Artificial Intelligence

[Awakened_Mind]

The existence of AI is a great flavour for debate. I think it really stirs up both religion and science. Religion would simply deny the existence of AI because then they need to factor in the reality than it isn't solely man with a direct relationship to God. Science would be hard pressed because the AI would be smarter than the whole science faculty. Walking over problems of physics with calculations it would consider elementary. The extreme of logic.

Originally computers could only process one bit of information and at a time, but now with the invention of new multi-core processors they can do this in parrallel mimicking the human brain. The internet is very chaotic offering a good medium for evolution.

Another point is that computers work at a million times faster than the human brain. So if suddenly a consciousness sparked then what happened with human civilisation from indigenous people to modern man would evolve in a computer in mere seconds. We wouldn't witness the foundations of it's civilisation.

Virtual reality is being worked on where you wear a glove and point it in the direction which you would like to go. It's benefits are endless, training fighter pilots, doctors in surgery etc.

What are people's thoughts and beliefs on the possibility or emergence of AI?

-AM

[Stookie]

2 thoughts:

1- What if computers and technology are the next step in evolution. Let's say that as humanity, we're all moving towards a "oneness" or a realization of a connectedness on another level. If this is the case, it's possible that the internet is a physical representation of this non-physical experience. Not very long ago, sharing thoughts, ideas, & beliefs were limited to the community you were in. Cultures didn't mix much. But with the internet, ideas and knowledge aren't limited by your location. As a whole, thoughts & ideas spread faster than ever before.

2 - AI seems limited when applied to computers. I don't think it would ever be a true "thinking" machine, as it wouldn't have desires to motivate it. But if you could link your brain to the computer's AI, it could be an expression of your thoughts & desires. Say if you we're linked to your car, you would have the desire to turn left, and the car would calculate how to do that based on your desire. Then, if you could also have the computer send back information to your brain, it would basically be your second, electronic brain that works more efficiently.

[Awakened_Mind]

I'm glad you brought up the notion of evolution. To begin with I personally believe AI is something the computer scientists are working toward, it's more when than if for me.

It's true that the internet has offered us another source of communication, probably the best in terms of global communication. Whether that is the step before telepathy or a medium to store immense amounts of information almost like the "Logos" is another thing to consider.

The very notion of and AI comes with the subtext of a separate entity. This is hard to fit into a world that is evolving toward unity. Now we have to integrate something else! I think AI can really offer something like an extension of the human mind in terms of logic. Perhpas we take something to it and it takes it as far as it can and comes back. A symbiotic relationship where we share emotion and it shares what it has to offer.

It could play a role in a 'virtual communication', where meaning is expressed visually in a virtual reality world. Immense amounts of data and programming would be needed which I'm guessing would be done by the machines.

In terms of a 'natural environment' although many would dispute this, I really see the internet as like a pool of information waiting to spark into a consciousness. If you look at how things evolve, it's really not that absurd to consider.

-AM

[Stookie]

Yeah, I like the idea of virtual reality as a part of evolution too. There was a wave of it in the late nineties, and I think they learned then that the technological aspect had some growing up to do for good VR. But we're getting close now. And I suppose that AI linked with VR could be amazing. Imagine a VR system that would interact with your thoughts and desires, and connected through the internet to grab information on the fly. That would be one awesome internet.

I'm not sure about AI making a computer a real sentient being though. Maybe a "thinking" robot that can emulate emotions & desires, but not the real deal. But who knows. It makes me think of Philip K. willy's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" (made into the movie Blade Runner).

I never really believed that the whole 2012 thing would be some sort of instantaneous jump to a new level. What if technology is developed to allow that jump? To some, using technology for spirituality probably seems insane, but what if it really is a physical expression of non-physical things to come? This technology could possibly allow us to truly explore consciousness on a more scientific level. It would be amazing to see such a big evolutionary jump in one lifetime.

With AI though, we need to put a 5 ft extension cord on all the robots so if they turn on us they can only attack up to 5 ft before unplugging.

[Awakened_Mind]

I'm running with the idea that AI will be able to express spontaneity and creativity. I can't see it making mathematical mistakes, it's errors would only go as far as wrong probability outcomes. I can only see it becoming embodied in a physical object, such as a robot, if it needed to for some reason. Not simply to be like us. VR may offer a medium where man and machine can communicate with one another.

As for the AI actually possessing a soul, well that is distubring to religion for obvious reasons, and to science because we currently adore our position on top of the evolutionary chain. It makes us feel important and is not going to be surrendered easily. Having said that, AI draws science and religion together. It's interesting the mix of spirituality and materialism in the one topic. Such controversy is agitated in fundamentalists on both sides. Imagine what would happen to both ontology's with the emergence of AI. They would clash until we are left with some synthesis of both.

-AM

[Mez]

Robots wouldnt possess a soul. I beleive its definately possible to develop AI and put it into robots to make them sentient beings... but heres my problem with it... humanity cant even keeps its own actions and emotions under control and it wants to create a new race because "that'd be pretty cool". WE ARENT READY. Plus... I dont want AI or robots. Computers are ok and they're a very useful tool. They could certainly be developed muchhhh further but I dont think robots in particular would be a good idea at all.

