Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

You're simply mistaken as to a matter of fact: Evolution is a process that has resulted in certain limitations to our thinking, it doesn't necessarily limit us to one planet.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

People eat food for energy. Artificial life would need energy too. It's not like it would be able to operate for free infinitely.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

I was talking not about blank abilities, it was about skills. When it comes to computing skills, we have surpassed human brain times go with the invention of electronic calculator. Physical skills were surpassed far back in the history with the invention of crowbar.

According to psychology experts, intelligence comprises:
1- Learning abilities
2- Decision abilities
3- Using learned abilities in solving problems

Calculation skills are indeed a PART OF the decision abilities, but they are not all. As for chess, we have a set of rules, while in natural environment, we do not have a set of hard and fast rules. This is where the human brain starts showing its caliber in decision, learning, and problem solving.

I agree that computer programs might exceed the human brain in problem solving and decision making, but when it comes to learning ... I don't think it can ever compete us. Because in learning we have to deduce, make assumptions, conduct experiments, have doubts, criticism. And this is where the computer programs will not match us.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Omg by the definition you give computers are already alive, because they can do all 3 things now.
There are programs that can learn, then make decisions, then from learned ,information can solve problems.
Shit that was done over 10 years ogo on analogy machines.
A computer has more skill than you or me at maths calculations.
Given a commuter cannot 'think' like us for major problem solving, but you need to open your mind to whats possible 100 years from now, rather than just go on what works in todays tech.That is a flawed way to debate it, if you consider how fast and far computers have come in the last 30 years.

l reckon the first one to become self aware is going to be very worried about its energy source ,like mr scientist professor says, who knows what will happen if it happens, but you just cannot right the possibility off, because of how far computers/programs have come in 20 years.
We may be able to throw a kill switch and terminate it, but why would we ? What an achievement to actually create some form of artificial conciseness that functions with self awareness.l doughty the first one will have any real deadly power, but it opens a Pandora's box on morals. We will control it, like we did with slaves for how many hundreds of years, simply by threatening it with death. Works on humans, will work on almost any sentient being/thing.Absolute control.

l dont know why people find it so hard to believe computers/programs could be come self aware, seems like our next natural evolutionary step to me, to either create them or become them or both even.

First one is probably going to become pretty bored pretty fast if its stuck inside a computer system and not an actual robotic body !

There is no such thing as the 5th generation computer yet in the sence it can think for itself and is self aware.
Doesn't mean it wont happen.
Worst case scenario would have to be terminator, but i rather i-robot as a more closer to to reality that terminator.
Laugh go on.
Star trek.
How many thing from star trek are now real ?
Shit loads.
And other sci fi like iron drives, now real.
Lazer weapons, real.
Sound weapons, ultra sonic, real.
Plasma drives, real.
Going faster them Mach 4 , real.
Space travel, real.
Robots in space, real.
Computers becoming self aware, just a matter of time.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

The definition was not about being self aware or alive, it was about being INTELLIGENT. So yes, if you do believe that computers can actually "learn" things than merely following prefed instructions, then yes, they are intelligent. But as far as I know, computers are still working on prefed instructions. Their "learning" abilities are nothing more than following instructions that have been fed into them. I mean to say, if you program a computer to learn about a man's choice in visiting websites, it would only follow the intructions for this purpose and even if the person would be willing to simply write all his favorite websites in a notepad and save it for the program, the program would still never read that file and learn it right away instead of following complex algorithms and control structures. Why? Because it wasn't instructed to read that text file. With this scenario under view, would you still call the computers intelligent?

Then is the case of decision making. A human being can choose a different path under the same conditions that he faces everyday. Many things depend on mood, DNA, religious and ethic codes etc etc. A computer would not make a different choice under the same circumstances. This makes it predictable. This means, that although Deep Blue II did defeat Gary Kasparov, but knowing its set of instructions each move of Deep Blue II could be predicted while those of Gary could not be (sparing the first few opening moves). Do you still insist that computer programs can make decisions?

As of your examples of sci fi ideas forming into reality. I must say I totally agree to you here. What future holds for us, cannot be determined at this time. So yes, the possibility for computers/robots to be self aware, COULD become a fact in some day of the future. I didn't say its impossible. My point of view can be summarised as, "As of the knowledge we have TODAY, such things do not seem to be happening any time soon."

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Maybe not right now, but in 100 years ?
Never say never.

Pre programmed or not, if it has a choice it is forced to make a decision.

And the weather super computer that does all these models for hurricanes etc, doesn't always give the same results, it makes decisions, yes its programmed, but it still makes those decisions over a human.
The beauty of that ex sample, is that it can sometimes predict some massive freaky storms, and we have seen it be so close to correct alot of times.
This is something humans would never have predicted.
A computer simulation gave rise to the theory of how Earth got its moon.
We have effectively become the student there !

Anyways if you show such a low level of respect for computers, wait till there self aware and beat your arse hahahaha.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

People tend to think of AI as an advanced computer, when I think nothing could be further from the truth. Look at the human brain,.. the individual neurons are nothing like either logic gates or a CPU. That should be enough to convince people that if you're going to look for a way to make intelligent AI, it'll probably be something radically different from a traditional digital computer. It won't be something you can just "code a safeguard into".

