|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Apr 27, 2019 17:55:10 GMT
Says Who?
I've read a couple of articles where... Computers are more intelligent and can process information faster than humans... One female "A.I" wants to have children... Two "A.I." systems created their own original language to communicate with each other... And another artificial being has already be granted citizenship of a country...
There seems to be some conflicting information about that "Opinion"... Not, that I am saying that I am disagreeing with you...
But, I guess it depends of what one person considers to be "Artificial Intelligence (A.I.)"...
Is there a "universally" accepted definition?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 27, 2019 18:38:28 GMT
Right? True A.I. doesn't exist yet. It's just a buzzword companies like to throw around. Would that be a correct assertion? No. It already exist. It is not where tech experts want it to be. But it is already superior to human intelligence in certain areas. And continually improving. |
|
|
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Apr 27, 2019 20:38:54 GMT
It's existed for years. Where have you been?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Apr 27, 2019 22:16:08 GMT
It's existed for years. Where have you been? Can you link me to the article that announces the world's first self thinking machine? I must have missed the greatest breakthrough in history. you probably mean “strong AI doesnt exist yet”. self aware machines. those do not exist yet as far as we know. So true (also called “strong") AI does not. but AI in general does. self learning and acting intelligence which was artificially created does exist in our every day lives. AI has many different sub categories. some are reactive only, some learn what they are told to learn, some learn on their own some can even autonomously improve itself which is pretty amazing if you think about it. but none is self aware yet. that would be the big break through. that and truly passing the touring test. i believe in our life time (given we are under 50) we most likely will experience it. exciting times.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 27, 2019 22:16:36 GMT
That's not the definition I find; "the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages."Computers can already do this. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 27, 2019 23:32:29 GMT
One would have to define intelligence and one would have to define artificial.
Intelligence is abstract and how is something artificial, if it isn't tangible?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2019 2:28:24 GMT
It's coming  |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 28, 2019 2:39:39 GMT
It's coming Who says A.I. won't care? Teddy is the conscience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2019 2:53:51 GMT
It's coming Who says A.I. won't care? Teddy is the conscience.
Jude Law's character in that movie gives me hope for the future! That's the kind of A.I. they should be focusing on. |
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 28, 2019 3:58:20 GMT
onethreetwo Like your article says, "the truth is we are far from this reality and will not begin to see a world like this for decades – if it even happens at all." personally I am of the it won't happen group as humans are unique in existence as I think machines will always be limited to some degree and simply cannot truly match our level of overall being/thinking. but with that said, I am sure machines will continue to advance quite a bit as time passes but will be just more refined through programming etc. plus, people have eternal souls (which animate us and basically gives life to our bodies) which a machine can never have. I realize this goes into religious territory but, if that's true, which it is, then that pretty much gives you the answer in that machines can never truly match humans overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 28, 2019 3:59:48 GMT
That's not the definition I find; "the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages."Computers can already do this. I think what is required for true AI would be independent action and self awareness. It would be like Hal in 2001. If we've created something like that I've never heard of it. If you think of the human being as a computer of flesh, true AI would be a self-conscious independent being made of circuits and wires. Some day they may invent that. But I've never heard that being done yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 28, 2019 4:10:07 GMT
Who says A.I. won't care? Teddy is the conscience.
