JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags A.I. , artificial intelligence , consciousness

View Poll Results: Is consciousness physical or metaphysical?
Consciousness is a kind of data processing and the brain is a machine that can be replicated in other substrates, such as general purpose computers. 81 86.17%
Consciousness requires a second substance outside the physical material world, currently undetectable by scientific instruments 3 3.19%
On Planet X, unconscious biological beings have perfected conscious machines 10 10.64%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
Old 20th April 2012, 09:08 AM   #201
Leumas
Master Poster
 
Leumas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,737
Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
It's not a matter of conjecture. It's a matter of computability theory. If the task of interpreting these images was not a computable function it would theoretically impossible for anyone or anything to interpret them. Since humans can interpret them, then this must be a computable function, and therefore it is theoretically possible for a computer to do this.

Whether or not it would be practical to program a computer to do this is a different question entirely. Possibly it might take an absurd amount of processing power or time (which amounts to the same thing, as double the amount of time is equivalent to double the amount of processing power), or it might require programming in vast amounts of contextual knowledge and understanding that humans unconsciously acquire in childhood.

But the fact that the USA Military is involved in this is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

__________________
"I don't know if God exists, but it would be better for his reputation if he didn't" - Jules Renard
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty" - Thomas Jefferson
"It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" - Mark Twain

Last edited by Leumas; 20th April 2012 at 09:55 AM.
Leumas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 09:14 AM   #202
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
My Growing Collection of Magic Beans

I've decided to collect magic beans. Aside from the master magic bean of consciousness, we've heard of:

1) The Magic Bean of Smartness.
2) ...of Image Recognition (i.e.enemy hideouts in satellite pics).
3) ...of Creating Fine Art.
4) ...of Understanding (i.e. the Chinese Room experiment)

On #1, it depends on how smartness is defined, but a quick google yields "Characterized by sharp quick thought; bright." That's how I'd describe Watson, though one could argue it doesn't have the Magic Bean of Thought.

On #2, I've worked on many image recognition projects and knew some masters of the craft. Some of the hardest image recognition problems are regularly cracked with neural network simulations. They work!

On #3, I once proposed a program that generated animated cartoons in real time. That's exactly what computer games are doing now, and getting better at it every day. Kids sit and watch self-play mode for hours.

It will be a long time before computers have a shot at achieving the finest of fine art. I don't know how one could argue that they NEVER could (except by invoking the magic bean argument).

On #4, I killed the Chinese Room Experiment in that layman thread and would gladly repost here if anyone's interested.
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.

Last edited by Mr. Scott; 20th April 2012 at 09:20 AM. Reason: #4 missed because of phone call
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 09:48 AM   #203
Leumas
Master Poster
 
Leumas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,737
Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
This is about god? Elaborate.

Your obsession with attributing magic beans (as evinced by your post below) to anyone and everything that is beyond your realm of understanding is a very religionist characteristic you must have retained from your woo days.

Just as when you used to be woo you could not fathom how anyone does not have woo and accordingly you fallaciously attributed to them woo albeit of a type you spurned.

Just like an ex-alcoholic remains forever obsessed with alcohol and struggles with rejecting the temptation on daily basis.


Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
I've decided to collect magic beans.
Are you sure this is wise? I think an ex-woo is better off not tempting himself with collecting woo even if it is woo only in his obsessed imagination .
__________________
"I don't know if God exists, but it would be better for his reputation if he didn't" - Jules Renard
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty" - Thomas Jefferson
"It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" - Mark Twain

Last edited by Leumas; 20th April 2012 at 09:50 AM.
Leumas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 10:28 AM   #204
punshhh
Illuminator
 
punshhh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rural England
Posts: 4,820
Originally Posted by !Kaggen View Post
Unless you are The One
The fifth element?
punshhh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 11:59 AM   #205
keyfeatures
Critical Thinker
 
keyfeatures's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: My head
Posts: 436
Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
On #1, it depends on how smartness is defined, but a quick google yields "Characterized by sharp quick thought; bright." That's how I'd describe Watson, though one could argue it doesn't have the Magic Bean of Thought.
I suspect anyone going on a date with Watson based on the description of being sharp, quick thinking and bright might be sorely disappointed...

