|
| Thread: What do you think is the near future of AI |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:06 AM |
|
|
What do you think is the near future of AI
I'm sleepy at the moment, AI won't be.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:16 AM |
|
|
|
At present there is no technological, not even theoretical foundation for any reasonable optimism (or pessimism, depending on the stance) that we could "play God" and create real intelligence. It's just a scifi concept.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:32 AM |
|
|
If you think of it like, they are just about to invent a machine indistinguishable from Goethe, yes, that would be far away from the truth. If you think of it like, much of the "mental" stuff isn't that much of a Goethe stuff and navigation applications can easily upgrade into AI taxi drivers, is that to play God? WTF is to play God? God is dead already.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:51 AM |
|
|
a benevolent dicatator (such as Helios AI from Deus Ex franchise) sounds good to me 
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
frostysh
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
WHY?
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:52 AM |
|
Edited by frostysh at 09:55, 10 Feb 2017.
|
Well, the brain is somekind of advanced Artificial Int. stuff. And so what? I think in the future humans can reach such effectiveness of their AI tech. stuff as human Brain. But if this AI-Cyborg-brain will have same size and ergonomics as human head stuff, I have doubts about much more effectiveness of that - Quantum Physics have a lot restrictions... Well, I think if guys may can create the "Brain" of size of the Hover Dam - the hell it will be smart! Perhaps it will suck energy like the entire NYC  , but still...
This thing will be alive, this thing can make a decisions  as a humans The thinking process is too difficult and to rapi for a full 24/7 monitoring, in addition the machine can try to hide its thoughts... - And this is a potential danger. The solution (the bad solution, but at least some solution!) has been proposed by Isaac Asimov (lol, same as Isaac Newton  )
Some of his books I liked. He created some "Laws" that a machine-guys cannot restrict.
Anyway, humans must have "plan B" - just blow up those piece of junk, with a huge and horrific bomb, if thing will going too crazy 
Also very interesting topic - Cybernetics, I mean connections between bio-AI-genetic-and-stuff technologies.
____________
|
|
Warmonger
Promising
Legendary Hero
fallen artist
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 10:02 AM |
|
|
AI progress and usefulness is still very limited, however the humanity is on a good way to become dumber than AI.
____________
The future of Heroes 3 is here!
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 10:11 AM |
|
|
artu said:
God is dead already.
not the one i saw. and i get the feeling that if it ever DID die, then everything would cease to exist in the blink of an eye. non-existence in a fraction of a second.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 10:19 AM |
|
|
artu said:
If you think of it like, they are just about to invent a machine indistinguishable from Goethe, yes, that would be far away from the truth. If you think of it like, much of the "mental" stuff isn't that much of a Goethe stuff and navigation applications can easily upgrade into AI taxi drivers, is that to play God? WTF is to play God? God is dead already.
That is no AI. You could have the same effect with alternative traffic systems (for example transportation bands like you have them in airports already). It won't be long, until trucks will be driven by an autonomous system, but that's obviously in line with what I earlier said: with labor it's also a process of natural selection, and jobs will go depending on their repetitiveness; the more repetitive a job is, the sooner it will go extinct, and that is the way it SHOULD be.
That has nothing to do with artificial INTELLIGENCE, except if you want to offend the concept.
There is also a trend that reproductive rates in "advanced" countries will lead to a decreasing population. Ideally, world population may continue to rise for a couple of decades, then stagnate, then decrease. Procreation may become artificial at sometime in the future (that is, planned).
There is no reason to worry about "jobs for everyone". After all, there are already concepts of a basic support for everyone.
Oh, and about "God" - I don't believe in God, as you know. It's just that if we can create a MIND (which is what "intelligence" suggests), then I don't see any limit in its capacity, and you can easily imagine what that leads to.
|
|
frostysh
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
WHY?
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 10:51 AM |
|
Edited by frostysh at 10:54, 10 Feb 2017.
|
Warmonger -
Well, it is not so easy. some ~100 ago peoples have nothing like IPhones, Cybersecurity, Quantum-Computing satellites (CPR's long term program..) etc.. So you cannot deny the fact, that "thinking machines" drastically changed the life of the humans on the Earth.
But what can appear after 100 years from this point? - Who hell knows...
Anyway - A cool joke about dumbness, I have a lot of laugh, for an example I think frostysh is sometimes even more stupid than his machine-friends, such as Personal Computer whahahaha . yeah...  .
To the other guys - I do not think that a good idea to bent the God to the AI - well, me always thought that this two technologies if far from each other, Like a Sociology of mass controlling ideas, and transistors
____________
|
|
AlHazin
Promising
Supreme Hero
النور
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 01:31 PM |
|
|
I think by creating computers, a form of AI based on algorithms and mathematical applications, we quite achieved a first step in that way, who knows where we could get.
Nevertheless, maybe your question is rather "could we create consciousness?"
Also:
fred79 said:
artu said:
God is dead already.
not the one i saw. and i get the feeling that if it ever DID die, then everything would cease to exist in the blink of an eye. non-existence in a fraction of a second.
Allahu Hayyunn la yamoot, kullu chay-in yafnâ illâ wadjhahoo, artoo
(God is alive doesn't die, everything vanishes but His face, artu).
____________
Nothing of value disappears from this world, it will reappear in some shape or form ^^ - Elvin
|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 04:04 PM |
|
|
You need definitions for things such as "intelligence" first.
Rather than intelligence, I think the real question is creating a machine that knows it exists. Our own consciousness is still poorly understood, so applying that to a machine is a very distant ambition.
Humanity will be obsolete if there is a sophisticated self aware machine because it could just evolve itself several trillion times over a very short time span. That doesn't necessarily mean we'll go extinct but it won't be our servant and it may see no value in our quest for comfort. In addition to being self-aware it might also need desire, which would probably be an organic or semi-organic machine.
