You know of Moore's Law correct? Technology growing at an exponential rate. But that only applies to humans. Once technology reaches a point that surpasses the cognitive abilities of the human brain it will be able to further its own design at an explosive rate. Moore's law at that point will become an infinite exponential rate. This also raises issues that turn the sci-fi factor to 11. The human brain is a computer at its core. It uses boolean values to create spatial maps, predict, memorize, and navigate. If we create a computer that has our cognitive ability will it become a conscious being? I would say yes, it would'nt be human at all but it's cognitive ability would be honed to the point of perfection and it would make descisions faster than any living thing. This is the turning point, the so called "explosion" I was talking about. The conscious computer would make descisions about it's own design, making it more efficient and eventually perfect. It would continue on until society itself is perfect. It would oversee resource management so that we can guide ourselves toward stage 1 and 2 quickly thereafter. The problem is getting A.I. to the point where it beats out the human brain.
I have to say , I have read a few of your post's and I think you are a very interesting individual... you seem to think for yourself at all times, and for that I respect you, A LOT.
I do not however believe that AI will ever be a match for the human brain. Sure it may be able to solve equations faster, and it may have much more memory. But we created AI, and the is something AI will never have, instinct , and intuition. It is impossible, I think to create these two things without some kind of living brain tissue. Now I f we could somehow Meld AI with a brain, making the best of both worlds (a hybrid), we might be on to some form of higher or supreme intelligence.....
We have AI now that are about as smart as an infant. Going by moores law, in a decade we should have a AI as smart as 2 y/o, another decade a 4 y/o, another decade an 8 y/o, another decade a 16 y/o. By 2060 we should have a fully functioning AI. By then other advancments will probably be made in life longevity so I hope I live to see it
Jeff Hawkins, is indeed a brilliant man, and this company "Numenta" may definitely be on the brink of understanding AI.
I do however fail to accept the fact that they understand the neocortext to the point where they can replicate all it's functions at any level.
Things like, memory, basic problem solving, yes maybe. But right now, I believe any real intelligence cannot be validly replicated unless some kind of living tissue, is present.
It is a scary thought, but believe it or not, the idea of a being that is mostly a computer with only a small fraction of it being actual living tissue, is not that far off.
I do not however believe that AI will ever be a match for the human brain. Sure it may be able to solve equations faster, and it may have much more memory. But we created AI, and the is something AI will never have, instinct , and intuition. It is impossible, I think to create these two things without some kind of living brain tissue. Now I f we could somehow Meld AI with a brain, making the best of both worlds (a hybrid), we might be on to some form of higher or supreme intelligence.....
Why so? Is there a special ability that only allows carbon atoms to contain an intelligent mind that silicon atoms are somehow missing?
It's all electric signals in your brain, they're just structured in a way different from computers. The brain has a monstrous amount of neurons that are interconnected to one another, which is assumed to be the reason why humans are much more intelligent that machines despite lacking the raw processing power of a microchip.
Quote from "Murderface" »
We have AI now that are about as smart as an infant. Going by moores law, in a decade we should have a AI as smart as 2 y/o, another decade a 4 y/o, another decade an 8 y/o, another decade a 16 y/o. By 2060 we should have a fully functioning AI. By then other advancments will probably be made in life longevity so I hope I live to see it
That doesn't make any sense. Moore's Law only states that the amount of transistors on a given area of a microchip inrease exponentially, not that the processing power does. Or for that matter the ability for a computer to act cognitively.
AI as in a computer being as smart as a human in every aspect is far off, but I definately think we'll see developments in that area. In fact we already have, but it's along way to go.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
I believe consciousness exists outside the physical domain and cannot be fabricated...
But speaking of: "But we created AI, and the is something AI will never have, instinct , and intuition."
That's not really a problem at all...
Instinct is a set of programs prebuilt into a being for-after-birth. Basically, like software that comes by default with the OS. Nothing more, nothing less. A true AI can learn these programs on its own, but instinct is programs already there from the "beginning".
Intuition is not even a feasible term. What you're talking about is heuristics. Heuristics are not a mysterious concept at all, they are, in fact, considered very faulty by psychologists.