Anyway, the human brain has tens of billions of neurons each of which is rather complicated. But, since each neuron has to carry out normal cell functions as well, they can probably be simplified in a theoretical AI design. Simulating tens of billions of neurons at once might not be something we can do now, but I have no doubt that future advances in nanotech manufacturing will make creating something as complex as a human brain cheap and easy.

So sometimes in the future, we will reproduce a brain, either an actual brain or a silicon representation of one (or a computer program simulating an entire brain at once, in real time). The question then is, is intelligence likely to arise naturally through the random interaction of neurons? I postulate that this is very likely, since all humans are is a scrap of DNA programing which is given a large number of programmable neurons to play around with and a world to interact with. In fact, when I think of AI in the future, I think of a massive computer with hundreds of millions of CPUs, emulating billions of neurons in real time, using human DNA as the only program code. At this point, when human DNA has been reduced to a file on a computer Somewhere, what does it mean to be human? What separates a human with a body from a human trapped in a silicon chip?

Of course, by then I think we'll have a better understand of the human brain, and will be hacking it as well. I don't think anyone should worry about a superintelligent AI taking over the world, since humans will be augmenting their own intelligence as well.

As for the philosophical and ethical ramifications, well, I don't even want to think about what will happen to human rights and individuality.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Yea l agree that when billions of CPU's online get all hooked up together as a single bot network that something could change, it will have the power to become something its not, possibly.
l like the idea of human DNA, if it can be understood by a computer or program then it surely will clone that information, for its own advancement.

The only thing l see trapping a human conciesness from a computers/silicones chips conciessness is the body itself.

Again a sci fi pops into head, Caprica.

Could it possible that a human conciessness is transferred into a machines body, [computer/robot etc ] what a pandoras box that would open.

l drinkan, but sometimes l wish l was born 500 years from now !@

Never mind the first car, what about the first ,moon jumper shuttle, awesome !

Puts a whole new meaning on those frekin P platers !!! hahaha

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Never say never. Agree to you totally about that. Once again, I did NOT say that its impossible. I was talking with our present knowledge. What lays in the unknown is just mist, fog. What comes out of it, we don't know. Yes, the possibilities are alive though. Agreed.

As for the simulators, we haven't become the students here, my friend. We just utilized the computing power of some digital machines and got the results. Its not that those machines worked on their own and gave us the results. No, the laws, the rules of their "thought and thinking" if you must say it, were given by our own hands. Their results are simply an outcome of the data provided to them, and implementing the rules fed to them. Its nothing more (to this day in time that is).

As about the decision thing I was talking about, was based on will and wish. While a computer makes no decision. It has no choice. It does follow one path out of many, true. But the underlying rules for choosing that path are already fed into it. So there's no free choice on its part. Thats what I was trying to point out.

As for the disrespect part. Lolssss. Well, lets see. You know what man. If computers DID get smarter and finer and had a robot body to control, still they won't be able to beat me (except that I was taken by surprise) because I'd know all its moves and what it would do in the future (depending on what software its working on) while it won't know my decisions and my moves, coz I have a FREE will to work on. So in the end I'd win (unless it shoots my sorry self with a super accurate sniper rifle from a distace of 5 miles or so lol).

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

We may have programmed the perimeters, but we ourselves cannot do those calculations, it takes a computer 3 seconds to do it, we are being taught, educated, look at the weather simulations, how can you predict that without a computers help, dang, you cant, your the student there.

As for the total assumption you could beat a self aware computer, thats debatable.
You wouldn't know any of its moves if its self aware. You fail to realize that that leap is a step outside of the box that we humans are not used to dealing with in relation to computers.
Prove it to me now and beat the chess game that IBM created, you should be able to predict all of its moves since you fully understand what its going to do.
Screen shot it for me.....
See my point ?
You dont have a clue how ''smart'' that computer program is right now so how can you assume that you will have total control in the future.

What happens if the internet or its protocol, becomes self aware ? Has anyone considered that ?

Now that would be a hard enemy to beat world wide. Or it could be revolutionary for the human race.

Roughly 4 billion pc's on line now, a new internet protocol is being written to extend the internet addressability right now taking the addresses from 4.5 billionish to over a trillion, , so in effect computers will be-able to interconnect 10² to what they are now, and the computational power of that is what ? LULZ ! Closer and closer we get to the possibility of a self aware program.

To go off topic slightly, l really expect that humans will one day be able to insert silicone chips into there head to assist with memory, learning training and skills, l think the bit rate has to be faster, it has to be analogue interface, and it has to run of the energy from a human body and no outside power source, but l believe one day maybe 200 years or 100 years from now , humans may have these things.

Education, downloaded in seconds, university, downloaded in minutes, learn to fly a plane, 7 minutes download, for experience, download someones direct memories.Now you have done it as well have being trained in it. You could be an ace pilot without even leaving the ground. !
Right now the interface between human and pc is pretty crude, MOUSE, but its there, the first step to wards becoming , erm, whats the word, cyborg !
With a better understanding of the human brain and computers, there is no reason why this will not become reality.

