A.I. Mankinds next step or pitfall

I thought there should be a thread for this topic. The movies main set-up is that in the past humans gave birth to A.I. The machines began to think for themselves and create new machines. It came to a point where both humans and machines could not live together because they each had a need for domination.

My question to you all is this. How do you feel about A.I. in our world and what do you think the results will be. All ready companies and inventors the world over are making strides in this new field. I think within the next century we will see significant steps in this field.

So what are the opinions of the people out there. For or against. Will it end bad like Matrix and Terminator. Or peaceful like Bicentennial man or A.I.

If the world continues scientifically as it has been, I would say the creation of an A.I. of any type or sophistication is very very probable. 80% probable in my book within the next 20 years. Yes it will be our next step. But then if we engage in global thermonuclear annihilation, then there will be no creation of A.I. for many many many years and human generations.

why would we engage in global thermonuclear annihilation? I dont think there is any current threat of that. there is definately the threat of terrorist getting a hold of a nuke, but not on the scale of nuclear winter.

Really, thought about how AI would work has never moved on from Asimov's time, and his books are still the best discussion of AI that you can get.

The fact is you can’t write an algorithm for something that you do not comprehend.

Ergo, creating an “artificially intelligent” agent is not a matter of hardware or computing power so much as it is a matter of comprehending how (or why as the Merovingian would say) the consciousness functions.

In other words, you cannot create what you do not comprehend.

You can't KNOWINGLY create it, you mean. And the entire essence of the Chinese Box Demon riposte to the Turin test states that if we ever create true AI we shall have no way of realising we have done so for there is no way for us to distinguish a true AI and a perfect (seeming) simulation of one. Unless we develop some sort of ESP.

good point, i dont think it is possible, but even if it is how do we know if we do?

Very good Mr. Serpent. But there are humans who do comprehend such things and are most likely working on such creations. That is how complex our world has become.

Well Turin, random elements again. North Korea revealed to us last November that it had secretly developed it nuclear program and sent the world in a tailspin! 😮 Iran is also very close to processing fissionable material for one or two nukes. Israel has hundreds of nukes. China said that it is going to start building up its nuclear arsenal after Bush gave his first State of the Union speech where he called three countries the Axis of Evil. Japan announced around the same time that she was going to begin beefing up her military in response to what was going on in N.K. and China in 2002. Bin Laden and other terror masters are actively seeking nuclear material. With the destruction of the Iraqi infrastructure and the sacking of several nuclear facilities there is now alot of missing nuclear material. There is also nuclear material "missing" in Russia and her former republics. One very very false move by any of the major players and we can easily be in a nuclear exchange. Very very easily.

Ushgarak said:
You can't KNOWINGLY create it, you mean. And the entire essence of the Chinese Box Demon riposte to the Turin test states that if we ever create true AI we shall have no way of realising we have done so for there is no way for us to distinguish a true AI and a perfect (seeming) simulation of one. Unless we develop some sort of ESP.

Unless you are positing the existence of a non-material “Soul”, what would be the difference between a “True AI”, and a “Perfect simulation of one” (i.e. a simulated consciousness)?

If there is no perceivable (detectable) difference, then is there any difference at all?

In other words, is Commander Data (from Star Trek) any less of a “person” than You or I?

What is the soul? Something separate from the body and mind? Many believe that the "soul" is the actual consciousness of the person. That piece of very fine energy we call consciousness. The consciousness takes on the imperfections of the physical body, but when the body dies and it is released... the soul is perfect in all aspects of existance. An A.I. that is conscious of itself and sees itself as something other than what it was created for would be considered a "lifeform". It has consciousness. It has a soul.

This whole A.I. question brings up the same question that has been debated over clonig? when is it that a machine or clone becomes a person or entity of it's own and not possesed by what it has been programmed?

I would just like to point out that I believe discussions like this one are the reason these films are so popular. They raise some very deep philosophical issues in a very entertaining manner that many people can easily relate too and comprehend.

For a machine? When it gains self awareness. When it is fully conscious of itself as an entity. Cloning is a biological process and it falls within the meaning of biological living things regardless of the species.

maul's woman, maybe i am an optimist but you mentioned a lot of nuclear threats out there and the are all valid, but i strongly beleive that no one wants to use them aside from N. Korea and any terrorist organization that gets one. everyone else realizes the implications of a nuclear strike against another nuclear power. I beleive that the threat of a nuclear strike is the only objective with most of these countries. It is a scary thought though that one wrong move can be catastrophic, but almost everyone realizes that.

The Problem is the choice...

The question you need to know, before you can even of thinking of programming an A.I. is; Do humans have a choice?
Is that what we do, a choice from our "soul", or is it all based on causalaty...

Thats the point... If you dont comprehend that you will never comprehend how to programme an A.I.

But when we have no choice, what are we then?
Nothing more than a function...
But this would be the only chance tto programme an A.I., cause if we have a choice, there must be more than the physical world that we can understand, there would be a "soul".
And you can not programme a non physical reaction, that you dont understand.

So the humanity first have to find out who we are...
Maybe we are just a kind of a programme...
Cause if there is nothing more than physical reaction, then we have no choice- and if we have no choice, we are not "living" in my definition.

