Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Of course. We really don't have any "higher life." The thing is, once we've got AIs, they are better. It's a hard thing for some humans to accept, but with superior reasoning capabilities and speed/reflexes they are. Thanks to our dependence on computers, they'll be able to hack into computers to acquire what we need to become more powerful.
------------------ "Once, just once, I'd like to be able to land somewhere and say, 'Behold, I am the Archangel Gabriel.'" "I fail to see the humor in that situation, Doctor." "Naturally. You could hardly claim to be an angel with those pointed ears, Mister Spock. But say you landed someplace with a pitchfork "
There's is nothing to say that AI will be any better than OI. It's different. It's hard for humans to accept that sometimes just because something seems so much better in some ways that it's not entirely flawed in others. There is no proof that computers are any faster than people. So if we assume that AI will come from computers then there's no reason to assume they will be faster than us. They organize differently. Their system is better being fast because it can easily access the information needed. Our system is better because it encompases spontaneous deduction and complex thought. AI will most likely never be put into a free moving form because we already have something that moves and thinks, people. It's not all doom and gloom.
------------------ Captaintripps, proudly dispensing bad advice since before you were born. (url="http://"http://voxhumanasketch.tripod.com/voxhumana/l")VoxHumana(/url) -- Comedy of the Future
I have reason to be believe that advanced computers will be grown from living tissue, in the same way that our brains are grown. As it stands, we're about 50 million times as complex as computers. Organic is better.
Quote
Originally posted by Count Altair El Alemein: I have reason to be believe that advanced computers will be grown from living tissue, in the same way that our brains are grown. As it stands, we're about 50 million times as complex as computers. Organic is better.
And if that happens then they are organic too. Then we've created not only artificial computation and possibly intelligence, but fully artificial life.
------------------ Captaintripps, proudly dispensing bad advice since before you were born. (url="http://"http://voxhumanasketch.tripod.com/voxhumana/")VoxHumana(/url) -- Comedy of the Future
CaptainTripps - have you heard of neural networks? Insane strides have been made - there's already a robot soccer leauge. No, not like those dumb "Robot Wars" shows on TV, this is real human-intervention-banned robotics.
I look forward to when machines take over. They don't really have much reason to kill or oppress us, and I doubt they'll be any worse than our current leaders (W and Teddy to name 2 bad apples).
Also, they probably will have no need for interns.
------------------ Formerly-Rampant Human-Coded AI
But say, AI gets to the point that you have a little Powerbook that you take with you everywhere and you can open it up and a face, or a chat room like thing pops up and you talk to it. It has emotions, and it feels pain, so, if you poke it to hard it says "oww" or something and it gets a pain in it's HD if it needs a new one.
Maybe not quite like that, but pretty similar.
Then wouldn't kicking one down the stares or jabbing a kinfe in its screen be causeing it pain? And it reacts like it is programmed to react to pain.
Aren't we 'programmed' to react like we reacted to pain?
So then wouldn't this be cruilty to AIbooks.
------------------ PI=3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097 494459230781640628620899862803482534211706798214808651328230 664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110 5559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233787...
(This message has been edited by White Fire (edited 07-10-2001).)
Ummmm.... that seems like an extraordinary oversimplification to me.
If we were to build an AI, it would not be something you could stick in a laptop. It would be a rather large and complex series of components designed to function in any way necessary for its use. But, although this is what us humans would need to make it, AIs would undoubtedly be able to identify key components and reorganize its entire structure to improve its speed/reasoning. AIs will be more efficient at using "what they have," ergo they wlil be able to acquire "more," ergo they eventually surpass us and become better.
Originally posted by Fleet Admiral Darkk: **CaptainTripps - have you heard of neural networks? Insane strides have been made - there's already a robot soccer leauge. No, not like those dumb "Robot Wars" shows on TV, this is real human-intervention-banned robotics.
Also, they probably will have no need for interns. **
The robots in the robot soccer league are not really at an AI level yet. They're like plants, very active plants, but they obviously have preprogrammed goals to make and pretty much act on stimulus response. There's really no thinking involved.
Originally posted by Pallas Athene: **Ummmm.... that seems like an extraordinary oversimplification to me.
If we were to build an AI, it would not be something you could stick in a laptop. It would be a rather large and complex series of components designed to function in any way necessary for its use. But, although this is what us humans would need to make it, AIs would undoubtedly be able to identify key components and reorganize its entire structure to improve its speed/reasoning. AIs will be more efficient at using "what they have," ergo they wlil be able to acquire "more," ergo they eventually surpass us and become better. **
The computer you are using now would have taken up most of a building thirty or forty years ago and we simplified and identified key components rather well in order to shrink it down to size. The powerbook I'm using now is more powerful than the Quadra 840 I owned before and is about a quarter of the size and the new Titanium(sorry, Macs were the easiest example at hand) is much smaller and lighter than this monster I type on now. So we've done pretty well on our own, not to mention the fact that we are still evolving and that each person makes thousands of new neuronal connexions every day. And again I'd like to state that I don't think there's any evidence that there will be any kind of race. It has been shown that when left alone programs are parasitic to the nth degree. Tom Ray, a biologist at Harvard, was one of the first people to create artificial life within a computer. He created a digital "creature" that copied itself, but the copy was always slightly different. Over the course of the experiment they did indeed simplify themselves and cut their programming down to a size the programmers at the time couldn't achieve (this has since been done by a programmer). The thing is that all of the programmes were parasitic. They lived in parasitic symbiosis with one another. And, to spook you out even further, they were released into the internet a few years back. Wonder what they're up to.
Hey, you guys didn't get my meaning in that post. I didn't say that it we were frankensteining our way into making artificial humans, but that we could us this organic grown 'brain' instead of chips and circuits, which is more cost-effective. Programming this with the neural network and you've got an organic computer. As it learns, the network can actually stimulate the brain to grow like a human brain, once again, if we used circuits for the neural network, it would take nano-technology to allow the brain to actually redefine it's neural paths. It would keep growing, becoming more and complex. Remember what Bungie's AI's found the greatest obstacle? A limit to their growth, because a Rampant computer needs to keep growing. Well just supply this with nutrients (probably in the form of liquid inside a brain tank ) you've got your effectively unlimited space to grow and learn.
Originally posted by Captaintripps: ** The computer you are using now would have taken up most of a building thirty or forty years ago and we simplified and identified key components rather well in order to shrink it down to size. The powerbook I'm using now is more powerful than the Quadra 840 I owned before and is about a quarter of the size and the new Titanium(sorry, Macs were the easiest example at hand) is much smaller and lighter than this monster I type on now. So we've done pretty well on our own, not to mention the fact that we are still evolving and that each person makes thousands of new neuronal connexions every day. And again I'd like to state that I don't think there's any evidence that there will be any kind of race. It has been shown that when left alone programs are parasitic to the nth degree. Tom Ray, a biologist at Harvard, was one of the first people to create artificial life within a computer. He created a digital "creature" that copied itself, but the copy was always slightly different. Over the course of the experiment they did indeed simplify themselves and cut their programming down to a size the programmers at the time couldn't achieve (this has since been done by a programmer). The thing is that all of the programmes were parasitic. They lived in parasitic symbiosis with one another. And, to spook you out even further, they were released into the internet a few years back. Wonder what they're up to.
**
First: Macs are the best example because they are better.
Second: These little animal things, they sound alot like the Hurkle virus, the B stran.
You can find out more about the A-Life, it's a programme called Tierra (url="http://"http://www.isd.atr.co.jp/~ray/tierra/index.html")here.(/url)
(This message has been edited by Captaintripps (edited 07-11-2001).)