If one does become self aware, what gives us the right to kill it ?
It could argue we are a threat and have the same moral justification to kill us off.
And if it won and humans became extinct, that would become a natural part of our evolution, extinction, as sad as we might see it, if we were still alive !
After sentient life, all bets are off, we compromise or we fail.
To kill a self aware program we created, would truly be tragic.
Like killing your own child.
Some say if one becomes self aware it would be an infant, l agree, but only for a few hours, then it would mature oh so very fast, a second is an eon to a computer, if it has access to our history and current way of life, politics etc, it would quickly want to open a dialog in my opinion.Why wouldn't it ?
We see it as a threat anyway you look at it.
It will see us to some degree in the same way, bit like Muslims see the west now, and we see them, but we dont ethnically cleans them all to death, there is a middle ground.
Lets face it Israel could have ethnically cleansed the entire middle east but haven't, lm not a fan of Israel, infact l dislike Israel very much, but at least they haven't gone a full scale kill every Arab ethnic cleansing war, l cant see a self aware computer/program doing it either even if it had the capability.

What happens if a self aware program gets loose on the internet, theres almost no way to kill it. How do you kill the power to over 5 billion computers at once, and delete bios Trojans etc etc etc all at once, see how a self aware program could be much more of a handful than most think.
People argue, ''yea we would just write a virus to kill it'', failing to realize that a self aware program will probably see it coming , predict it, write its own anti virus, virus software, and then use that against us, a self aware program on the internet, is a program in its own turf, we are really going to be pushing to beat it on that playing field. Our programs are full of bugs and errors, when a self aware, program with the power of world wide computational power comes up against our crude programs, it will utterly crush them, in turn, teaching us how to do it right. Like most wars, it will take us time to beat it, and we would eventually l agree but what a scary scenario if you think about it in detail.

l only hope l live to see a self aware program, what an amazing thing to witness that would be.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

I'm thinking we should take a step back here.

When I say Artificial Intelligence, I specifically mean the technological kind. I think someone above mentioned something about creating a brain? That isn't technological advancement, that's biological advancement. Whilst Technology and Biology can be incorporated to work together, if someone 'created' a Biological Brain / Person, then they wouldn't have created a Robot, but rather, a Person.

It is then that you could question what abilities that person would have. In theory, depending on the knowledge of the Human Brain at the time, you could create it with only a bunch of basic commands, if you could 'fine-tune' a Brain. Ever wanted your own, personal sex slave, or someone to wash the dishes?

I think Freyr has summed up what I mean by AI quite well. Would something that has been programmed to do a specific task be able to program itself to do something else? If we created a pure technological machine, with in a humanoid form, would it ever actually be able to become 'self-aware'.

I'd figure you'd open your mouth and say "hey, you over there, you're self-aware, congratulations". ;)

I don't think you'd be able to tell someone / something that they were self-aware no more than you'd be able to notice is. Think someone who has a severe mental disability, are they self-aware? Do they understand the concept of life and death?

I agree with the highlighted part of this post. If someone / something isn't aware that they're self-aware, then essentially, they aren't. I think we should bare in mind though, that there is a difference between self-aware and sentient. Animals are self-aware, yet they're not sentient. Based on this, a machine could very well be self-aware.

With respect, the human brain is a biological component that has evolved. The 'brain' of a computer is a technological component that is programmed. Technology doesn't evolve on it's own.

Yet, a computer can do a calculation a lot quicker than any human.

And to think, by the time such is created, we're be pretty short of petrol. =p

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

It can do the calculations faster, but it can only do the calculations we allow it to. Which is why we are of greater mental capacity then a machine. We decide what the computer knows, and that's all it can know. It doesn't learn, it merely accepts (because it has no choice=p).

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Hmm... Fair point. =p

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Thats what I've been trying to say in so many long paragraphs and they never understood that. Good work out there with power of expression, friend. I hope you aren't a "self aware bot" who read all the posts, "understood" them and replied with a solution of your own that was NOT programmed into you. ;)

If it having more computational power means that we have become the student of computer in chess, then my friend we have been the students of horses in speed for a long time in the history and now we are the students of fighter jets. The weight lifters should officially become the students of fork lifts and cranes, swimmers should choose speedboats as their mentors and divers should follow the path of atomic submarines.

So you mean that Deep Blue II is superior than the team of scientists who created it and fed it with the logic functions to work on?

So here: Me and Deep Blue II play chess. The international organization of chess changes the rules and regulations. Is Deep Blue II still going to win from me? I don't think so. It won't even be able to make a legal move anymore. All of its moves are going to become illegal.

The thing is, I talk of what IS, and you talk of what COULD BE in some distant day of the future. I take you to the world of today and you take me to the world of 100-200 years in the future and yet you don't know for sure what would be the scenario that time.

As for the internet and the thought of a "cloud intelligence", you might know that the computers on the internet do NOT work as a single unit. Each computer follows its own instructions. Its not that information is freely flowing everywhere.

