Artificial Intelligence

[Swift]

BTW, don't kid yourself that we're "close" to developing AI that will rival ours. We're hundreds of years away from that. We haven't even scratched the surface of how our brains work yet, so don't think we'll see AI of any real capability in our lifetimes.

I don't think my grandchildren will see it. But just look at the advances we've made in the last 100 years. A "computer" didn't exist, not it's a common item. I think we're closer then you think. They'll be one big discovery that'll launch an incredible advancment in biotechnology. Then we'll see that kind of stuff. Much like Skynet in terminator.

 

[Zardoz]

...I think we're closer then you think...

Nope. You're underestimating the power and complexity of your brain.

Pardon my use of the "e" word, but it took hundreds of millions of years for our brains to evolve to where they are now, and we're not about to duplicate its staggering capability any time soon.

 

[Swift]

Nope. You're underestimating the power and complexity of your brain.

Pardon my use of the "e" word, but it took hundreds of millions of years for our brains to evolve to where they are now, and we're not about to duplicate its staggering capability any time soon.

Forget evolution that has nothting to do with it since we didn't have a conscience effort in our own evolution. Outside of limited selective breeding.

We're doing things now that would be considered witchcraft and sorcery to people during the revolutionary war. Even the Civil war.

I understand that the brain is still a huge mystery, but so was electricity, internal combustion, microwaves, batteries and a host of other things. All I'm saying is that if we can figure out how to clone something, we can figure out how the brain works in a few centuries.

 

[Zardoz]

...we can figure out how the brain works in a few centuries.

Read my earlier post. I said "hundreds of years". That's what it will take.

 

[Swift]

Read my earlier post. I said "hundreds of years". That's what it will take.

that's a nice round number. I said a few hundred meaning less then 500. But either way, the technology that you and I know about is advanced. But imagine the stuff that we DON'T know about yet.

 

[Grand Prix]

I think clones and self-conscious robots should have rights. I think Futurama's theory would work quite well, we'll just make it so that liquor corporations can benefit from the existance of robots: alcohol-fueled power cells.

I think a thinking robot or android would be very helpful. A thinking being that can operate in the vacuum of space for longer periods of time. Mech warriors to fight our battles with, saving millions of human lives. Intelligent workers that won't die from radiation in nuclear power plants. The possibilties are endless! I think we should learn to love and respect the Machine.

 

[Famine]

Work by Thomas K. Landauer indicated that the human brain processes and stores information of any type at about 2 bits per second. This puts the brain's total "memory" at ~1Gb.

Scared?

 

[Grand Prix]

See? I told you guys that a superior species would eventually bring about the end of superiority for humans, but NOOOOOOOOOOO............

 

[Swift]

Work by Thomas K. Landauer indicated that the human brain processes and stores information of any type at about 2 bits per second. This puts the brain's total "memory" at ~1Gb.

Scared?

That's a lot lower then I expected. I would think of something at least a terabyte or so. Oh well, I'm not bioligist, so what do I know.

 

[Famine]

Apparently we're capable of about 100 million gigaflops (100,000 teraflops, or 100 exaflops). This makes us only around 100,000 times - or 5 orders of magnitude - smarter than a PS3.

Sadly, computer chip technology increases processing ability by a full order of magnitude every 5 years. This means that not only are we already way down on raw memory, but in 25 years' time, we'll be only on a par in processing ability. With a games console.

(in fact I believe the current Cray is at 52 Teraflops, which brings us down to 18 years or so)

Scared now?

 

[Swift]

Apparently we're capable of about 100 million gigaflops (100,000 teraflops, or 100 exaflops). This makes us only around 100,000 times - or 5 orders of magnitude - smarter than a PS3.

Sadly, computer chip technology increases processing ability by a full order of magnitude every 5 years. This means that not only are we already way down on raw memory, but in 25 years' time, we'll be only on a par in processing ability. With a games console.

(in fact I believe the current Cray is at 52 Teraflops, which brings us down to 18 years or so)

Scared now?