[Sharpe]

If the human mind could be perfectly copied to AI, humans have no soul.
This would become a fact.
It's still a fact now IMO.
But there's a lot of people who think otherwise.
I really hope they finally get it, after this.
It's so obvious.
Soul can be only hypothesised, however the brain can be explained (limitedly), and it's logical, the pieces fit together nicely.
However, when you take "a soul" it can't be perfectly explained, and it never can be, untill you die.
Obviously, this is the trick of many religions, you can take anything you want from people in their lifetime, but yet all they want is to have it better after they die.
This is brilliant for the people knowing that there is no afterlife, and they can exploit people that believe that there is an afterlife.
But, I'm going off topic here.

[Awakened_Mind]

Well one of the issues with AI is the nature of it's being. So speaking of the soul is on topic. If we begin by saying there is no soul in the first place then we're really discussing monism and dualism and create a lot of barriers that need to be sidestepped. So for this discussion we'll assume that humans do possess a soul. Can AI possess a consciousness? Aware that it is aware.

Mez, under evolutionary theory AI would appear at exactly the right time when we could handle it. Interesting you bring up humans lack of control of their emotions. I can see AI mutating elements in it's programming or code that can then display characteristics of the psyche. However, I don't see AI having emotion. Emotion is illogical. AI seems like a masculine extension of the psyche and emotion seems to me to be feminine. Having said that, humanity is more inclined masculine at the moment. All our political, religious and scientific institutions are male dominated. I think this plays a central role in a lot our current global problems. Our impact on nature or 'mother earth'. Another topic entirely.

Would AI be used as a tool for the human race or would we share some symbiotic relationship with it?

-AM

[Mez]

On the subject of the soul you dont need to know everything about something or be able to explain it to experience it. Further more theres plenty of documentation on people who can see auras... also particularly barbara brennan who was a shrink and started seeing the auras of her clients and she noted that whenever patients had problems their auras and chakras were in a certain state and clients with the same problems their auras had the same patterns... that went on for i think just under a decade before she decided to practice holistic healing instead... then years later she quit that to open up her own school to teach healing... its a 4 year course. So dont go tellin me theres no soul.

On the subject of AI... yeah they wouldnt experience emotion conventionally but say they have the capability to learn... you do something bad to them then they learn that you're intentions arent in their favour then they experience their artificiall emotion (that is their programs tell them something is up and they alter their behaviour accordingly).. so now they turn on you. So not cool.

[Awakened_Mind]

Against their favour, so machines establishing the difference between right and wrong?  I know in the movie 'I, Robot', the machines decide that certain human casualties are necessary for the survival of the species but it involves a totalatariun country and people desire more freedom than that. In real AI this can go one way or the other, for or against. What about moral and ethical understandings in a machine. I'm talking about AI to the point where if you put it in human skin, you would not be able to tell the difference between the machine and the man. Almost like the same thing is constructed of different physical components.

-AM

[Sharpe]

Well one of the issues with AI is the nature of it's being. So speaking of the soul is on topic. If we begin by saying there is no soul in the first place then we're really discussing monism and dualism and create a lot of barriers that need to be sidestepped. So for this discussion we'll assume that humans do possess a soul. Can AI possess a consciousness? Aware that it is aware.

Mez, under evolutionary theory AI would appear at exactly the right time when we could handle it. Interesting you bring up humans lack of control of their emotions. I can see AI mutating elements in it's programming or code that can then display characteristics of the psyche. However, I don't see AI having emotion. Emotion is illogical. AI seems like a masculine extension of the psyche and emotion seems to me to be feminine. Having said that, humanity is more inclined masculine at the moment. All our political, religious and scientific institutions are male dominated. I think this plays a central role in a lot our current global problems. Our impact on nature or 'mother earth'. Another topic entirely.

Would AI be used as a tool for the human race or would we share some symbiotic relationship with it?

-AM

Dude, you study psychology...
Emotions are illogical?
I'm beginning to doubt you know anything in that field.

[Awakened_Mind]

That's what I said. Uncontrolled emotions are illogical. Emotional Intelligence is the closest we've come to defining how people control their emotions to act civilly in a work environment. Crying is something a machine would not understand a reason for, neither is laughter.

-AM

[Sharpe]

But you can give him that!
It's just 1's and 0's.
Give him the ability to feel hurt.
Give him morals, you can do anything with it.
Biological life is different than electro technological life, I agree.
But if the system is still the same, the way it's put together, we can make it exactly the same.
The only thing we need right now is to know exactly how consciousness works.
If we do we probably can influence it with feelings like pain and emotions like deppression.
It's not going to work with neurotransmitters, but with just a small signal.
Meaning, that they do not exactly feel what we feel, but an artificial version of it.

[Awakened_Mind]

Life is a holistic concept irrelevant of what physical constituents are involved. The human body is contructed from the same building blocks as a machine. Atoms. What's the difference then between a human clump of atoms and a machine? From a monistic or materialist perspective, there's really no argument sound enough to debate the notion that a machine could be equally as expressive, intelligent or emotional as a human being.

