Perhaps you should note the question mark.
Originally posted by soleran30
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................
To say otherwise is silly? You honestly believe that at some point, man-made machines will be equal to us in terms of being able to perceive and endure emotions? Yes or no.
The mere fact that they are man-made and have to be made by man to exist, proves it wrong.
Whirly himself is the one saying that machines will end up equalling or surpassing human beings in that sense. He's not saying it might, he's saying it will based on current information, which he has got wrong anyway.
-AC
Hmmm, perhaps I misunderstood because you began it with, "You believe...", and not, "Do you believe...". The first sounds like you telling me what I mean, and the second sounds like a question.
And for the record: I don't believe Robots will ever "feel" emotions. I just wanted to point out that robots that can understand complex tasks, and even create their own program to complete said task aren't that far in the future.
Originally posted by mechmoggy
Hmmm, perhaps I misunderstood because you began it with, "You believe...", and not, "Do you believe...". The first sounds like you telling me what I mean, and the second sounds like a question.And for the record: I don't believe Robots will ever "feel" emotions. I just wanted to point out that robots that can understand complex tasks, and even create their own program to complete said task aren't that far in the future.
I think artificial "life" will though and this is not robots! However it is machines!
Complicated structures using distinctive parts wich are comparible even though some may use other substances than others are apperantly what we call machines.
The human body not being called a machine is only because of such complicated and non-comprehensible factors in it that we don't include it to the human defined category.
Perhaps we will set up a rule that structures working together as a whole with organics can not be included, it doesn't matter. The basic idea of a machine still stands and we can therefore imply it on everything with the specifications, either symbolically or technically.
But these terms are human made definitions and variable and mean nothing anyway.. So why am I thinking about a useless subject like this?
Hmm...
http://www.kurzweilai.net/index.html?flash=2
Very cool site. Especially check out the stuff on the singularity
Originally posted by Mindship
http://www.kurzweilai.net/index.html?flash=2Very cool site. Especially check out the stuff on the singularity
Thing is many think it will happen sooner then vinge estimates, I think this might be the case!
I didn't know Michio Kaku was a singularity theorist, shit!!!
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriEmotions are basically just complex chemical and electrical interactions. So why wouldn't it be possible?
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
Mitochondria are essentially machines. Ribosomes. Endoplasmic reticulum. Etc. Humans are basically machines made of smaller machines made of smaller machines.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Emotions are basically just complex chemical and electrical interactions. So why wouldn't it be possible?Mitochondria are essentially machines. Ribosomes. Endoplasmic reticulum. Etc. Humans are basically machines made of smaller machines made of smaller machines.
That's already been discussed, the idea of humans as machines.
Do you believe that a machine, at some point will be able to think, feel and appreciate to a human level? Pick up a guitar and create a song? Be moved by it?
I don't.
-AC
Because in order for that to be achieved in machines, it's not just a leap is it? It's not just going to happen. There would have to be many stages leading to it. Just "reactions" they may be, but they are reactions that are, in my opinion, out of the reach of man made machines. I, Robot for example. The robot named Sonny has all the apparant "emotions" but he lacks the ability to perceive and appreciate them because "he's" not human.
Moreover, Whirly was implying that "machines" will one day be equal. This is false seeing as they need humans to create them. They can be as advanced in interpretation as they want but it doesn't change the fact that there will always HAVE to be a human hand to start the ball rolling.
Humans don't need machines to create life or continue as a race. Machines don't create themselves.
-AC
If we're going to reference movies as if they actually mean anything, then Bicentennial Man had a emotion-capable robot and Alien Resurrection had a second generation android (played by a kleptomaniac).
To say that it's impossible to create feeling machines is silly. It entails the need for some esoteric factor unique to human perception beyond chemistry, physics and biology. To say that machines must always be made by humans is also foolishness.
It's human egotism to say that it's impossible to replicate such things as intelligence and emotion.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
To say that it's impossible to create feeling machines is silly. It entails the need for some esoteric factor unique to human perception beyond chemistry, physics and biology. To say that machines must always be made by humans is also foolishness.It's human egotism to say that it's impossible to replicate such things as intelligence and emotion.
You highlighted the wrong word, the word you should have highlighted is "replicate", and second of all, you're not saying anything that others haven't said.
Replicate all you want, they exist because of humans. Replicating and mimicry ISN'T creation from scratch and appreciating it.
-AC
Before you said that what set humans apart from machines was that humans had emotions. Also that a machine is something that is built by humans.
Now you're saying that even if emotions are replicated in machines, it's not enough because they didn't create their own emotions themselves from scratch. And if a second generation machine is created, it still exists because of humans.
Humans can't exist without progenitor humans either.
Are you saying that machines have to invent all new unique machine emotions?
How many generations would robotics have to go through before you'd stop considering humans as their direct progenitors?
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Before you said that what set humans apart from machines was that humans had emotions. Also that a machine is something that is built by humans.
In the common view when someone says "machine" you don't automatically think about humans. You think about synthetics and robots etc.
No, I never said machines were exclusively built by humans.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Now you're saying that even if emotions are replicated in machines, it's not enough because they didn't create their own emotions themselves from scratch. And if a second generation machine is created, it still exists because of humans.Humans can't exist without progenitor humans either.
Are you saying that machines have to invent all new unique machine emotions?
How many generations would robotics have to go through before you'd stop considering humans as their direct progenitors?
Replicating isn't having the emotion, in this case. Mirrors replicate an image, but my reflection isn't a sentient being. The mirror is just mimicing everything infront of it. Looks the same, moves the same, but isn't the same.
My main point is that I will never consider machines (in the easy sense) to be humans equal until there is a race of them that exist on their own, maintain themselves and create themselves. They're not equal to us if they can't do all we can do. I don't believe this will happen though, because machines would need the technological advances given to them BY humans to do this, and I can't see that happening.
-AC