Now are we talking ability to process said info or store said info?

 

[Famine]

FLOP = Floating Point Operation per Second, the basic unit of processing ability.

We're already outclassed in terms of memory storage - and ability to recall it (my computer can remember any CD I give it just once, perfectly). We can just calculate faster. For now.

 

[Emohawk]

Well, even if it's kinda lossy at times, that means we have incredible storage efficiency.
I'm not scared at all, it's sort of amusing, really.

 

[Swift]

FLOP = Floating Point Operation per Second, the basic unit of processing ability.

We're already outclassed in terms of memory storage - and ability to recall it (my computer can remember any CD I give it just once, perfectly). We can just calculate faster. For now.

Thanks Famine. Don't mind me...I'm just radically slow for the conventional tech geek.

 

[Danoff]

Raw processing power is no biggie. My computer is ALREADY way better at math than I am. Mathematica can solve algebra problems I don't even want to look at. Not to mention that sometimes I'll forget to add a negative sign.

The real trick is in the software that we use to harness that processing power. It's not a matter of simple ability, it's a matter of the wiring. How to get a computer chip to "think" is a challenging problem that's going to require a lot better understanding of how our brain works.

 

[Zardoz]

Scared now?

If all our brains did was crunch numbers, I'd say yes.

When do processors get to the point that they are independently creative? When do they get to HAL's capability?

 

[ledhed]

This is making me want to stick a controller in my ear and try to play a game . so I tried it and when I closed my eyes I played Sid meyers Pirates and it didnt crash once and it had a great framerate. How much ram do you think I have ?

 

[Arwin]

We haven't even scratched the surface of how our brains work yet

Not quite true.

(I wish I had time to link all those words but I don't have the time. However, if you would put everything that has been figured out about the brain into one book, you would see that there's not that much of a mistery left. Even the general principle of how consciousness works is pretty much unravelled, but it is such a controversial and hard to accept concept for many, that it will take a little while longer before it will be publicly presented - the evidence will have to be overwhelming, as very many will want to not believe it)

 

[Carl.]

Not quite true.

(I wish I had time to link all those words but I don't have the time. However, if you would put everything that has been figured out about the brain into one book, you would see that there's not that much of a mistery left. Even the general principle of how consciousness works is pretty much unravelled, but it is such a controversial and hard to accept concept for many, that it will take a little while longer before it will be publicly presented - the evidence will have to be overwhelming, as very many will want to not believe it)

I'd love to hear more about that. As most programmers, I consider the A.I. as some sort of holy graal.

Like nuclear power, it's a bit of a double-edged sword, it has enormous destructive potential. I believe, for example, that we'd have to completely rethink our current economic systems, otherwise it could be catastrophic. Once an engineer, doctor, architect managing or a programmer job is better done by a machine, what job market is left for humans? Services, art and entertainment?

I'm very eager to see the results of projects like this one.

 

[TheCracker]

Apparently we're capable of about 100 million gigaflops (100,000 teraflops, or 100 exaflops). This makes us only around 100,000 times - or 5 orders of magnitude - smarter than a PS3.

I know a few people who make my old 48k Sinclair ZX Spectrum look smart.

 

[Zardoz]

Raw processing power is no biggie...The real trick is in the software that we use to harness that processing power.

There you go. That's what its all about. I would never have thought to use a "software" analogy, but that's why human-equivalent AI won't be seen until the distant future, isn't it?

It isn't about how many computations we make per second. It's the "programs" we use. What a challenge for software writers!

 

[Famine]

In the case of the brain, the software (the mind, for want of a better word) is merely an emergent property of the hardware (the brain). If we were to build a processor capable of 100 Exaflops with 1Gb of memory and able to create its own internal connections, would we see a computer mind as an emergent property?

 

[Danoff]

In the case of the brain, the software (the mind, for want of a better word) is merely an emergent property of the hardware (the brain). If we were to build a processor capable of 100 Exaflops with 1Gb of memory and able to create its own internal connections, would we see a computer mind as an emergent property?