Jude Law's character in that movie gives me hope for the future! That's the kind of A.I. they should be focusing on. These A.I. were programmed to love and care and didn't know different.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 28, 2019 7:39:25 GMT
That's not the definition I find; "the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages."Computers can already do this. I think what is required for true AI would be independent action and self awareness. It would be like Hal in 2001. If we've created something like that I've never heard of it. If you think of the human being as a computer of flesh, true AI would be a self-conscious independent being made of circuits and wires. Some day they may invent that. But I've never heard that being done yet. Complete, independent, self-aware, self-directed artificial intelligence --- yes. That is probably what the OP was referring to. But that is not the definition. Intelligence is relative. The intelligence of a fish or reptile is generally less than the intelligence of mammals. But fish and reptiles have some intelligence. Artificial Intelligence is anything that can think on its own. Computers have intelligence. Adding machines don't. Old fashion type writers didn't. But smartphones do. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 28, 2019 8:05:36 GMT
I think what is required for true AI would be independent action and self awareness. It would be like Hal in 2001. If we've created something like that I've never heard of it. If you think of the human being as a computer of flesh, true AI would be a self-conscious independent being made of circuits and wires. Some day they may invent that. But I've never heard that being done yet. Complete, independent, self-aware, self-directed artificial intelligence --- yes. That is probably what the OP was referring to. But that is not the definition. Intelligence is relative. The intelligence of a fish or reptile is generally less than the intelligence of mammals. But fish and reptiles have some intelligence. Artificial Intelligence is anything that can think on its own. Computers have intelligence. Adding machines don't. Old fashion type writers didn't. But smartphones do. This is an interesting religious and existential question. If human beings are entirely physical, and consciousness comes completely from the material, not from a "soul" or factor separate from the brain, then we are no more than advanced robotic creatures made of flesh, not hardware. This is what interests me about AI. Can humans build a "machine" that is self aware and sees itself as an autonomous individual? Nature made us from flesh. Can we do the same with hardware and circuits?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 28, 2019 8:24:52 GMT
Complete, independent, self-aware, self-directed artificial intelligence --- yes. That is probably what the OP was referring to. But that is not the definition. Intelligence is relative. The intelligence of a fish or reptile is generally less than the intelligence of mammals. But fish and reptiles have some intelligence. Artificial Intelligence is anything that can think on its own. Computers have intelligence. Adding machines don't. Old fashion type writers didn't. But smartphones do. This is an interesting religious and existential question. If human beings are entirely physical, and consciousness comes completely from the material, not from a "soul" or factor separate from the brain, then we are no more than advanced robotic creatures made of flesh, not hardware. This is what interests me about AI. Can humans build a "machine" that is self aware and sees itself as an autonomous individual? Nature made us from flesh. Can we do the same with hardware and circuits? I agree. I have a thread on the Politics board titled "Should robots ever be given Constitutional Rights?" If they become completely able of independent thought and feelings --- what's the difference? I define our souls as what results from having independent thought, feelings and a conscience. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 28, 2019 15:18:01 GMT
This is an interesting religious and existential question. If human beings are entirely physical, and consciousness comes completely from the material, not from a "soul" or factor separate from the brain, then we are no more than advanced robotic creatures made of flesh, not hardware. This is what interests me about AI. Can humans build a "machine" that is self aware and sees itself as an autonomous individual? Nature made us from flesh. Can we do the same with hardware and circuits? I agree. I have a thread on the Politics board titled "Should robots ever be given Constitutional Rights?" If they become completely able of independent thought and feelings --- what's the difference? I define our souls as what results from having independent thought, feelings and a conscience. But the standard atheist materialist line is that there can be no soul without the physical apparatus of our brain. That's the opposite of what religious or "spiritual" people believe. They think the soul and consciousness are independent from the physical. Yes, the great issue of the 21st century will be whether or not humans can create artificially intelligent life which is the equal of us robots of flesh. Maybe we are incapable of this? It might require millions of years of gradual evolution.