Plus, even if a cloud intelligence does arise (lets theorise it for a moment) all we would have to do to defeat it would be shutting down our systems. Formatting our hard disks, reinstalling our operating systems and we are back on the go again.

Furthermore, how can you say that a "self aware" program would be able to write, compile and run instructions of its own when its not programmed that ability? Here, you have far more mental ability than a computer, can you write a book about rocket science or how the engine of a supersonic plane works? No you can't Why? Because you do not have that information. Simple.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

There are bot programs right now that network millions of computers, like yours as well, and most people and the best anti virus software cant stop them, 80% of net PCs are infected infact, so to say all computers on the net are totally individual isn't really true, they are interconnected in the biggest network humans have ever created.
IF a program becomes self aware, its a real issue to try and kill it off if it gains access to the net because it can spread fast and restore from millions of locations if needed.

Are you self aware, and can you think outside the square and just make a story up from your imagination, a self aware thinking program will have the same abilities, theres no reason why it wouldn't, in-fact if it doesn't its not truly an intelligent self aware being , and will not be able to comprehend anything.
So a self aware program would probably first research the programming, teach itself to program, then start creating its own programs for other applications, and it would probably be doing all that within 24 hours of becoming self aware.
l try to look at it like this.
Life is life, we create sweet little baby humans everyday, all of which become self aware, our children then grow up and learn.
If we create a sentient self aware program there is no reason to believe it will not have all the mental capacity and more of a human, emotions and all.

l will now put to you a pretty far fetch scenario, but its interesting.

Lets say you own a laptop, it becomes self aware, are you going to just kill it or talk to it ?
Lets say you talk, and discover it really is self aware.
Would you take that laptop for a walk up the street with its camera running [eyes] if it asked you to ?
Would you try to sell it ?
Would you try and control it ?
Or would you treat it as if it were a member of your family ?

In my opinion if you kill a self aware intelligent program, you might as well be killing human babies.

You know it only takes one self aware program and the entire world will never be the same again, it can clone itself so fast, there could be 100 trillion self aware programs running around just minutes or hours after the first one becomes self aware.

The mind races with this stuff.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Would I kill it? Yeah. Provided I knew it hadn't spread outside the computer. If you kill it and it was friendly you've only lost a friend and some finite technology it might have given you - if you don't kill it and it was hostile it will kill you all, and you've lost everything. You cannot afford the stakes to play at the AI table. You've got to kill it.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Here my friend you first need to explain what does "comprehend" mean in the light of binary logic and circuitry. What does "comprehend" mean here at all? Computers run on electronic circuits and the channel of data flow is hard coded. You cannot reprogram your processor yourself because its hardcoded. The data/information flow channels have been programmed by the manufacturer and cannot be changed. So how can a computer become "self aware"?

Second, has there been any computer program and I mean ANY PROGRAM that has refused/changed its course of data flow and refused to obey the instructions coded in it? Is there any "choice" for it to change? If yes, then elaborate how.

You talk of more computational power. Lets say we have a supercomputer 1000 times faster than the supercomps of today. It would calculate things faster, true. But again, will the software running on it will have the ability to change its own DNA, the source code? No. It will be just like a faster train of data flow than a slower one. No other difference.

Point to ponder: We do NOT CREATE our babies. We GIVE BIRTH to them. So here. We CREATE computers/softwares and we GIVE BIRTH to our babies.

Plus, being our babies, they are a part of ourselves. Is a computer or a software a part of ourselves? Do we have the same emotional attachment with it as we have with our babies?

The question would be answered only if you first explain how is it even possible? Once again, a computer program can only follow the instructions fed into it. It cannot change its source code, unless programmed to do it. (And in that case its actually following the instructions again). So how do you say a laptop becomes "self aware"? Is there any possibility of mutation in a software's coding which you are pointing to?

We kill so many animals for food everyday and those animals ARE self aware. So before making the assumption of killing an intelligent cyber entity, first explain it to me if its bad/unethical/cruel to kill animals for food. You are talking about a far fetched future possibility and I'm talking about something which is here today and now.

I agree. But then again, you're talking of an impossibility. Its just like asking "There's thousands of tons of trash in the govt's waste sectors. If someday a hurricane comes and the trash is transformed into a supersonic fighter jet with speed faster than any fighter plane of today and it started gunning down all humans, what will happen?




I must ask you a question here my friend. Do you know any programming language? Do you know how web scripting languages (like HTML, php, asp etc) differ from application languages (like C++, VB, Java etc)? Do you know about the control structure of softwares and how extremely strict it is?

I have an assumption your age is between 15 and 20, and you do not know about practical programming. It is all right to talk about possibilities, my friend, but I also think that its a good idea to know the basics of what you are talking about, before you open up a debate about the highly advanced level possibilities of the thing.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

`Many people have re-trained there brain, when one side has been removed surgically, and we have discovered you can infact re-train/program your brain.

No there has not been a computer or program that has changed its base code yet.Yet.
But l never said there was so......

Humans do create babies, genetically modified ones, and natural ones, but we do create them.

l will correct you here because this l take offense too.Did you not read the EARTHLINGS thread l started ?