Perhaps my standards are too high?
keyfeatures is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 03:55 PM   #206
Leumas
Master Poster
 
Leumas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,737
Originally Posted by keyfeatures View Post
I suspect anyone going on a date with Watson based on the description of being sharp, quick thinking and bright might be sorely disappointed...

Perhaps my standards are too high?
__________________
"I don't know if God exists, but it would be better for his reputation if he didn't" - Jules Renard
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty" - Thomas Jefferson
"It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" - Mark Twain
Leumas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 05:03 PM   #207
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by Leumas View Post
Your obsession with attributing magic beans (as evinced by your post below) to anyone and everything that is beyond your realm of understanding is a very religionist characteristic you must have retained from your woo days.

Just as when you used to be woo you could not fathom how anyone does not have woo and accordingly you fallaciously attributed to them woo albeit of a type you spurned.

Just like an ex-alcoholic remains forever obsessed with alcohol and struggles with rejecting the temptation on daily basis.




Are you sure this is wise? I think an ex-woo is better off not tempting himself with collecting woo even if it is woo only in his obsessed imagination .
Cute, clever, creative, completely delusional.

The debate reminds me of the year-long one I had with a creationist here, Kleinman.

Like creationists, the anti-computationalists have no evidence for what they believe in and can only throw stones at their opposition.

There's a huge body of evidence supporting the view that the brain is a data processing machine, and no evidence otherwise, AFAIK. As always, you're invited to prove me wrong.

That AI has not yet achieved the touchdown of creating a human-like mind in a machine is not evidence they never will. I've been around long enough to see anti-computationalists run down the field carrying the goal posts away from the AI team again and again. I'm sure that will never end. When AI makes its touchdown, I don't doubt the opposition will only acknowledge the achievement of a Philosopher's Zombie, cognitive dissonance being what it is. At that point, it will no longer matter.

Leumas, if you have positive evidence for whatever it is you believe in regarding the uncomputability of the mind, then share it with us, will you?

And, if you don't like the phrase "magic bean" maybe you can suggest another that appeals to you so we can both use the same name for whatever it is that the brain purportedly has that no machine has without stirring emotions. How's "metaphysical attribute?"
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.

Last edited by Mr. Scott; 20th April 2012 at 05:06 PM. Reason: typos
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 05:35 PM   #208
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 7,693
Originally Posted by Leumas View Post

What do you find contradictory in what he wrote?

The "might"s in that post are related to the specific ways that the hardware and software of intelligence may have to be designed, not general point (which he said is not conjecture) that it could be done by a turing machine.

He basically said: we don't know specifically how it will be implemented, but however it is implemented it will be a turing machine. What's contradictory there?

(and if you respond, could you avoid yelling? I have sensitive ears)
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 05:39 PM   #209
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 7,693
The question to me isn't even if what the brain does can be done by a sufficiently advanced computer. I suspect it can, but let's assume for the sake of argument that there's something else involved. That penrose is right, for instance, and some sort of quantum mechanical properties are involved in the functionality.

So, one day we figure this out and understand how the brain works. Can we build a machine with different parts that works by the same principles? If not, why not?

And if we can, then we can build a robot, or a computer that happens to work a little differently than the ones we currently have, that works as a human brain does.

Clearly it doesn't have to be an exact replica of a human brain: every brain is slightly different from every other, but we still consider each other to be conscious.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 06:52 PM   #210
quarky
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,448
Can we make an artificial atom?
Or do we need to use real atom parts to do it?
quarky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 07:05 PM   #211
Brian-M
Daydreamer
 
Brian-M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Downunder
Posts: 6,247
Originally Posted by Leumas View Post
You are conveniently EQUIVOCATING the word simulation now.... this is disingenuous to the extreme.....you are relying on the evasiveness so far by computationalists to accept the DISTINCTION between simulation and emulation. I think this has been a DELIBERATE tactic and a very dishonest one.