Serpent- YES. Just because there is no perceived difference it does NOT mean there is no difference. It just means that difference cannot be seen. It is VERY simple. Just because you cannot SEE which of two identical twins has cancer and is going to die, does not mean that twin does not have the cancer. Even if there was no way to tell at all, it would still be so.

Also please note I said perfect (SEEMING) simulation. A perfect simuluation is a contradiction in terms because to be actually perfect it would have to BE the real thing. But a thing can seem like something, but not be it.

To us humans, there would be no difference at all- aside from the intellectual realisation that we would not know if these being were alive in the way we are or not.

The objective difference between an AI and a simulation of one is that only the first is truly sentient. But there would be no way to tell that from external observation.

This is actually pretty basic stuff in AI talk.

Turin, you are correct. Most nations understand the unbelievable reprocussion involving a nuclear strike and a nuclear exchange. No one wins a nuclear war. But radicals, terrorists and other twisted and vengeful individuals are not thinking of reprecussions... they want what they want adn that makes them extremely dangerous and lethal. The Arab radicals and terrorists who are extremely angry at the U.S. policies in the region for the past 100 years have in their minds and hearts just cause for trying to destroy the U.S. and the west with weapons of awesome power that they have created. If not total destruction, then extreme trauma would suffice. North Korea threatened to launch its missiles if the U.S. goes in and attacks it. That is why the Administration is treating Jung's Government with velvet gloves. Not so with the Arabs because they don't have devices yet. But that sort of treatment of the Arabs can only inflame them and bolster their resolve to get their hands on lethal weaponry to hit us with. My opinion is that they will do just that. Many parties have agreed to help them as much as possible.

Kapitan, most people don't think about causality when they create something. They just do it and many times throwing caution to the wind. In creating an A.I. they are mainly thinking about if they can make it work, not whether or not they understand their own selves. Can they create a software that is independent thinking and have the capacity of independent learning and creative thought. I personally believe this sort of research is going on all over the world. 🙂 Eventually, we will succeed in creating some sort of A.I. In the U.S. it will definitely be under "government control" or some kind.

kapitan said:
The Problem is the choice...

The question you need to know, before you can even of thinking of programming an A.I. is; Do humans have a choice?
Is that what we do, a choice from our "soul", or is it all based on causality...

Thats the point... If you dont comprehend that you will never comprehend how to programme an A.I.

I agree completely.

But when we have no choice, what are we then?
Nothing more than a function...
But this would be the only chance to programme an A.I., cause if we have a choice, there must be more than the physical world that we can understand, there would be a "soul".
And you can not programme a non physical reaction, that you dont understand.

In fact we do have Souls, and in the True reality Souls are all that exist.

There is no spoon, there is no Matrix, there is no matter, there is no universe, but you and I, and every other living being you have ever encountered are real. living entities (or programs if you prefer) are all that actually exists.

What you perceive as “matter” (the universe) is simply information (energy) transmitted between Souls.

So the humanity first have to find out who we are...
Maybe we are just a kind of a programme...

We are.

Cause if there is nothing more than physical reaction, then we have no choice- and if we have no choice, we are not "living" in my definition.

We do not make “choices” in the manner most people suspect. We do not have “free will”.

… but we do possess something far more powerful, lasting, and miraculous. We are each unique individuals.

Ushgarak said:
Serpent- YES. Just because there is no perceived difference it does NOT mean there is no difference. It just means that difference cannot be seen.

But that is NOT what you originally said:

Ushgarak previously:
we shall have no way of realising we have done so for there is no way for us to distinguish a true AI and a perfect (seeming) simulation of one.

If there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to discern a difference, then there is no discernable difference. You can’t claim that two things are different based on NO EVIDENCE that they are different.

It is VERY simple. Just because you cannot SEE which of two identical twins has cancer and is going to die, does not mean that twin does not have the cancer. Even if there was no way to tell at all, it would still be so.

Yes, but there are test which can DISCERN that one twin has cancer. What you are claiming is that even if all the tests for cancer on both twins come back negative, that one twin STILL has cancer because you SAY that he does based on no perceivable/discernable evidence.

Also please note I said perfect (SEEMING) simulation. A perfect simuluation is a contradiction in terms because to be actually perfect it would have to BE the real thing. But a thing can seem like something, but not be it.

Only if there is a possible way to discern a difference between the two. If there is no possible way to detect a difference, then what is gained by claiming that there is a difference based on no evidence?

To us humans, there would be no difference at all- aside from the intellectual realisation that we would not know if these being were alive in the way we are or not.

The objective difference between an AI and a simulation of one is that only the first is truly sentient. But there would be no way to tell that from external observation.

“external observation” … are you implying that an entity has to be made of flesh and blood to be truly conscious? Would an intelligent alien based on a different type of physiology (say silicon) classify as conscious in your mind, or does something have to be a white anglo-saxon male to be considered sentient?

In my mind, if I cannot detect that is a consciousness is artificial, then it is not artificial by any valid definition of that term. (i.e. Commander Data [star trek] would be just as conscious (just as alive) as you or me.)

Maul's woman, thanks. i think you are also very correct in the fact that the few individuals that would use a nuke would have no hesitations to use them and what better target then the US. kind of scary.