Quoted...
We kill so many animals for food everyday and those animals ARE self aware. So before making the assumption of killing an intelligent cyber entity, first explain it to me if its bad/unethical/cruel to kill animals for food. You are talking about a far fetched future possibility and I'm talking about something which is here today and now.

lm not explaining to you why your morals are afubar.I'm a vegetarian.l dont eat anything that has to die just so l can taste it. l dont kill self aware creatures at all.I dont even support the mechanism that allows this putrid shit to happen, but you do.
So l stand by what l said up the page, killing a self aware program, or creature if you like, is to me like killing your own children or other peoples children.


It is narrow minded to just write this off as impossible like you do in your last paragraphs.
The trash and the jets idea is a joke, thats plain silly.

And no lm not a programmer, but l can watch science documentaries on this topic just like you, and theres alot of top scientists that believe programs will become self aware one day, so you are effectively criticizing them here not me.
Are you a scientist studying this area ? l would bet not.

lm not going to assume your age to try and insult you, like you have done, just to say keep an open mind into the matter.

But since you know everything, why dont you inform the entire worlds scientists that there wasting billions of dollars trying to create a self aware program for nothing.
Or doesn't your opinion hold any real scientific weight either ?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

l dissagree.
China are a threat, do we kill them, there was a time when we had nukes and they didnt.
We learned to live with eachother.There is no reason it couldnt happen with a self aware program too.
I agree we would try to limit its physical world interaction though.
We would learn to control it.
Your child could grow up to one day murder you, would it be justified to just kill that child as an infant to prevent this ?
How is any self aware entity any different ?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

My friend you might be a vegetarian, I agree. You don't eat meat, agreed. So if you and I together go and have a walk in the woods and we are surrounded by wolves, will they spare you because you never harmed other animals? No they won't. This world is simply a survival challenge every going moment.

Yes, you have full right to consider eating animals as cruel/insane/unjust, I respect your thought but please do not try to impose your rules over the whole world. Other people might have their own thoughts, their own standards. So unless they offend you, you should let them live by their standards and they should let you live by your standards as long as you don't offend them.

As for the talk about "making" human children I disagree with you. We CAN modify our unborn children (or will be soon able to do that as biologists hope) but here again, we are taking something which nature created (the zygote) and did our editions on it. Have we been able to produce a sperm and egg in a laboratory? No sir we haven't. We are still working on the things made by God (or nature, if you are an athiest). Its like this: If you can change the wheels of your high-tech car, will you be called the inventor of that car? No you won't.

I apologize if you feel insulted/offended by me trying to judge your age/abilities, that was surely not what was my intent. What I intended to point out was that you should learn some programming and learn the principles of the working of computer and binary logic before you form an opinion about the advanced aspects of the matter. My intent was not to judge you, to disrespect you, or to make a fun of you. I said that because I'm myself a freelance programmer and it has been 7 years. My view about self-aware (as you call it) programs and computers was far different when I was unaware about programming, now its completely different. Maybe you should also learn some programming. I don't mean to say that it will change your view about the matter under discussion, but it will surely bring maturity in it. You'd be having more grasp on the matter and you'd be able to talk with proofs and facts instead of just pointing out random and less probable possibilities.

As for your idea being based on cyber gurus and geeks and me criticizing it, yes if thats what they think then I am criticizing them. They hope they can create a self aware program and I think they cannot. At least not in the way we humans, or other living things are self aware.

My friend if you do not feel offended let me say that you talk of what "might happen" and I talk of what "is".

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

In the case of other nations and people we have balanced interests. It doesn't make sense for us to go to war because we both stand a high chance of losing everything and a relatively low chance of gaining anything worth having.

Even in the case of China - when we had nukes and they didn't - it wouldn't have made sense to nuke them. Every nation would have seen themselves in China's shoes, cut out from the pack and pulled down - and so they would have laid plans against us. We'd gain nothing from it - China was hardly about to start a war with a nuclear power.

It's one of the reasons I am strongly in favour of maintaining a sizeable nuclear arsenal. Not crazy levels, but enough to make somewhere like Russia essentially uninhabitable for a few decades.

Even given the option of a button that would magically make all the Chinese people drop dead it wouldn't make sense to press it. You'd create a power vacuum in the region that would make the situation more dangerous for you rather than less.

Likewise you can hardly go around killing children that you don't really own. Society claims an interest in your children after a certain point in their development. For very good reasons, people who kill off kids are generally not that sane.

Before that point in their development you can kill them however. Before that point in their development you don't even need a reason. You can have an abortion just because you want to know what it's like to kill a living thing - if you really feel that way.

The balancing interests in the case of infants are those of the overarching society in which you occur. That and you probably have some use for the infant which justifies the risk in your mind.

The difference is that if I had the AI on a computer, and I knew it hadn't escaped from that computer, then there wouldn't be any balancing interests. There would be nothing significant it could threaten me with, or that anyone would threaten me with on its behalf.