Clearly you don't understand what these words actually mean. Let me correct that for you...

Emulation: Running a program or other software designed for a different system.
Simulation: Something which simulates a system or environment in order to predict actual behaviour.
Simulate: To model, replicate, duplicate the behavior, appearance or properties of.

Originally Posted by Leumas View Post
Do you think there are computerized replicas (emulations) of cells?

Yes
, although precise whole-cell molecular model is still being developed.

Originally Posted by Leumas View Post
Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
It's not a matter of conjecture. It's a matter of computability theory. If the task of interpreting these images was not a computable function it would theoretically impossible for anyone or anything to interpret them. Since humans can interpret them, then this must be a computable function, and therefore it is theoretically possible for a computer to do this.

Whether or not it would be practical to program a computer to do this is a different question entirely. Possibly it might take an absurd amount of processing power or time (which amounts to the same thing, as double the amount of time is equivalent to double the amount of processing power), or it might require programming in vast amounts of contextual knowledge and understanding that humans unconsciously acquire in childhood.


Presumably you believe the words you've bolded and highlighted are in contradiction with each other (which would be strange because my clarification that the second paragraph addresses "a different question entirely" is part of the highlighted text).

If so, this would be further evidence of your inadequate reading comprehension skills. I see no reason to continue arguing with someone either unable or unwilling to comprehend plainly worded posts.
__________________
"That is just what you feel, that isn't reality." - hamelekim
Brian-M is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 07:07 PM   #212
epepke
Philosopher
 
epepke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 8,317
Originally Posted by rocketdodger View Post
That isn't a full representation of the industry, though.

In fact every place I have worked there is a constant argument between AI programmers on whether we should concentrate on making the AI scriptable, so designers can get the exact presentation they want ( cinematic games like Modern Warfare ) or making the AI very intelligent and organic, so players can experiment with it and get a more real feeling from it ( open world games like Grand Theft Auto 4, sim games like The Sims, and even some FPS games like Half Life 2 or Crysis ).

It usually ends up being a compromise, with us putting in pretty intelligent behavior in some aspects that end up being entirely scripted anyway due to the designers having the final say in the matter. But that doesn't mean the AI doesn't get more and more advanced each time.
You're right. It doesn't mean that's the AI doesn't get more and more advanced each time.

It doesn't mean that it does get more and more advanced each time. If you want to support the idea that it does, I'm all ears.

Now, funny thing is that I myself was thinking about GTA 4. I actually don't find the AI impressive, and it doesn't seem that open-ended to me. Some of the old fantasy RPGs on the Apple II seemed to me more open-ended and in many ways smarter.
__________________
"It probably came from a sticky dark planet far, far away."
- Godzilla versus Hedora

"There's no evidence that the 9-11 attacks (whoever did them) were deliberately attacking civilians. On the contrary the targets appear to have been chosen as military."
-DavidByron
epepke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 08:20 PM   #213
rocketdodger
Philosopher
 
rocketdodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hyperion
Posts: 6,884
Originally Posted by epepke View Post
You're right. It doesn't mean that's the AI doesn't get more and more advanced each time.

It doesn't mean that it does get more and more advanced each time. If you want to support the idea that it does, I'm all ears.
I am one of the people programming it ! Of course it gets more advanced! Just maybe not in ways you would want, but that is out of my control. In games about combat, that is what gets the brunt of the work. And most players don't even notice, unfortunately.

I spent about a month getting the "green despoiled" character in Wolfenstein to make use of splash damage. He scans the environment around a target and evaluates whether there are any spots nearby where the explosion from his fireballs would at least cause damage, and it works really well. You can be crouching behind cover and he will aim at the wall behind you. You can be hiding behind a corner and he will aim at the ground he can see. You can be running along in a hallway and he will shoot through windows where he can, leading your movement. You can be ducking on a rooftop and he will shoot up at objects above and behind you -- anything he can see that will work. Basically, exactly as a good human player would.