A heuristic is a template regarding how to act in a given situation. These templates are constructed via experiences, assumptions, opinions. Fixation is a condition when once a person gets a template for something, they refuse to change it. Heuristics are mostly constructed in a way that once a person gets a heuristic for something, they're stuck with it for quite a while. This can be emulated in a machine, but I am not sure if it would be productive for anything other than simulation of a human. Quick logic and an information database and infinite memory will beat heuristics any time.
I'm talking about an AI that can handle all of the worlds resources. It would be given agendas in order of importance and then it would manage everything according to that order. It would also be able to gauge the importance of other smaller agendas based on their affect on the larger ones. Then we could get rid of all the managerial jobs that are clogging the arteries of progress.
I think you guys need to re-define your viewpoint on (instinct) and (intuition)
I believe the soul, in combination with the brain controls these two vital processes, while they can be explained to some degree, they can never be replicated by any computer technology currently available today or in the future. AI (computer AI) is something that can only exist as we program it, and nothing more, I think it is not only incorrect to assume that we can ever replicate (to any degree) human intelligence, or any intelligence for that matter, but also very naive of anyone who attempts to do so.
AI (true AI) is something I know, can not ever exist, without some form of Biotic organism.
Machines/computers as we know are A-biotic, and only do what they are programmed to do. Even if you witness something completely new from a computer or machine, in the end it is only a result of what was initially programmed into it. Biotic organisms however, choose their own path, not based on what was initially programmed into them, but based on the real life experiences that the are subjected to everyday.
Now you might say, "so yeah living organisms also behave on what is programmed into their neocortext' an in a sense this is true, but never forget, living (biotic) organisms started out with (nothing) programmed into their brains, and make there decisions and actions in life based on what they have learned/experienced. A computer however, did start out with a wealth of information, and not (nothing) so to compare the two, in not fair or plausible.
Like I said earlier, The only shot we have at creating Real AI, Lies within the melding of a computer with some kind of Biotic organism. Nothing will change my viewpoint on that, so with that said I am finished debating this, and a now putting forth my efforts into solving that German image that has haunted me all night in my dreams.:thumbsup:
- Watch out for those cyborgs in the future, not only are they smarter than you, they are also more deadly.:P
Quick logic and an information database and infinite memory will beat heuristics any time.
Probably. The problem, I think, lies in figuring out how to combinet he structure of a human bran with the speed of a computer.
Quote from "Murderface" »
I'm talking about an AI that can handle all of the worlds resources. It would be given agendas in order of importance and then it would manage everything according to that order. It would also be able to gauge the importance of other smaller agendas based on their affect on the larger ones. Then we could get rid of all the managerial jobs that are clogging the arteries of progress.
Who is going to decide what's the best course then? The AI? How do we know he won't fuck with us and do whatever he pleases?
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
AI (true AI) is something I know, can not ever exist, without some form of Biotic organism.
And I counter by saying this is a very naive statement from someone who cannot see in to the future and has nothing to base this theory on besides a personal hunch.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
Now you might say, "so yeah living organisms also behave on what is programmed into their neocortext' an in a sense this is true, but never forget, living (biotic) organisms started out with (nothing) programmed into their brains, and make there decisions and actions in life based on what they have learned/experienced. A computer however, did start out with a wealth of information, and not (nothing) so to compare the two, in not fair or plausible.
That hardly even true for bacteria. Human are born with lots of functions in their brains, particularly reflexes. We get those before we are born, and thus come, to a certain extent, preprogrammed.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
Like I said earlier, The only shot we have at creating Real AI, Lies within the melding of a computer with some kind of Biotic organism. Nothing will change my viewpoint on that, so with that said I am finished debating this, and a now putting forth my efforts into solving that German image that has haunted me all night in my dreams.:thumbsup:
Even if someone does build a complete AI with nothing biotic in it?
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
Who is going to decide what's the best course then? The AI? How do we know he won't fuck with us and do whatever he pleases?
Limiters and a big red button. The AI would be programmed to benefit society as a whole. It wouldnt be a true AI, just a huge program based on how civilizations work and how to best deal with unlikely instances.
Here is a list of importance.
Make sure everyone has a home.
Make sure that people are safe.
Make sure that everyone has food.
