Posted on 11/13/2010 5:28:58 AM PST by RogerFGay
What if that AI is beaming a hologram of itself into other universes for "companionship" or perhaps just plain old hunger.
And here I thought the parrotting of Soros’ words on TOTUS and out of Reid’s & Pelosi’s mouths simply demonsrated SkyNet is already aware.
There was a scientist who was asked, “Will there ever be a computer as intelligent as a human?” He answered, “Yes, but only for a few moments”.
“When will we have artificial intelligence?
“We” elected it on 11-4-2008.”
Lol! You beat me...
His words were “Je pense donc je suis” (original in French not the Latino “Cogito ergo sum” often attributed). He may have MEANT “I think therefore I know that I am”, but his words were “I think therefore I am.” I think your phrasing makes more sense, however. Otherwise the point could be made in a number of other ways, such as “I hear, therefore I am” or “I eat, therefore I am.”
Frankly, I never thought that this statement was very deep, or even true. Much exists that has no knowledge of its existence. And it is not the conscienceness of one’s existence that makes one exist. A stone has no awareness of its existence, yet it exists. The “therefore” makes no sense.
Precisely. It will not be “AI” until the computer is “self-aware” and self-programming. Short of that, it’s just a really fast number-cruncher.
It needs to be followed up with, "Of course I could be wrong".
Al Gore?
Perhaps the study of artificial stupidity would yield some seriously interesting results; just like understanding evil provides insight into morality.
Some of this stuff seems to go slowly (in computer technology evolution time, which is actually quite rapid) because of the small amount of funding it has. It’s easy to think I’m wrong about that, especially when governments have put tons of money into robotics R&D over the past decade. But when something becomes profitable, that’s when the sales->competition->R&D cycle kicks in and you get a much, much larger number of people involved in development.
And I also meant to provide you with this link; re: autonomous vehicles: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/10/27/driverless.car/
Interesting. I’ve been watching episodes of Space 1999 lately. Last night I watched the one where an AI being in the form of a space ship tried to kidnap 3 of the main characters to replace his “companion,” a human that died.
Even more relevant - when will we have magnetic bubble memory?
“He may have MEANT ‘I think therefore I know that I am’, but his words were ‘I think therefore I am.’”
Yes, I was, as I said, trying to get at what he meant. Which, however catchy, can be misleading.
“Frankly, I never thought that this statement was very deep, or even true”
I think it’s true and shallower (or narrower, if you will) than people give it credit for. It does all come down, after all, to a single sudden, basic, emotional response. You must simply realize that you are thinking, and that’s the whole trick.
“Much exists that has no knowledge of its existence”
That’s not really the point, though. Descartes is very specifically inquiring into whether he, a thinking person, can be fooled into thinking he exists. The ruse of the “malicious demon” (or, as one commentator put it, the rather accomodating demon), who’s trying to trick you into believing you exist when you really don’t, wouldn’t work on things that can’t think.
“And it is not the conscienceness of one’s existence that makes one exist.”
No, but if you follow his logic, he realize that’s not what he’s saying. All it is is that consciousness leads one to realize that you cannot be fooled into thinking that you exist when you don’t. Because you must exist in order to think.
“The ‘therefore’ makes no sense.”
It does within the train of thought.
“Which, however catchy, can be misleading.”
Cogito ergo sum, I meant, can be misleading.
“Judgement call” AI is already used extensively in medical screening and diagnosis and it has been for over 15 years. It may have even been used on you and your family.
“he realize that’s not what he’s saying” = you realize that’s not what he’s saying
That’s not the correct definition of AI.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.