He keeps track of how and when he has hurt you, so it is literally impossible to cheese him. If you are hiding in a corner, and he just can't get at you from where he is, he will try something else, like moving to another spot. And if that doesn't work, he actually runs away and waits for *you* to make the next move. On the other hand if he has been doing well, he keeps on doing the same thing.

But do any players notice all this? I don't think so. They just switch to a strong weapon and kill him as fast as they can, rather than dancing with him like I intended. Oh well. But -- he is still very smart, and a far better combatant than any AI in any game prior. Thus, game AI definitely is improving.

EDIT -- I just noticed that this is the guy in my avatar, lolz.

Originally Posted by epepke View Post
Now, funny thing is that I myself was thinking about GTA 4. I actually don't find the AI impressive, and it doesn't seem that open-ended to me. Some of the old fantasy RPGs on the Apple II seemed to me more open-ended and in many ways smarter.
Well you have to evaluate it in terms of the areas that the devs put work into. In the case of GTA, that is obviously violence and general mayhem.

If you experiment with harassing the AI, they have some pretty deep animation and behavior. You can shoot or injure them in any part of their body and they react appropriately. When you are in combat they gang up on you and flank you really well. If you bump into them repeatedly they fight with you. If you carjack them they fight with you, trying to pull you out of their car. And when you do that, you can repeatedly stop and go, dragging them as they hold onto the door ( admittedly not smart, but deep at least ).

I could reference Skyrim as well, which has pretty good open ended AI.

And what you need to remember is that all this AI is going on while competing with CPU cycles in a measly 3 core chip against the graphics, streaming, physics, and everything else. In games like GTA4 and Skyrim, it is literally a marvel of engineering to see what comes out of those old xbox 360s. If we could devote nearly the whole CPU to a single AI it would be pretty amazing results I think.

Last edited by rocketdodger; 20th April 2012 at 08:23 PM.
rocketdodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th April 2012, 08:23 PM   #214
Leumas
Master Poster
 
Leumas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,737
Edited by Gaspode:  Removed breach of rules 0&12.
__________________
"I don't know if God exists, but it would be better for his reputation if he didn't" - Jules Renard
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty" - Thomas Jefferson
"It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" - Mark Twain

Last edited by Gaspode; 23rd April 2012 at 12:58 PM.
Leumas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 12:04 AM   #215
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
#5 The Magic Bean of Experience, found in another thread!
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 12:09 AM   #216
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by rocketdodger View Post
That isn't a full representation of the industry, though.

In fact every place I have worked there is a constant argument between AI programmers on whether we should concentrate on making the AI scriptable, so designers can get the exact presentation they want ( cinematic games like Modern Warfare ) or making the AI very intelligent and organic, so players can experiment with it and get a more real feeling from it ( open world games like Grand Theft Auto 4, sim games like The Sims, and even some FPS games like Half Life 2 or Crysis ).

It usually ends up being a compromise, with us putting in pretty intelligent behavior in some aspects that end up being entirely scripted anyway due to the designers having the final say in the matter. But that doesn't mean the AI doesn't get more and more advanced each time.
Mr. Scott "likes"

Perhaps it's about job preservation.

Advanced games will be able to anticipate and manipulate the emotions of players, creating graphics, sounds, music, models, and stories as they execute, reducing or eliminating the need for designers who aren't able to encapsulate their design strategies in the game software.

I actually did work on software that composed and arranged music in real time as a game was played. Work of this type has been going on since the 50s.
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.

