive, all you know is that you do. What is perceiving? Nobody really knows. Perhaps it could just be the result of incoming information, somehow. In-which case...perhaps the Internet is perceiving...perhaps it is aware. You may say it does not because it can't make choices. What are choices? Do the chemicals in our brains which result in thoughts not have a fixed pattern to them, one thing leading to another? How, then, is that different than the internet?

Sadly, it seems evident that consciousness will never be able to comprehend itself.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 12:38:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 11:39:22 AM, FREEDO wrote:
How do we know when a robot is perceiving? It's impossible to test. It's impossible to even tell if any other humans perceive, all you know is that you do. What is perceiving? Nobody really knows. Perhaps it could just be the result of incoming information, somehow. In-which case...perhaps the Internet is perceiving...perhaps it is aware. You may say it does not because it can't make choices. What are choices? Do the chemicals in our brains which result in thoughts not have a fixed pattern to them, one thing leading to another? How, then, is that different than the internet?

Sadly, it seems evident that consciousness will never be able to comprehend itself.

Although this is fairly intuitive, it is also misleadingly solipsistic.

It's belied by emotional connection as well as cooperative learning and engagement.

Have good sex and see solipsism for what it is.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 2:58:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 5:46:17 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/17/2010 1:51:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

The development of a true self-aware machine will produce vast amounts of wierdness. It will be a major obstacle for religion to negotiate around, even more so than evolution. It will shatter humanocentric notions. AI's will be given voting rights, will have to call computer programmers or more likely a new breed of psychologists who specifcally specialise in the psyches of AI's in criminal cases. There will be AI pop stars, AI politicians. Marriages between AI's and humans. Humanity will seek immortality by slowly converting most or all of their organic brains to computers. Society will be changed.

How so?

I find that that would pretty much be better anyway, and not all that weird. With robots, you increase jobs available, from manufacturers, to the pyschologists, and special robo-trained police, and mechanics that operate like doctors.

It will break down boundaries as previous innovations have done so and challenge the assumption that we are somehow special. With AI's we are no longer unique and more importantly no longer the pinnacle.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 3:01:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 7:58:43 AM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/17/2010 1:51:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:45:20 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:25:36 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/16/2010 5:14:40 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
We have already made them (the intellect of a 2-4 year old) and they will probably be for children's toys/playmates and nothing more I don't see any weirdness unless machines start falling in love with humans which will be very strange indeed . . .

That is true, to a degree.

They do have the ability to learn about the world around them, but do they have the ability to actually question the world about them? The potential to develop identities? If so, I haven't seen those yet. Just the kind that can observe and learn physical things. Though I could be mistaken.

http://www.imagination-engines.com...

Yeah I should have elaborated but shall you address my point on weirdness?

The development of a true self-aware machine will produce vast amounts of wierdness. It will be a major obstacle for religion to negotiate around, even more so than evolution.

I disagree with that, since evolution doesn't go against a god, and neither would AI. They (as a whole, rather then as individuals) would probably just take longer to accept it, as they are with evolution.

Evolution may not go against God, but it does go against Religion. Fundementalist or literalist Christianity is increasingly untenable in the face of evolution, by adapting it becomes liberal and ultimately a liberal faith offers very little.


It will shatter humanocentric notions. AI's will be given voting rights, will have to call computer programmers or more likely a new breed of psychologists who specifcally specialise in the psyches of AI's in criminal cases. There will be AI pop stars, AI politicians. Marriages between AI's and humans. Humanity will seek immortality by slowly converting most or all of their organic brains to computers. Society will be changed.

funny thing, we are finding that carbon based computers will likely be the way of the future (as we are reaching the limits of silicon).

Cool.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 4:52:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't think we will ever create true AI. Simulated AI may get to the point where it very well seems like true AI, but it will still in simple terms be a set of actions/reactions.
True AI = Self-writing code = Impossible.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 5:16:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
If a computer gains human-like intelligence then it must be destroyed immediately.

This is my position and you can't talk me out of it.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 5:18:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 5:16:22 PM, Korashk wrote:
If a computer gains human-like intelligence then it must be destroyed immediately.

This is my position and you can't talk me out of it.

now.. now.. now... what are we but really involved computers??

that said..

I agree.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 2:18:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 5:16:22 PM, Korashk wrote:
If a computer gains human-like intelligence then it must be destroyed immediately.

This is my position and you can't talk me out of it.

Feh, the human race has to move over for something better sooner or later!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:38:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 4:52:24 PM, tvellalott wrote:
I don't think we will ever create true AI. Simulated AI may get to the point where it very well seems like true AI, but it will still in simple terms be a set of actions/reactions.
True AI = Self-writing code = Impossible.

Basically.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:30:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 6:38:00 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/17/2010 4:52:24 PM, tvellalott wrote:
I don't think we will ever create true AI. Simulated AI may get to the point where it very well seems like true AI, but it will still in simple terms be a set of actions/reactions.
True AI = Self-writing code = Impossible.

Basically.

We indeed have "self-modifying code."

It's impossible to have machines that learn, which we do have, without it.