Make sure that resources are distributed evenly.
Make sure disasters are handled swiftly with an appropriate amount of aid.
Make sure that radicals are dealt with.
Make sure that the economy stays on a slow but steady upward climb.
Like my main man once said, "computers can/will never be smarter then us because we created them." Simple as that.
While they may appear to have qualities that resemble living intelligence... and may in fact be smarter in a vast many ways....., I think many people fail to comprehend human intelligence (and other) living intelligence for that matter to it's fullest extent. Give yourself, as a species, and (intelligence) itself a little more credit please....
It's like saying that any one person(s) or computer(s) will ever be smarter than a creator (if their is one) or be able to think/comprehend on the level it does. Wont/cant happen.
While you may be able to understand something better then the "creator" and in fact be smarter than it regarding many things..., to say you can think and function on it's level, to understand the grand scheme of things like it does, to perceive the universe like it does, is illogical and impossible.
I'll say it again, A lot of people do not understand the intelligence/mechanisms required that only living (Biotic) organisms posses to achieve instinct and intuition as well as intelligence.. so many things are dependent on it....that Abiotic matter does not posses. Too many to list!!!
Well putting AI aside, I think that question will be answered soon enough by Hawkins or another team hell bent on the foolish quest of trying to replicate a living being's intelligence with a computer.
Here is a list of importance.
...
... Something along those lines.
That's a horrible list. I'd rather go with the 3 laws of robotics.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
It's like saying that any one person(s) or computer(s) will ever be smarter than a creator (if their is one) or be able to think/comprehend on the level it does. Wont/cant happen.
Go watch 13th floor.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
I think you guys need to re-define your viewpoint on (instinct) and (intuition)
I think you need to go to a high school and learn what those things actually mean instead of throwing around uneducated ideas. The assumptions that humans have some magical sense they call intuition is false. There's nothing magical about it. Intuition is a guess, sometimes an educated guess, but yet always a guess, and thus it can be wrong or right, and humans tend to notice when they're right more than when they are wrong, and hence we get the whole intuition idea, while, really, it's just GUESSING!
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
I believe the soul, in combination with the brain controls these two vital processes, while they can be explained to some degree, they can never be replicated by any computer technology currently available today or in the future.
You can believe what you want, but you have no argument here. There is no "Why".
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
AI (computer AI) is something that can only exist as we program it, and nothing more, I think it is not only incorrect to assume that we can ever replicate (to any degree) human intelligence, or any intelligence for that matter, but also very naive of anyone who attempts to do so.
Again, no "why".
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
Biotic organisms however, choose their own path, not based on what was initially programmed into them, but based on the real life experiences that the are subjected to everyday.
False. The behavior of humans has been psychologically described and predicted pretty accurately. Humans can often be categorized depending on how they act, and it can be suggested why they act as they do. If these things can be described, these things can be programmed.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
living (biotic) organisms started out with (nothing) programmed into their brains
False. They start with a database. They start with phonemes of all languages. They start with fear of spiders. Etc. etc. etc. Humans certainly do not start completely blank.
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
A computer however, did start out with a wealth of information, and not (nothing) so to compare the two, in not fair or plausible.
From this sentence I know that you know nothing about AI technology.
Are you kidding me? You know what those three rules are, you know how they work and what they led to, and you don't know what's wrong with your list?
Everything on your list is impossible. It also involves contradiction of human nature where the robot will have to go against human institution in order to achieve those goals. Moreover, it targets total equality on unequal basis, meaning that, yes, everyone is going to have food (if the robot somehow succeeds), but that food is going to be horrible, and those homes will be horrible, and nobody will have enough resources to do anything since they'll be evenly distributed.
Radicals will be dealt with? What is a radical. What does "dealt with" means?
" Make sure that people are safe."
For a robot, safe = far away on an island with nobody and nothing there.
You can't give tasks like that to a robot. Why not? See Asimov. He has described problems with very smart AI robots in great detail.
I'll say it again, A lot of people do not understand the intelligence/mechanisms required that only living (Biotic) organisms posses to achieve instinct and intuition as well as intelligence.. so many things are dependent on it....that Abiotic matter does not posses. Too many to list!!!