Last edited by Mr. Scott; 21st April 2012 at 12:19 AM.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 01:29 AM   #217
keyfeatures
Critical Thinker
 
keyfeatures's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: My head
Posts: 436
Originally Posted by rocketdodger View Post
I spent about a month getting the "green despoiled" character in Wolfenstein to make use of splash damage. He scans the environment around a target and evaluates whether there are any spots nearby where the explosion from his fireballs would at least cause damage, and it works really well. You can be crouching behind cover and he will aim at the wall behind you. You can be hiding behind a corner and he will aim at the ground he can see. You can be running along in a hallway and he will shoot through windows where he can, leading your movement. You can be ducking on a rooftop and he will shoot up at objects above and behind you -- anything he can see that will work. Basically, exactly as a good human player would.
Wow, he sounds dreamy. Good with his hands 'n' stuff. What happens if you invite him in for a coffee? Or ask him if he considers there to be such a thing as a number without awareness? Or whether he really wanted to be a splash damage specialist when he grew up?
keyfeatures is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 01:33 AM   #218
keyfeatures
Critical Thinker
 
keyfeatures's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: My head
Posts: 436
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
So, one day we figure this out and understand how the brain works. Can we build a machine with different parts that works by the same principles? If not, why not?
Plato's cave.
keyfeatures is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 05:04 AM   #219
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
One more question, Leumas. You brought up god in a thread about consciousness. Is the idea that a machine could be conscious in conflict with your spiritual beliefs?
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 06:54 AM   #220
annnnoid
Muse
 
annnnoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: canada
Posts: 889
Originally Posted by keyfeatures View Post
Wow, he sounds dreamy. Good with his hands 'n' stuff. What happens if you invite him in for a coffee? Or ask him if he considers there to be such a thing as a number without awareness? Or whether he really wanted to be a splash damage specialist when he grew up?

There is this phrase in England….’taking the piss’ I think it is. But just the same, I thought I’d take a stab at your questions.

Q: What happens if you invite him in for a coffee?
A: He will fireball you to death.

Q: Or ask him if he considers there to be such a thing as a number without awareness?
A: He will fireball you to death.

Q: Or whether he really wanted to be a splash damage specialist when he grew up?
A: He will fireball you to death.

Dreamy indeed! I guess we’ll just have to take it on faith that those in the AI community are actually aware of the shortcomings of their creations.

Here’s an academic question: If AI is modeled on human consciousness / behavior (presumably), would not an appreciation of AI shortcomings be directly related to an ability to appreciate the equivalent shortcomings / dysfunctions in the human version.

I mean…should we assume that Chomsky was right in his characterization of scientists as being some of the last people you should rely on to adjudicate the verities of human nature.

So can we expect AI ‘personalities’ that reflect the various neurosis of their creators… either individually or collectively? Or can we expect AI personalities that achieve God-like insight, wisdom, maturity, and compassion (the question of the degree to which such things can be instantiated we’ll leave for another day)? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…..

Just a question.
__________________
What I get from….you.
Comes…and goes.
Like finding a cure
Then getting sick again.
annnnoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 07:00 AM   #221
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 7,693
Originally Posted by keyfeatures View Post
Plato's cave.
That's not an answer. Please be specific.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 07:48 AM   #222
annnnoid
Muse
 
annnnoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: canada
Posts: 889
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
That's not an answer. Please be specific.

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck… is it a duck?

"...I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you..."

IOW….why it is impossible to describe an accurate understanding of the unintelligibility of unintelligibility?

For a further discourse on the matter…go down the nearest rabbit hole (remember to bring your red and blue pills).

But in all fairness…there are horizons beyond which our vision requires a different variety of vision. I wonder if a sufficiently advanced HLMI might be capable of adding a sunny post-script to Russell’s gloomy prognosis:

“Brief and powerless is man’s life; on him and all his race the slow sure doom falls pitiless and dark. Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.”

As things currently stand...the only AI postscript would seem to be 'I will now fireball you to death!"

My prediction is that Apple will leap to the AI forefront with the introduction of the IMe (for which I will have received a $200M copyright payment)...which will be shipped with its own birth certificate and Social Security Number. IMe #1 will reincarnate the essence of Steve Jobs and be installed as the CCEO of MegaAppleCorp. MegaAppleCorp will buy out Google, Facebook, Ebay, Microsoft, Groupon, Intel, Walmart, China, and Martha Stewart, and institute one-world proprietary government after setting up a new tax-free HQ on a suitable banana republic third world Caribbean Island (...say...Turks and Caicos).

