Originally posted by soleran30
wow AC, after reading these pages I am not sure of your expectations............you are not sure of future results howver you say you think that certain things will occurr................please specify.
I know he can fool some of the people some of the time but he doesn't really understand anything I have posted. 😂
Originally posted by Sir Whirlysplat
Biomechanics would argue men are machines!
Some cognitive scientists would argue the brain is a machine and emotion is a set of computer viruses that create our conciousness, that we are purely a product of infection! What do you think! I will post later 🙂
I don't think a Human is a machine because of our ability to change our purpose to any situation and think independently. Machines cannot do this.
Originally posted by Sir Whirlysplat
You told me humans can adapt to any situation. So explain what you think that statement means.
Humans change to fit their surroundings, Such as Inuits you can note the difference in their physical appearance to people from Europe or Africa.
Or if you stick them in front of a river that the humans have to cross they will build a bridge.
Originally posted by Grand Moff Gav
Humans change to fit their surroundings, Such as Inuits you can note the difference in their physical appearance to people from Europe or Africa.
Or if you stick them in front of a river that the humans have to cross they will build a bridge.
Your talking about natural selection and adaptability in one post.
The inuits are a product of environmental evolutionary adaptation.
http://lslwww.epfl.ch/biowall/Articles/teuscher01_ipcat01.pdf
The authors are with the Logic Systems Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne,
CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. E-mail:
{name.surname}@epfl.ch. Web: http://lslwww.epfl.ch. This work
was supported in part by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant 21-54113.89, by the Leenaards
Foundation, Lausanne, Switzerland, and by the Villa Reuge, Ste-Croix, Switzerland.
Evolutionary computing works towads this with some success.
http://evonet.lri.fr/evoweb/resources/nutshell/
machines are working towards this.
Adaptability in machines and problem solving, if a computer is programmed to build a bridge, like a human it will. If a human has never seen a bridge it will not build it!
What do you think a virus is Gav?
A machine or living thing?
Do you think machines have to be made of metal?
Whirly, get over it. I understand everything you've posted but if the childish tactic of convincing yourself I haven't, works for you, then my all means continue it. Your arguments just aren't strong enough, well, first off they're not YOUR arguments. Second of all, they're just not strong enough to hold water. You are basing everything on what you believe will happen in the future and that's bs, because the future is conceptual for the most part.
Your whole argument is based around "Machines have already created music" and the fact is, they actually have not. Your inability to admit this not included, it's true.
Originally posted by soleran30
wow AC, after reading these pages I am not sure of your expectations............you are not sure of future results howver you say you think that certain things will occurr................please specify.
A fair question.
My point is that the future doesn't exist outside of being a concept, when it arrives it becomes the present. The reason I say that I believe things will happen is because time, incase you haven't noticed, passes somewhat regularly. So, death or the end of the world not withstanding, we will see more of time. In time, things will obviously develop. Eg: To say "Technology will advance" is true, regardless of the future being conceptual or not. Saying "I will get older" is true, because it's happening as we speak.
For Whirly to specifically say that an EXACT complex event will happen is ridiculous though, why? Because for machines to achieve what he believes they will achieve, many OTHER things must occur for it to get to that point and there is absolutely no way in which we are able to determine that those specific advances in technology will happen. I don't believe for one second that machines will ever be independent enough to have emotion, Whirly does and that's fine. He's basing it on something he is falsely believing about the machines of today though.
He believes that if they can create music on their own now, they'll do much more in the future. Obviously he's persistently sticking his fingers in his ears going "Lalalalalalala not listening" when the fact is raised that they haven't done that.
-AC
Originally posted by Sir Whirlysplat
Your talking about natural selection and adaptability in one post.The inuits are a product of environmental evolutionary adaptation.
http://lslwww.epfl.ch/biowall/Articles/teuscher01_ipcat01.pdf
The authors are with the Logic Systems Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne,
CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. E-mail:
{name.surname}@epfl.ch. Web: http://lslwww.epfl.ch. This work
was supported in part by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant 21-54113.89, by the Leenaards
Foundation, Lausanne, Switzerland, and by the Villa Reuge, Ste-Croix, Switzerland.Evolutionary computing works towads this with some success.
http://evonet.lri.fr/evoweb/resources/nutshell/
machines are working towards this.
Adaptability in machines and problem solving, if a computer is programmed to build a bridge, like a human it will. If a human has never seen a bridge it will not build it!
What do you think a virus is Gav?
A machine or living thing?
Do you think machines have to be made of metal?
I believe virus' can be organic and virtual, if that was your question. However a machine does not need to be made of metal or indeed to be able to carry out things on its own. A spinning wheel or loom are both machines are they not?
Originally posted by Grand Moff Gav
I don't think a Human is a machine because of our ability to change our purpose to any situation and think independently. Machines cannot do this.
Not yet...
...but I've done some work in the robotics field (for manufacturing) and I don't think it'll be far in the future when we'll see robots that can be given a general task only; then they use vision systems to evaluate their surroundings and create their own programme to complete the task in the most logical/time efficient way.
Originally posted by mechmoggy
Not yet......but I've done some work in the robotics field (for manufacturing) and I don't think it'll be far in the future when we'll see robots that can be given a general task only; then they use vision systems to evaluate their surroundings and create their own programme to complete the task in the most logical/time efficient way.
You believe a man-made machine will, in time, have the ability to laugh and cry, feel sadness and all other human emotions? Not just interpret, create?
That's nigh impossible.
-AC
If, when all is said and done, there is no elan vital, which many feel animate a living thing, then in truth one day there will be machines indistinguishable from their biological analogues, even at the nanoscale.
However, if there is more to life than meets the eye and mind, if the material, phenomenal world is but a "crust" over some deeper, more rarified noumenon, then no matter how complex the machine, it will always be a mimic, a simulacrum of the genuine article (regardless of whether or not we human beings, with our limited perception, can tell the difference).
Unless, of course, spirit can inhabit man-made bodies! 😉
Never say never 🙂 If you believe in Evolution inorganic and organic elements combined in a soup to create life and over 3.5 billion years that became life. In less than 50 computers are able to respond and react in ways beyond primitive organisms. Code is also able to replicate within a host (a computer) The evolutiion of more than a billion years in organics, in fifty for machines. 😉 Never say Never. This is not looking at things like nerve cells and organic computers which both already exist.
You are basing your whole argument on "If" and what you believe might happen in the future due to your "I don't care if it's impossible, never say never" rationale. The problem there is, you go around saying "If..." and "Never say never" but that's why you call people limited thinkers.
Because you are of the belief that anything might be possible, despite it being IMPOSSIBLE for what you claim coming to pass.
No amount of tricking or trying will get around the fact that man-made machines will never feel emotion or create emotion, they will never have that. The only counter you have is "Hasn't happened yet, so you can't say", when infact, that's precisely why I can say it and why you CAN'T say that things will happen. You don't know that, but I DO know that machines can't do those things today, and judging by this, nor will they ever.
-AC
Typical coward move. Attempt to over-complicate the debate with needless sidetracking when the actual debate is out of your reach.
We don't need to define thought, that's not for this debate.
Your argument is that in time machines can become equal to humans or more, in the sense that they will be able to create exactly as we do and feel exactly as we do.
The fact is, you are wrong. Mimicry to the point that a human can't tell the difference is still mimicry.
-AC
Some people here are assuming the future and as such have no clue what is going to happen. I do believe there will be a time that "machines" will have many of the functions that humans have. To say otherwise is silly Whirly has used music for comparison simply because AC associates with it. There are many many many other AI that do much more then the music piece whirly represented................