AgnosticWeb.com - Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI

Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI (reply)

xeno6696 — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:43:20 +0000

I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. > > > > IF nano-technology were acting as the biochemical properties of the brain, it MIGHT be possible, but I remain skeptical. Whether it would have the same capability as the human brain, I almost completely disagree. There are a couple of tests that could sort of validate it. One would be the spontaeous generation of thought using unrelated without a pre-generated algorithm to determine the parameters. More simply stated, spontaneous without a human providing the input or the method to disassemble, reassemble, interpret, and create a new idea that has no current frame of reference other than the random data. Call it imagination. The other would be a test to see if the machine was capable of emotional response, which is in its way independent of logical data analysis.-Both of these things could be easily faked. Hell, sociopaths fake emotional response all the time--in fact they simply copy what they see because they don't actually feel.

Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI (reply)

Balance_Maintained — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:05:24 +0000

I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. > -IF nano-technology were acting as the biochemical properties of the brain, it MIGHT be possible, but I remain skeptical. Whether it would have the same capability as the human brain, I almost completely disagree. There are a couple of tests that could sort of validate it. One would be the spontaeous generation of thought using unrelated without a pre-generated algorithm to determine the parameters. More simply stated, spontaneous without a human providing the input or the method to disassemble, reassemble, interpret, and create a new idea that has no current frame of reference other than the random data. Call it imagination. The other would be a test to see if the machine was capable of emotional response, which is in its way independent of logical data analysis.

Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI

xeno6696 — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:54:56 +0000

Graham Dunstan Martin starts out his attack on materialism by simply attacking whether or not humans could create consciousness. -The crux of his argument is this: -Language itself is imprecise when it deals with the world; and is more imprecise yet when we try to describe experience itself, or 'tacit' knowledge. -Machines can only understand the explicit; therefore they will never understand the tacit. -Therefore, we will never build a true human intelligence based on this fact alone.-Currently I am forced to agree; however I disagree with the statement "never." We are just getting to the point where we can even think of actually building a brain. I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. -The deeper problem would be how to come up with a way that machines could use tacit knowledge. I don't see at present how this can be done; and though I hold the door open to the future, I am firmly in realization of a possible limit. -Martin also points out that there is a gap between the theoreticians in the field of AI and the practitioners; the practitioners seem much more modest in what they think their machines can do, whereas the theoreticians are not.