I think humanity will become integrated with AI rather than machines in of themselves being a completely separated entity.
I like science fiction too, but building a Dell and calling it even something remotely - by even a millionth of a percent - as advanced as a bacteria is a little bit amusing. Sci fi is that: sci fi.
We've had autopilot on planes for a long time. For cars, it's about perfecting GPS and sensors. It's a calculator.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 08:03 PM |
|
|
Well, if we put aside fred's acid trip or AlHazin's Abrahamic super villain, "God is dead" is of course a metaphor indicating nothing theistic determines our cosmology or law or intellectual perspective anymore and I'm extremely glad God left those circles never to come back. He really wasnt helping anything in the past.
Back on topic, how to decide when AI becomes "real" I'd say that an algorithm designing algorithms of its own is pretty much it. I think when people imagine what AI's will evolve into, they tend to think of a very anthropomorphic destination. AI's most probably will never have urges, desires, passions, joy... We don't have these because we are intelligent, we have them because we are organic, we had urges way before we were cabable of abstraction. An intelligence without the above will of course be a different kind of intelligence, it will not want to do things on its own but that won't be because it is not smart or original enough, why should it want to?
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 08:13 PM |
|
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 08:23 PM |
|
|
I already told my reasoning, which part are you referring to?
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:00 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 21:02, 10 Feb 2017.
|
JJ was trying to say that true AI, the kind that shares every aspect of human intelligence, is nowhere near a foreseeable reality or even sound in theory, and I would argue that it's more of an impossibility. If you've read anything about Descartes or other philosophers proposing that there is no such effect greater than its cause (which is also in the context of God being the necessary and sufficient cause for the effect known as human conscience), then you'll probably arrive at the conclusion that a computer will never leave the bounds of its coded hypothesis to return a completely original answer. But way to miss the point nitpicking the phrase "playing God" on the basis of unbelief, lol.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:02 PM |
|
|
Something needs some sort of motivation to do something or even anything if it's going to do it on its own (as opposed to just responding to programming, which isn't different from why water flows downhill. Even using the phrase "responding to programming" is somewhat anthropomorphizing a computer where it is not warranted. There is a sequence of algorithms that operate via an electric circuit). Water doesn't have any motivation to flow downhill and a computer has no motivation to run software. At the most basic level you at least need electrochemical stimuli for negative or positive feedback mechanisms. More realistically, you need an ego, if it is going to act out in creative, brilliant, and at times, debatably irrational ways.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
tSar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:14 PM |
|
|
At best you'll get machines with highly sophisticated scripts letting them do some crazy lifelike things, but no, it is highly silly to assume a computer can go beyond its programing, it can 'adapt' within that framework. People when referring to ai always go, is it self aware, or go by metaphysical analysis. Personally their ability to grow and to have desires and ambitions is what separates us from the machines, we seek to express and manifest through creation, until a machine is capable of doing that solely of their own accord, this outcome is impossible imho.
The real question is, does it have to be alive? We will eventually be able to create machines that will be able to perfectly mimick a particular human archetype with enough inconsistencies in character to flesh out a realistic humanlike personality. However such a thing wouldn't be alive, but again, for it to fulfill its function need to be so?
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:19 PM |
|
|
Blizz, you DO realize that even now there's probably bazillions organisms on this Earth who obey every kind of chemical law there is and they are NOT intelligent, right? Just because you go into biomimetics doesn't mean you can engineer matter with will.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:23 PM |
|
|
Exactly, you two guys before me.
Personally, I've been toying witb the idea that "intellkigence" is a function of having limbs with digits. Practical proof: octopusses. Octopusses are extremely curious. Give them something and they start playing with it. Each of their arms has its own brain PLUS there is another brain for coordination.
Considering evolution, for something to develop there must be a reason. For example, if there was no physical possibility to fly, there wouldn't be wings. Intelligence needs a way to EXPRESS itself - nothing is a purpose unto itself, except life. So what would w WHALE do with "intelligence"? Nothing, because they don't have the means.
However, having HANDS allows a being to DO something - it's reason and motivation to develop intelligence, because that being has the instruments to use it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 10, 2017 09:39 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 21:55, 10 Feb 2017.
|
Lol, Stevie, I read Descartes probably before you were born. His onthological "proof" is refuted centuries ago and its circular, btw. Descartes' importance today is mostly historical. You can use the same method to argue Gremlins exist.
And intelligence is something gradual, there ARE other organisms with intelligence and today even something such as culture is not considered unique to humans, We can trace back the qualities of our mind in more elementary forms in most primates. These are nothing new either, such research dates back to 1970's. Having a will is not a binary concept, it has stages. Having a will is also not absolute, you don't really decide a lot of the things on sheer will, like you believe you do
@BB
That's what I mean by anthropomorphic, does intelligence have to come with preference? Why would you have preference when you have no desire? For example we want to live because it's an instinct, not because our intelligence decides it's the smart thing to do. And without preference, how can AI have personal choices? So, these are not questions about how sophisticated or independent AI can get, these are questions about its nature no matter how advanced it becomes.
@JJ
Whales are actually pretty smart animals and they have incredibly complicated communication systems based on signals. And wings didnt develop as flying instruments first, it's a very common concept in evolution that something starts to have a side-line benificial effect other than its usual purpose (in wings, this was to cool down body tempature by flapping them) and then this side-line trait starts to evolve better and better, for example some fish use electric signals as a radar, some start to have a little more watt power than others, better radar, yet this time they also start to shock prey with it and generations later you have fish which dont use electricity to find its way but to directly hunt by giving paralyzing level shock waves.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
| |
|
|