|
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Apr 28, 2019 15:38:12 GMT
There's interesting programs that can learn things
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 28, 2019 15:59:17 GMT
I agree. I have a thread on the Politics board titled "Should robots ever be given Constitutional Rights?" If they become completely able of independent thought and feelings --- what's the difference? I define our souls as what results from having independent thought, feelings and a conscience. But the standard atheist materialist line is that there can be no soul without the physical apparatus of our brain. That's the opposite of what religious or "spiritual" people believe. They think the soul and consciousness are independent from the physical. Yes, the great issue of the 21st century will be whether or not humans can create artificially intelligent life which is the equal of us robots of flesh. Maybe we are incapable of this? It might require millions of years of gradual evolution. I am religious and spiritual. I don't believe that. I agree it will be interesting to see. But furthermore, what if the robots we build are superior to us physically and mentally? Certainly we can build robots that have more strength, stamina, speed, quickness and durability. If AI results in them having independent thought, feelings and a conscience, couldn't they be a threat to humanity? That was the theme of The Orville (Season 2, episode 8 "Identity"). The robots created by a biological race of humanoids revolt against slavery and abuse. They use their superior physical and mental abilities to exterminate their creators. Then they set out to exterminate all biological humanoid species in the galaxy --- including humans on Earth. |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 28, 2019 16:33:29 GMT
But the standard atheist materialist line is that there can be no soul without the physical apparatus of our brain. That's the opposite of what religious or "spiritual" people believe. They think the soul and consciousness are independent from the physical. Yes, the great issue of the 21st century will be whether or not humans can create artificially intelligent life which is the equal of us robots of flesh. Maybe we are incapable of this? It might require millions of years of gradual evolution. I am religious and spiritual. I don't believe that. I agree it will be interesting to see. But furthermore, what if the robots we build are superior to us physically and mentally? Certainly we can build robots that have more strength, stamina, speed, quickness and durability. If AI results in them having independent thought, feelings and a conscience, couldn't they be a threat to humanity? That was the theme of The Orville (Season 2, episode 8 "Identity). The robots created by a biological race of humanoids revolt against slavery and abuse. They use their superior physical and mental abilities to exterminate their creators. Then they set out to exterminate all biological humanoid species in the galaxy --- including humans on Earth. I'm a materialist and an atheist. But I'm becoming more and more attracted to pantheism, and have a sense that while there is no "god", no anthropomorphic sky lord, there may be a reason and purpose to this universe and our existence. So I'm genuinely curious to hear what you think is the nature of our consciousness. Is there a "soul", an individual identity completely separate from the physical? Are we as beings just a series of thoughts which are generated by a fleshy computer called the brain? Or are we something apart from the functions of the brain? And yes, I agree. If we can create machines which rival our ability to be self-conscious and independent, will there be an ultimate battle where the robots rebel and try to extinguish us "inferior" creatures of flesh? This is the subject of much great science fiction. There's a great old movie, one of my favorites, called "Creation of the Humanoids" which explores this as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 28, 2019 17:17:16 GMT
I am religious and spiritual. I don't believe that. I agree it will be interesting to see. But furthermore, what if the robots we build are superior to us physically and mentally? Certainly we can build robots that have more strength, stamina, speed, quickness and durability. If AI results in them having independent thought, feelings and a conscience, couldn't they be a threat to humanity? That was the theme of The Orville (Season 2, episode 8 "Identity). The robots created by a biological race of humanoids revolt against slavery and abuse. They use their superior physical and mental abilities to exterminate their creators. Then they set out to exterminate all biological humanoid species in the galaxy --- including humans on Earth. I'm a materialist and an atheist. But I'm becoming more and more attracted to pantheism, and have a sense that while there is no "god", no anthropomorphic sky lord, there may be a reason and purpose to this universe and our existence. So I'm genuinely curious to hear what you think is the nature of our consciousness. Is there a "soul", an individual identity completely separate from the physical? Are we as beings just a series of thoughts which are generated by a fleshy computer called the brain? Or are we something apart from the functions of the brain? And yes, I agree. If we can create machines which rival our ability to be self-conscious and independent, will there be an ultimate battle where the robots rebel and try to extinguish us "inferior" creatures of flesh? This is the subject of much great science fiction. There's a great old movie, one of my favorites, called "Creation of the Humanoids" which explores this as well. I am a Christian. I believe in God. But I also believe in science. I believe God created everything. Including science. God doesn't just snap His fingers and create things through magic. He uses science. As I said before, I think the soul is a result of independent thought, feelings and a conscience. So yes, eventually through greater computing ability, robots will have independent thought, feelings and a conscience. So to answer your question directly, our consciousness is only a result of a more able brain. |
|