And somehow you do. I think you're assuming a whole lot here. Your basing a belief that humans are, and always will be, superior to machines, on assumption. You offer no real explanation for your viewpoint besides repeating over again that we will alwaysa be smarter than what we create.
You say that a computer may be smarter than us in many areas, but it will never preceive the universe as we do. So your argument seems to be that computers won't be smarter than us because they are not sentient? No?
Quote from name="dub Lucifer" »
Well putting AI aside, I think that question will be answered soon enough by Hawkins or another team hell bent on the foolish quest of trying to replicate a living being's intelligence with a computer.
If they fail, that won't prove AI as I envision it is impossible. It will merely prove that Hawking/whoever failed in constructing it.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Also, what are your thoughts on Edward Witten, and Michio Kaku?
Any info leading towards the attainment of type 1, is info I would like to see.
Sounds a lot like i Robet ehh?
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
I do not however believe that AI will ever be a match for the human brain. Sure it may be able to solve equations faster, and it may have much more memory. But we created AI, and the is something AI will never have, instinct , and intuition. It is impossible, I think to create these two things without some kind of living brain tissue. Now I f we could somehow Meld AI with a brain, making the best of both worlds (a hybrid), we might be on to some form of higher or supreme intelligence.....
Those cyborgs are pretty crafty you know...
read this
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
I do however fail to accept the fact that they understand the neocortext to the point where they can replicate all it's functions at any level.
Things like, memory, basic problem solving, yes maybe. But right now, I believe any real intelligence cannot be validly replicated unless some kind of living tissue, is present.
It is a scary thought, but believe it or not, the idea of a being that is mostly a computer with only a small fraction of it being actual living tissue, is not that far off.
It's all electric signals in your brain, they're just structured in a way different from computers. The brain has a monstrous amount of neurons that are interconnected to one another, which is assumed to be the reason why humans are much more intelligent that machines despite lacking the raw processing power of a microchip.
That doesn't make any sense. Moore's Law only states that the amount of transistors on a given area of a microchip inrease exponentially, not that the processing power does. Or for that matter the ability for a computer to act cognitively.
AI as in a computer being as smart as a human in every aspect is far off, but I definately think we'll see developments in that area. In fact we already have, but it's along way to go.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
But speaking of: "But we created AI, and the is something AI will never have, instinct , and intuition."
That's not really a problem at all...
Instinct is a set of programs prebuilt into a being for-after-birth. Basically, like software that comes by default with the OS. Nothing more, nothing less. A true AI can learn these programs on its own, but instinct is programs already there from the "beginning".
Intuition is not even a feasible term. What you're talking about is heuristics. Heuristics are not a mysterious concept at all, they are, in fact, considered very faulty by psychologists.
A heuristic is a template regarding how to act in a given situation. These templates are constructed via experiences, assumptions, opinions. Fixation is a condition when once a person gets a template for something, they refuse to change it. Heuristics are mostly constructed in a way that once a person gets a heuristic for something, they're stuck with it for quite a while. This can be emulated in a machine, but I am not sure if it would be productive for anything other than simulation of a human. Quick logic and an information database and infinite memory will beat heuristics any time.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
I believe the soul, in combination with the brain controls these two vital processes, while they can be explained to some degree, they can never be replicated by any computer technology currently available today or in the future. AI (computer AI) is something that can only exist as we program it, and nothing more, I think it is not only incorrect to assume that we can ever replicate (to any degree) human intelligence, or any intelligence for that matter, but also very naive of anyone who attempts to do so.
AI (true AI) is something I know, can not ever exist, without some form of Biotic organism.
Machines/computers as we know are A-biotic, and only do what they are programmed to do. Even if you witness something completely new from a computer or machine, in the end it is only a result of what was initially programmed into it. Biotic organisms however, choose their own path, not based on what was initially programmed into them, but based on the real life experiences that the are subjected to everyday.
Now you might say, "so yeah living organisms also behave on what is programmed into their neocortext' an in a sense this is true, but never forget, living (biotic) organisms started out with (nothing) programmed into their brains, and make there decisions and actions in life based on what they have learned/experienced. A computer however, did start out with a wealth of information, and not (nothing) so to compare the two, in not fair or plausible.