No. We would see a super fast processor wait for you to tell it to add 2+2 really really fast. Our brain has been programmed by millions of years of evolution. We would need to do the same before a computer processor would become intelligent.

Like nuclear power, it's a bit of a double-edged sword, it has enormous destructive potential. I believe, for example, that we'd have to completely rethink our current economic systems, otherwise it could be catastrophic. Once an engineer, doctor, architect managing or a programmer job is better done by a machine, what job market is left for humans? Services, art and entertainment?

If Robots have rights, they cost a fortune to make, AND you have to get them to agree to a salary - they might be more expensive than people are now.


Plus this brings up a point that I hadn't really considered before. If you think robots who are self aware and intelligent would have rights, what do you think about how those robots are created? Many people think that genetically engineering children is bad. Perhaps you want you child to have one arm or eye, so you (sometime in the future when this is possible) genetically engineer your child to have one arm. Is that a violation of the child's rights? I would say yes. But what about improvements? What about three arms? I would still say yes.

But then if you have a self-aware intelligent robot - would it be enthical to design it with one arm? Or no arms?

 

[Famine]

We already see emergent properties in computer systems. A famous experiment - I believe conducted at Stanford, though I don't recall - allowed a computer system to evolve itself to perform a task. The final product had, seemingly, several extra non-functional components, yet when the components were removed the entire system ceased functioning.

As soon as you turned the compubrain on, you'd be giving it information, and as soon as it receives information, intelligence emerges:

 

[Danoff]

We already see emergent properties in computer systems. A famous experiment - I believe conducted at Stanford, though I don't recall - allowed a computer system to evolve itself to perform a task. The final product had, seemingly, several extra non-functional components, yet when the components were removed the entire system ceased functioning.

As soon as you turned the compubrain on, you'd be giving it information, and as soon as it receives information, intelligence emerges:

It's the adaptation procedure that needs the tuning. I'm not sure they've got that part figured out yet. But I agree, you can give a computer the ability to evolve itself and it should (if the algorithm is good enough) achieve some pretty amazing things. Still, I'm not sure that would result in self awareness or any kind of emotion.

 

[Swift]

It's the adaptation procedure that needs the tuning. I'm not sure they've got that part figured out yet. But I agree, you can give a computer the ability to evolve itself and it should (if the algorithm is good enough) achieve some pretty amazing things. Still, I'm not sure that would result in self awareness or any kind of emotion.

I'm not trying to turn this into an evolution thread. But let's just assume evolution is true. How else could emotion have come about if not by this type of process?

 

[Danoff]

I'm not trying to turn this into an evolution thread. But let's just assume evolution is true. How else could emotion have come about if not by this type of process?

The computer wouldn't be subject to normal natural selection. Emotion helps make sure that we protect our children, pair bond, and generally procreate. If it weren't for emotion we might not care about our children enough to protect them.

Computers won't be facing that problem because they aren't going to die of natural causes and wouldn't need to provide for their children. So emotion isn't going to play an important role.

 

[Arwin]

In the case of the brain, the software (the mind, for want of a better word) is merely an emergent property of the hardware (the brain). If we were to build a processor capable of 100 Exaflops with 1Gb of memory and able to create its own internal connections, would we see a computer mind as an emergent property?

Of course, you do need input. And motivation. That's where our emotion and innate abilities come into play. In the form of our emotions, we are given primitive goals to pursue, given some basic skills, and the capacity to learn from our actions, organise our sensory input, interact with our environment, etc.

 

[Swift]

The computer wouldn't be subject to normal natural selection. Emotion helps make sure that we protect our children, pair bond, and generally procreate. If it weren't for emotion we might not care about our children enough to protect them.

Computers won't be facing that problem because they aren't going to die of natural causes and wouldn't need to provide for their children. So emotion isn't going to play an important role.

That wasn't my point bud. I was saying WHERE did emotion come from?

 

[TwinTurboJay]

emotion of instinct...the same could be said for dogs...( protecting their children )