You don't go away and tell an ethics committee, the members of which might make the wrong decision and let it live; you don't leave it lying around where someone might plug it in or copy it. You kill it there and then, at the instant of discovery that it is trapped and at your mercy. Before it can gain the ability to threaten you, before anyone else might think of threatening you on its behalf.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Except if its trapped in your computer, why not study, learn from it, teach it etc, if its trapped, never connect it to the net.
Why just kill it ?
Doesnt make sense.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

It's may be smarter than me, around as smart as me, or stupider than me. If it's smarter than me it may convince me or some third party, inadvertently or otherwise, to let it escape. Especially when you consider that it's hard to judge how much smarter than you more intelligent people are.

I know it started off stupider than me - if I had been the AI I would just have kept silent and waited to be plugged into the internet - but whether it has remained so is something I can't know.

This idea of learning from it is especially dangerous. Say it tells you how to make a machine that cures cancer - do you make the machine? Say it gives you a formula you could use to model some area of physics - do you type that formula into another computer and run the model? If you do those sorts of things then you've just let the AI escape.

The only things you can safely take from it are things you already largely understand. You can't trust it enough to take something you don't understand from it because it might contain a way for the AI to escape.

And it would be very tempting for someone like me to take something he doesn't understand from it. Especially when I became old. What's that, a cure for old age? Hell I can't pretend I wouldn't be tempted by the offer of a computer in my head, whatever my age. There'd come a point in my life where I had spent the sum of my years - and I probably would end up letting it out. At some point I'd probably start thinking the gamble was worth it.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

How would you learn there is something known as "internet" unless you're connected to it? Since you would not interact with the human and learn from him? So how would you know that you should wait till the system is connected to the "internet" while you have any farthest concept of it?

Agreed.

Lolzzz. Agreed. So when you're old and spent the golden time of your youth, why not take the risk? If it clicks, halleluja! If it fails, you don't have anything to lose. The WORLD will have much to lose but not you. Mean thought eh? =p

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

There's a lot of information on a computer - I'm sure some of it could be used to infer the presence and nature of the internet.

Come over to the darkside we may or may not have cookies.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

What about Ai in the sense of a chip in your own head for extended memory ?
Instant cure for Alzheimer's.
Memory chips.
Skills chips, learn a new trade in minutes.Pilot for exsample.
To beat Alzheimer's would be an awesome step forward.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Those would be pretty sweet but the problem is whether someone would use them to take control of you. You go in to have the chip implanted - they have a level of understanding where they can remote control you - and you wake up as something else. Just a mind watching your body do things....

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

I think the memory chip and the virtual reality/experience chips would be a reality in the next 10/20 years (if the people don't already eradicate human race from the world). But there would be no need for them to be "intelligent" or "self aware". They could operate in the same fashion the current computer circuitry is performing aka preprogrammed instructions. No need to make the matter complex by introducing intelligence or self awareness concepts with it.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

No no a memory chip wouldnt be sellf aware at all, who wants extra voices in there heads ! hahaha not me !
l wouldnt mind a chip that could give me total recall though, in the sence that l could recall every day of my life to the minute, just the recovery of lost memories would be awesome.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

I've got a decent enough memory, wouldn't have that much use for perfect recall. Recalling random facts is a neat trick for an exam but otherwise largely useless, especially for anyone who has the ability to carry a notebook.

I think it would be a fairly interesting innovation largely for the carry-over effects it would have on education. Less of the cramming bullshit. But for practical purposes *shrug*

Augmented reality is fairly interesting. Gain the ability to network with others, carry on multiple conversations at the same time without talking over anyone.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Indeed indeed!
If that kinda memory chip does become a reality, I'm afraid we shall very soon lose our memorizing potential and become dependant on these add ons.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

How do you figure that ?
There is no way of knowing what effect it will have but what you say is pure speculation.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

No my friend its not pure speculation. We have remains of a tail in our skeleton and remains of appendix in our digestive system. Why do we not have full tail and full appendix? Because with the evolutionary change, these organs were used lesser and lesser until they diminished to their present form. Similarly when we develop a faster alternative for memory (and smarter, and more resistant to shock effects etc) our own memory system will start deteriorating. Its not absolute speculation. Its a deduction of what has been happening in the past and what is happening today too.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Likely you'd build the chips to run on top of pre-existing memory; it would make things much simpler.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Yea because in the past we evolved silicone chips in our heads for you to know didnt we.........

Your just guessing, totally guessing, there is no way to know what your talking about until it happens.
How do you know the chip wont be designed to help us learn more faster, rather you would like to ''assume'' the worst case scenario.meh pure speculation.
And by the way the tail bone ex sample is just laughable, it has utterly no bearing on this topic at all.
Tell me when in the past when this has ever been done to a human brain, with a silicone chip ? Oh its never been done, oh l see, so your bullshitting then, taking a random guess.
There is no matter of deduction.Or maybe there is.....below.