Like I said earlier, The only shot we have at creating Real AI, Lies within the melding of a computer with some kind of Biotic organism. Nothing will change my viewpoint on that, so with that said I am finished debating this, and a now putting forth my efforts into solving that German image that has haunted me all night in my dreams.:thumbsup:
- Watch out for those cyborgs in the future, not only are they smarter than you, they are also more deadly.:P
Who is going to decide what's the best course then? The AI? How do we know he won't fuck with us and do whatever he pleases?
And I counter by saying this is a very naive statement from someone who cannot see in to the future and has nothing to base this theory on besides a personal hunch.
That hardly even true for bacteria. Human are born with lots of functions in their brains, particularly reflexes. We get those before we are born, and thus come, to a certain extent, preprogrammed.
Even if someone does build a complete AI with nothing biotic in it?
Here is a list of importance.
Make sure everyone has a home.
Make sure that people are safe.
Make sure that everyone has food.
Make sure that resources are distributed evenly.
Make sure disasters are handled swiftly with an appropriate amount of aid.
Make sure that radicals are dealt with.
Make sure that the economy stays on a slow but steady upward climb.
Something along those lines.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
While they may appear to have qualities that resemble living intelligence... and may in fact be smarter in a vast many ways....., I think many people fail to comprehend human intelligence (and other) living intelligence for that matter to it's fullest extent. Give yourself, as a species, and (intelligence) itself a little more credit please....
It's like saying that any one person(s) or computer(s) will ever be smarter than a creator (if their is one) or be able to think/comprehend on the level it does. Wont/cant happen.
While you may be able to understand something better then the "creator" and in fact be smarter than it regarding many things..., to say you can think and function on it's level, to understand the grand scheme of things like it does, to perceive the universe like it does, is illogical and impossible.
I'll say it again, A lot of people do not understand the intelligence/mechanisms required that only living (Biotic) organisms posses to achieve instinct and intuition as well as intelligence.. so many things are dependent on it....that Abiotic matter does not posses. Too many to list!!!
Well putting AI aside, I think that question will be answered soon enough by Hawkins or another team hell bent on the foolish quest of trying to replicate a living being's intelligence with a computer.
Go watch 13th floor.
I think you need to go to a high school and learn what those things actually mean instead of throwing around uneducated ideas. The assumptions that humans have some magical sense they call intuition is false. There's nothing magical about it. Intuition is a guess, sometimes an educated guess, but yet always a guess, and thus it can be wrong or right, and humans tend to notice when they're right more than when they are wrong, and hence we get the whole intuition idea, while, really, it's just GUESSING!
You can believe what you want, but you have no argument here. There is no "Why".
Again, no "why".
False. The behavior of humans has been psychologically described and predicted pretty accurately. Humans can often be categorized depending on how they act, and it can be suggested why they act as they do. If these things can be described, these things can be programmed.
False. They start with a database. They start with phonemes of all languages. They start with fear of spiders. Etc. etc. etc. Humans certainly do not start completely blank.
From this sentence I know that you know nothing about AI technology.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Everything on your list is impossible. It also involves contradiction of human nature where the robot will have to go against human institution in order to achieve those goals. Moreover, it targets total equality on unequal basis, meaning that, yes, everyone is going to have food (if the robot somehow succeeds), but that food is going to be horrible, and those homes will be horrible, and nobody will have enough resources to do anything since they'll be evenly distributed.
Radicals will be dealt with? What is a radical. What does "dealt with" means?
" Make sure that people are safe."
For a robot, safe = far away on an island with nobody and nothing there.
You can't give tasks like that to a robot. Why not? See Asimov. He has described problems with very smart AI robots in great detail.
And somehow you do. I think you're assuming a whole lot here. Your basing a belief that humans are, and always will be, superior to machines, on assumption. You offer no real explanation for your viewpoint besides repeating over again that we will alwaysa be smarter than what we create.
You say that a computer may be smarter than us in many areas, but it will never preceive the universe as we do. So your argument seems to be that computers won't be smarter than us because they are not sentient? No?
If they fail, that won't prove AI as I envision it is impossible. It will merely prove that Hawking/whoever failed in constructing it.