ETA…and further…we will all be hardwired to our IPhone '0' (they forgot that number…the metaphysical equivalent of ultimate space-time) at which point life will become ‘app-functional’. The ultimate ‘killer-app’ will be ‘HAPPINESS….NOW!’. Dial it up… and drift away on oceans of Apple bliss (legal drugs….yay!) ‘Time’ in App(le)-World will be everywhere-now and everyone will be able to commune with Steve Jobs contemporaneously (or some equivalently big sounding meaning) and feel like they are ‘the one’.. There….a sunny postscript!
__________________
What I get from….you.
Comes…and goes.
Like finding a cure
Then getting sick again.

Last edited by annnnoid; 21st April 2012 at 08:09 AM.
annnnoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 08:08 AM   #223
AlBell
Philosopher
 
AlBell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,362
Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
Clearly you don't understand what these words actually mean. Let me correct that for you...

Emulation: Running a program or other software designed for a different system.
Simulation: Something which simulates a system or environment in order to predict actual behaviour.
Simulate: To model, replicate, duplicate the behavior, appearance or properties of.



Yes
, although precise whole-cell molecular model is still being developed.




Presumably you believe the words you've bolded and highlighted are in contradiction with each other (which would be strange because my clarification that the second paragraph addresses "a different question entirely" is part of the highlighted text).

If so, this would be further evidence of your inadequate reading comprehension skills. I see no reason to continue arguing with someone either unable or unwilling to comprehend plainly worded posts.
Plainly worded posts appear to mean different things to different people. You have provided the computationalists view.

For me and I suspect others here, wrt brain and consciousness, an Emulation is replacing some part of a brain (neuron has been mentioned, although I doubt that level carries sufficient detail, I suggest getting the connections correct is the magic bean) with an electronic black box(EBB). And yes the result is expected by most if not all to be conscious.

A Simulation imo would be constructing a computer model of a brain using only EBB's, and that is where the argument begins. Computationalists, of course it's conscious; others, maybe but actually unknown.

just my 2cts!

Last edited by AlBell; 21st April 2012 at 08:46 AM.
AlBell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 08:24 AM   #224
annnnoid
Muse
 
annnnoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: canada
Posts: 889
Originally Posted by AlBell View Post
Plainly worded posts appear to mean different things to different people. You have provided the computationalists view.

For me and I suspect others here, wrt brain and consciousness, an Emulation is replacing some part of a brain (neuron has been mentioned, although I doubt that level carries sufficient detail) with an electronic black box(EBB). And yes the result is expected by most if not all to be conscious.

A Simulation imo would be constructing a computer model of a brain using only EBB's, and that is where the argument begins. Computationalists, of course it's conscious; others, maybe but actually unknown.

just my 2cts!

EBB = ?

Three possibilities:

1 Exponentially bounded bustiness

2 Events beyond bacon

3 Electronic Bulletin Board

(...are there more? ...perhaps a topic for a new thread)

Apparently you have established your point. Plainly worded posts can in fact have multiple meanings.
__________________
What I get from….you.
Comes…and goes.
Like finding a cure
Then getting sick again.
annnnoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 09:11 AM   #225
AlBell
Philosopher
 
AlBell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,362
Originally Posted by annnnoid View Post
EBB = ?

Three possibilities:

1 Exponentially bounded bustiness

2 Events beyond bacon

3 Electronic Bulletin Board

(...are there more? ...perhaps a topic for a new thread)

Apparently you have established your point. Plainly worded posts can in fact have multiple meanings.
As I posted: "electronic black box(EBB)".
AlBell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 09:17 AM   #226
annnnoid
Muse
 
annnnoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: canada
Posts: 889
Originally Posted by AlBell View Post
As I posted: "electronic black box(EBB)".