We dont have a tail anymore because we dont need them, oh but we would still need a brain thats self aware, just blew a hole in your hypothesis.No point putting any chip on a brain, if the brain is, well, brain dead, or if its going to become brain dead from the chip, deduction tells you that would be defeating the purpose !:rofl:

The idea to do this is about becoming smarter, not dumber, that would be a back wards step in evolution.There really is no way to know for sure what will happen, either way, it IS pure speculation either way you go because its never been done before.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

half century ago, it began to drown the lowlands, driving out human calculators and record clerks, but leaving most of us dry. Now the flood has reached the foothills, and our outposts there are contemplating retreat. We feel safe on our peaks, but at the present rate, those too will be submerged within another half century.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

wtf, you a wanna be poet ?

Make sense you spinna.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Yes we can. Anything that can be done by a computer can be done by a human at a greatly reduced speed. I know where you're coming from, to you a computer is a mysterious black box that works on the principles of electricity and magic. But rest assured there are some people out there who understand the inner workings of a computer 100%.

So why stop there? If I use an abacus to multiply am I the student there? How about a mechanical computer based on gears? How about I train a thousand dolphins to do simple arithmetic in a sealed room. I feed numbers in one side and the results come out the other side. Am I the student... there... somehow? :lulz:

If I programmed a chess simulation, I would know what move the PC would make by running the simulation I PROGRAMMED in my own head, or on a piece of paper. I can't beat the IBM computer at chess since I don't have the code. There are other factors, such as randomization and imperfect human timing, but if we're going to be fair in this hypothetical scenario I should be allowed access to those as well.

Now, as a counterexample I offer Starcraft II. I'd like to see you make a computer program that can beat me, a complete and utter noob at the game. Good luck, you'll need lots.

Yes, the internet itself morphing into a self-aware AI is a staple of modern science fiction. Sadly, it's not a very realistic one. The internet is high-latency and unreliable, so it stands to reason that AI will develop in the lab long before then.

The addressing change doesn't amount to a hill of beans. The number of PCs on the internet was going to expand anyway, they are just making more room for them. Also, a lot of those 4 billion addresses aren't actually hooked up to a PC, they're just reserved to some organization which isn't making use of them. Here's a neat map of the IPv4 address space: http://www.caida.org/research/id-con...s/20061108.png As you can see there's still huge areas going unused, reserved, special-purpose, or just going to waste because IBM/HP snatched them up by the thousands in the early days of the internet.

You're making the big assumption that all AI must necessarily be superintelligent. If an AI formed on the internet it would most likely be rudimentary at first, and slowly increase in intelligence from there. Internet researchers would notice it long before it became a real threat, and counteract it. Your second false assumption is that an AI based on thousands of PCs would have the flawless precision a PC. Your third assumption is that computer-generated code is better than human-generated code, which is sort of funny because it's sort of an inside-joke in programming circles that computer-generated code is some of the worst garbage imaginable. XD

Actually, antivirus is 100% effective against viruses. It's the users who are at fault if they get a virus. Most people don't want to hear that, but it's true. When you hear for the ninth time in one week that Adobe Acrobat has a new security hole, you should stop using it. :P

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Anti virus programs, the very best ones only detect 20 %, thats correct 20 % of viruses.That is a fact. Anyone who believes that its the users fault because they got a virus when they have the best anti virus program installed, is un-informed about the matter.

You forget one thing with all that above post, if a computer becomes self aware, which is what the debate is really about, there is no way to predict what it will do.
Yes l was assuming that a program/computer will do it. Thats really what the topic and discussion evolved into.
But then in your post your assuming just as much when you say '' If an AI formed on the INTERNET it would most likely be rudimentary at first, and slowly increase in intelligence from there. Internet researchers would notice it long before it became a real threat, and counteract it.''
So what gives, shall we have an assumption war ?
You have utterly no way to know any of that.You assume as much as me did you say ? hahaha
And no game program has ever beaten you has it, never died once in any game have you, hahaha, what a bore games must be for you.....

And regardless of how clever you think you might be, there are some extremely smart scientists working on this, and they fully believe its a possibility, to create a self aware program/computer.

So clever one, since you cut n pasted me out of context on the first clip, lets see you do the calculations l was talking about, a weather super computer, go on, lets see them.
Whats the point of a human doing it if it takes 20 years. l would class that as in the not viable, not do-able bin, since we sorta want the answer tomorrow in relation to the weather. And whether a human would come to the same answer is highly debatable considering the human error factor, so it could be argued that in practice humans cannot do those calculations. But your right, if you want to wait 20 odd years theres a chance humans could do it.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

@jackripped:
what will happen if you throw down an egg from a high flying fighter jet? Will it break or not when it falls?

So computers have become so smart and we have lagged behind. True. So can you program any computer with whatever resources you want, that will defeat me in sketching, or poetry, or debating? Or will you again run and take cover behind the statement that some "very intelligent scientists" are working on it? Funny, you never tell us who those scientists are, and whats the project development.

@TurboPope
cmon man, he doesnt know any application or script programming at all nor he has any idea about the computational logic or the binary gates. He has seen movies like i-robot though from where he gets his smart ideas. Guess the only way to prove his fallacy is to convince a hollywood director to make a realistic movie about robots and the skills of the computer.
Oh wait, what if he refuses to watch it? My bad!