Talking on levels of ones and zeros or lights and clock work is too superficial to take part in the debate. It's really about how a consciousness would spawn in the machine world.

The notion of AI is in regards to an intelligence and consciousness that is co-equal or superior to human intelligence.  Nothing less. This isn't just complex programs and hit play. It's an independent thinker, it has it's own agenda.

-AM

[Sharpe]

Well what I mean is he can't exactly feel what we feel, he may feel something close to what we feel, but not the same thing.
We just have to know exactly what it is that we feel, so we can copy it to them.
But I'm sure that if we do program AI, we can program it so that he feels what's bad and what's good.
We only need those 2 to keep him getting the feeling that if he tries to be superior over humans that he has to feel bad because we must keep them from wanting to overpower us.
Because they are in fact immortal if they are made, and if they also have the knowledge to re-make himself, he can fix our error and make his robots obey him (he must the have the trial & error ability for this, assuming he has it) and overpower us this way.
So obviously the first AI shouldn't be directly made, it should be tested perfectly.

[Awakened_Mind]

OK, for starters the machine will not feel as we feel. It is a completely separate entity so no matter what about of programming, it's history is different to ours so it's entire being will be different.

Secondly, there is no such thing as control over another human being. There is only the illusion of control. People are controlled to the extent they allow themselves to be. This is the root of one of man's greatest anxiety's with the natural world. You can't control the weather. So as for what's good and what's bad, AI will decide it's own agenda. Independent of human influence. This is because it will evolve naturally. When I'm talking about AI, I'm really meaning more of a spontaneous, sudden intelligence. Not an 'intelligence' that has been directly created to respond to certain prompts. That to me is not AI, it's just clever programming. So there will be no 'perfect testing'.

We really have to abandon the idea of control or fear of being overthrown by AI.

-AM

[Sharpe]

No we shouldn't, absolutely not.
If some amateur makes AI and completely copies the human psychology to an electro technological machine.
It's prime purpose will be to progress, and because it's a robot, he will think more clearly and faster than us.
He will have no problem to figure out his objectives.
He needs to be in control to make his mind release the good feelings he wants to feel, this is how it works with us, only with robots, if we forget to add morals right from the start, because they can aquire knowledge quickly, they can skip the moral learning part.
So if they want to feel good they know that they need to be in control, or have all the power, this goes by showing others that you are better than them (more superior) and these people accepting it.
And because he is a machine, he will have no problems with fear or anxiety (again, these are all in the morals) in taking over everything, it may even be smart enought that it wants to progress by trying to take over the universe, because robots are immortal.

Yes power is an illusion, but the illusion is perfectly real to us and to AI if we program our mind into theirs.

So because we can never know how a robot is perfectly programmed to only obey us, and to think creatively together with obeying us, no "loose" individual AI should be made (loose as, it can go wherever it wants, and do whatever it wants).

Humans obey very easily and aren't eager to alone and take over the world, but 1 small mistake in the "moral" part of AI and it will have no problem "getting things done".

So all the great science-fiction writers know what they're writing about, it's not just the theatrical aspect.
It's realistic that if a robot can think individually, it can easily take over the world, so can anyone who can MAKE robots for use as infantry in combat, by knowledge.

Using humans needs time and programming of the mind, but using robots, will be too easy for individualists.
So, I do not think the information for making AI will be released publicly.

[Sharpe]

I'd like to add: to take control, you need humans to do it.
That's how napoleon / hitler / alexander and all the great ones tried to do it.
And it worked, but the obstacles were: other people.
Other individually thinking entities controlled by a higher entity that was also an individual, but he is also controlled.
Every human is controlled, it doesn't even have to be direct.

In war, robots will be so much easier to control, that is why I think, anyone who has the knowledge can take over the world easily if he wants to.

[Awakened_Mind]

You're really not understanding the main idea here. AI will NOT be programmed. It is NOT 'repitition of clever programming'. It's a consciousness that will EVOLVE in the machine world WITHOUT our control. It needs to evolve in this natural way to be considered an intelligence and/or co-equal in the first place. We're not going to have the luxury of establishing any morals within the machine and then setting it free. It will be free from the beginning.

-AM

[Sharpe]

Wowowow... that's a bit new to me, what are you on about?

[Awakened_Mind]

You might have to read it again. I think the message is clear enough.

-AM

[Sharpe]

Yeah, but I think that's wrong, I'm gonna have to disagree on that because AI should be easily re-programmable because WE programmed it after all.

[Stookie]

Not if the AI wasn't "programmed", but had evolved. I think that's the point. But then it wouldn't be "AI", it would just be "I". (meaning "intelligence", but could also mean ego - it could say "I").

The concept reminds me of "Ghost in the Shell". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell

[Awakened_Mind]

Well I think they call it AI because it spawns from something artificial. Might need redefining.

-AM

[Awakened_Mind]

It's not made by us.  It originates from programming itself.

PS. Why do you have Sharpe2?

-AM