Not surprisingly...my fallible human programming looked right past the obvious. I am in dire need of an update!
__________________
What I get from….you.
Comes…and goes.
Like finding a cure
Then getting sick again.
annnnoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 11:05 AM   #227
quarky
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,448
Meanwhile, I'm brewing up a batch of artificial quarks in the hopes of creating AI.

I can't use the normal ones, in case they are the source of consciousness.
quarky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 11:58 AM   #228
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by quarky View Post
Meanwhile, I'm brewing up a batch of artificial quarks in the hopes of creating AI.

I can't use the normal ones, in case they are the source of consciousness.
Yes, Penrose. Is there any evidence for quarks or quantum consciousness, or is it still only conjecture and argument from ignorance? (e.g we don't know how consciousness works, so it must happen at the quantum mechanical and quark level, since we don't know how that works, either).
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st April 2012, 12:47 PM   #229
quarky
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,448
Well, you can't be too careful.
The last time I created what I thought was AI, turns out the sample was contaminated with bed bugs, and it was their intelligence I was observing.

The itchy bastards check-mated me, too.
quarky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2012, 05:30 AM   #230
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,717
Originally Posted by rocketdodger View Post
But do any players notice all this? I don't think so. They just switch to a strong weapon and kill him as fast as they can, rather than dancing with him like I intended. Oh well. But -- he is still very smart, and a far better combatant than any AI in any game prior. Thus, game AI definitely is improving.
Players don't notice the details of good AI, but they sure notice bad AI.

Your efforts are appreciated. Maybe not so much when we're restarting a level for the fifth time, but on the whole, yes.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2012, 08:12 PM   #231
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
"Consciousness is a kind of data processing and the brain is a machine that can be in principle replicated in other substrates, but general purpose computers are just not made of the right stuff."
How do you know general purpose computers are not made of the right stuff? What is the right stuff we'd need to make consciousness?
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.

Last edited by Mr. Scott; 22nd April 2012 at 08:13 PM.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 03:49 AM   #232
!Kaggen
Illuminator
 
!Kaggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 3,734
Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
How do you know general purpose computers are not made of the right stuff? What is the right stuff we'd need to make consciousness?
The future
__________________
"Anyway, why is a finely-engineered machine of wire and silicon less likely to be conscious than two pounds of warm meat?" Pixy Misa
"We live in a world of more and more information and less and less meaning" Jean Baudrillard
http://bokashiworld.wordpress.com/
!Kaggen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 08:55 AM   #233
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by !Kaggen View Post
The future
Elaborate
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 09:43 AM   #234
!Kaggen
Illuminator
 
!Kaggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 3,734
The future is a requirement for humans.
The future is not a requirement for computer simulations.
__________________
"Anyway, why is a finely-engineered machine of wire and silicon less likely to be conscious than two pounds of warm meat?" Pixy Misa
"We live in a world of more and more information and less and less meaning" Jean Baudrillard
http://bokashiworld.wordpress.com/
!Kaggen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 10:04 AM   #235
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by !Kaggen View Post
The future is a requirement for humans.
The future is not a requirement for computer simulations.
That would be easy to program a computer to feel the future is a requirement. Sounds to me like you're just making stuff up. Why don't you tell us what you're thinking instead of posting useless, cryptic quips? Is your intent to degrade the conversation?
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 10:17 AM   #236
!Kaggen
Illuminator
 
!Kaggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 3,734
Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
That would be easy to program a computer to feel the future is a requirement. Sounds to me like you're just making stuff up. Why don't you tell us what you're thinking instead of posting useless, cryptic quips? Is your intent to degrade the conversation?
No, you cannot program a computer to feel the future.
All the information you would use is from the past which has nothing to do with the future. Unless you believe in magic, do you?
__________________
"Anyway, why is a finely-engineered machine of wire and silicon less likely to be conscious than two pounds of warm meat?" Pixy Misa
"We live in a world of more and more information and less and less meaning" Jean Baudrillard
http://bokashiworld.wordpress.com/
!Kaggen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 04:13 PM   #237
rocketdodger
Philosopher
 
rocketdodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hyperion
Posts: 6,884
Originally Posted by annnnoid View Post
Q: What happens if you invite him in for a coffee?
A: He will fireball you to death.