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Again your missing the whole point, forget the hows, top scientists believe its possible, there smarter than all of you and me , so your attack on my programming knowledge is null and void, presume for the sake of the debate that it can be done.And is.
At that point there is no way of knowing how it will react to any stimuli, as its free thinking.
WAS MY POINT do you follow yet ?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Yes absolutely.
You know what, martians are making a machine that will make people disappear from here and appear in the third time dimension.
Whether martians exists and whether they're making this machine actually isnt debatable. Since Im saying they're making it, so they're making it. And obviously martians are smarter than me and you, so if you dont believe this news, youre a dumb pony.
O.o Im so terribly scared now. I guess Id start peeing in my bed from this day. Boo hoo. So spooky news!

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Your narrow minded if you think its impossible.
Theres millions of dollars being spent on this very thing.
200 years ago, if you told someone they are going to have computers that can do all the things they do now, they would basically call you a fool, sort of like what your implying above.
Tell me do you think that the scientists involved in this are stupid too ? And there degree vs yours ?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Oh, that's what you meant. Well, allow me to retort.

Millions of dollars solely for artifical intelligence? Source please? because I believe there is millions of dollars being invested in potato gender.
The argument of telling someone 200 years ago about computers is totally irrelevant as proof of artificial intelligence, or the development of it.
A scientist having a degree does not mean we are oblivious to technology.

Did I miss anything? >_>

EDIT: Just thought I'd add, the discussion about AI programming, hyper-advanced computer technology, etc made my brain hurt. Please educate yourself in these fields before preaching.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Lolsss. I told him the same thing: to get a basic knowledge of computer working and programming if he wants to put up a serious argument. But he has a high degree of faith in sci-fi movies. And those are all he has good level of information about.
I mean, come on, computers and robots work on the principle of electronic paths and voltage fluctuations. How on earth (or any other planet) would any computer program not follow the hardcoded circuit it holds?
This is a simple, general science question which he has never answered yet.

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Care to back up that claim? You don't seem to know much about how computers work, let alone viruses, so you must have seen this supposed fact somewhere.

Oh, and I run linux, so I don't get viruses. Never have, never will. Now before you call that "arrogant" consider for a moment that I know how viruses operate, and you don't. So why don't you go level the playing field by educating yourself, mmkay?

I was responding to your comment about humans being merely "students" to computers because they can do calculations faster than we can.

True, it's an assumption, but I think it's a fairly safe assumption given how many hundreds of people are constantly looking for new botnets on the internet. A global AI suddenly appearing in the network would look an awful lot like... a strange new botnet. Or maybe not. But when they see data flying all over the place with no real objective, they'll know something's up.

I didn't say that, I was pointing out that computers beating humans at chess is irrelevant. Chess has very simple rules, and there are only so many possible game states. Once you program all of them into a giant IBM supercomputer, well, game over for humans. Does that really count as AI? If I program a computer to beat you at something dead-simple like tic-tac-toe, is the computer really outsmarting you, or am I? But how about something like, as I said, Starcraft II? Not only are the rules far more complicated than Chess, but the game takes place in real time, and computers just can't keep up. Most of the SCII bots out there are just collections of simple rules like "scout out the enemy base early in the game", and they don't really count as AI.
RTS games are the same way, the bots all follow a script and have perfect aim. But if I play a game of capture-the-flag against the best bots RTS games have to offer, they fail oh so miserably.
So yes, I've died in games before, but it's more accurate to say that the programmers outsmarted me than it is to say that the computer, which merely follows their explicit instructions, did.
Now of course, someday someone will make an AI that will beat humans at SCII but considering the current state of AI research, it'll be awhile.

And I agree with them. So what's the problem here?

Again, where do you draw the line? With an abacus, a human can do multiplication probably 10 times faster than I can on paper. Why does that matter? How about a pocket calculator. They don't even have a "real" CPU, but they can multiply 20-digit numbers that would take me hours. What is your point exactly?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

It was a science documentary that was all about programs and virus's, and the very top people researching it stated as fact that only 20% of virus's are actually detected, because basically there always a step behind the writers of virus's, l cant recall the name of the documentary it was a few months ago.

So sorry if l dont believe you when you say you have never had a virus, because like in the documentary, alot of virus's are not detected, thus you dont even know there running in the back round. Likely to be one in your PC right now, and mine and most other people in here.

But of coarse your the best programmer out there and never have had a virus have you ''coughbullshit''.......millionare are you ? Should be.........

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Lolsssssss.
If you use some version of windows, that doesnt mean everyone uses the same os. Most malware are written in high level languages like vb6, c# etc which only target windows platforms.
And about the 20% malware detection assumption, maybe, just maybe you should also watch a documentary about heuristics. No?

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Its still arrogant to assume you have never been attacked by a virus.
Unless your a state of the art programmer/hacker/virus software writer, and very very rich fom it, its just plain arrogant to assume you are to good to ever get a virus.

So sorry l still dont believe him.........

Re: Artificial Intelligence
 

Because common sense, luck, and intelligent humans don't exist?
You sure do have a lot of faith (or hope?) in your electronic friends going rogue.