... snip ...

So can we expect AI ‘personalities’ that reflect the various neurosis of their creators… either individually or collectively?
I have this inexplicable urge to spit a fireball at you.

In all seriousness, though, I would say yes. In this particular case, I have been playing multiplayer FPS games for 18 years ( as long as they have existed, actually ) and I am pretty darn good at every aspect of them. I know that using splash damage is a very powerful learned skill, far more useful for killing an opponent than being able to track a target directly. So when I had an AI handed to me whose weapon did splash damage, I made him fight like I fight.

I don't know of any other AI programmers that have played as much FPS multiplayer as I have. Most of them are more into other types of games, at least all the ones I know personally are. So I wouldn't expect them to make an AI use splash damage -- they don't particularly use splash damage themselves. They would probably beef up the AI logic in other areas, which admittedly might make a better AI in other ways, ways that I wouldn't even consider unless someone brought it up. I am pretty sure there is AI out there that can out-strategize my AI, and AI out there that prioritize targets better, AI that can capture the flag better, and all sorts of other things.

But none of them can use fireballs, rockets, or any other projectile that explodes when it hits things, better than my AI. Probably because none of their programmers can use fireballs, rockets, or any other projectile that explodes on impact, better than me.
rocketdodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 10:03 PM   #238
Brian-M
Daydreamer
 
Brian-M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Downunder
Posts: 6,247
Originally Posted by !Kaggen View Post
No, you cannot program a computer to feel the future.
All the information you would use is from the past which has nothing to do with the future. Unless you believe in magic, do you?
But humans cannot "feel" the future either. All the information we use is also from the past (and present).

However, if you can demonstrate a genuine capacity to perceive ("feel") or anticipate future events that could not be anticipated based on past information (with better results than just guessing), I know an organization that will give you a million dollars.
__________________
"That is just what you feel, that isn't reality." - hamelekim
Brian-M is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 11:14 PM   #239
Mr. Scott
Under the Amazing One's Wing
 
Mr. Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,550
Originally Posted by !Kaggen View Post
No, you cannot program a computer to feel the future.
All the information you would use is from the past which has nothing to do with the future. Unless you believe in magic, do you?
Is that another magic bean, that humans have and machines don't, the bean of feeling the future?

If you think humans can feel the future, then you believe in magic, right? No, I don't believe in magic.
__________________
"Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?" Ting-Ting, from the 2000 film Yi Yi.

Last edited by Mr. Scott; 23rd April 2012 at 11:15 PM.
Mr. Scott is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2012, 11:40 PM   #240
!Kaggen
Illuminator
 
!Kaggen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 3,734
Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
But humans cannot "feel" the future either.
Sure we do, anticipation, expectation, anxiety, fear are all feelings we have before we jump out of an aeroplane for the first time with a parachute on our backs.

Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
All the information we use is also from the past (and present).
So someone that never jumped out of an aeroplane with a parachute knows what it feels like to jump out of an aeroplane with a parachute before they actually feel what it feels like? How?

Originally Posted by Brian-M View Post
However, if you can demonstrate a genuine capacity to perceive ("feel") or anticipate future events that could not be anticipated based on past information (with better results than just guessing), I know an organization that will give you a million dollars.
It is a trivial ability of humans which developed through evolution. No magic there. You computationalists should study biology sometime, you might learn something instead of assuming everything that is not about computers is magic.
__________________
"Anyway, why is a finely-engineered machine of wire and silicon less likely to be conscious than two pounds of warm meat?" Pixy Misa
"We live in a world of more and more information and less and less meaning" Jean Baudrillard
http://bokashiworld.wordpress.com/
!Kaggen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

JREF Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:35 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.