Ensign Steve waxes philosophical on the Singularity, a thrad by Ensign Steve - Page 4

But · #76 09-15-2013, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lisarea

Abrupt rise of new machine ecology beyond human response time

I haven't read the whole thing yet, so please don't give me a quiz.

A new digital ecology is evolving, and humans are being left behind

My 2 Euros:

Human response time means several things: The time a human needs to read the stuff on a computer screen and the time to move fingers or shout gestures at the handheld dumbapple device or whatever.

All in all, time to move to the next level! Brain-computer interfaces without the hole in the skull. Take some squids and (insert research work here).

There is a cluster of supernerd brains right here:
http://www.mmci.uni-saarland.de/en/start

Ensign Steve · #77 09-25-2013, 08:10 PM

It's official.

Stephen Hawking: Brains Could Be Copied To Computers To Allow Life After Death

BrotherMan · #78 09-25-2013, 08:19 PM

Even though it never admits it, I think this movie is truely about the great coming singularity.

Her - Official Trailer (HD) Joaquin Phoenix, Amy...

Kael · #79 09-25-2013, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign Steve

It's official.

Stephen Hawking: Brains Could Be Copied To Computers To Allow Life After Death

I've never seen any reason why not. Seems to me it's a question of 1) finding a way to interface with a brain so the actual information of the way their neurons are connected can be transferred, and 2) building a computer or program sufficiently complex to allow the kind of emergent complexity in our heads to exist in some other medium. Without the 2nd one, you'd just end up with a giant file that could tell you what the person's brain was like, maybe letting you make educated guesses for how they'd respond to any given stimuli, but you wouldn't have the person anymore. Information without context would, at best, give you a Data-esque being, that has to rebuild all those connections from the ground up.

As a tangent, I always find myself shaking my head at TNG when they keep saying Data can't experience emotion. What he experiences isn't the issue - he even talks about becoming familiar with the input of someone's presence and noticing its absence. His problem is that he doesn't have the ~600 million years of layered complexity that provides all those ready-made neural paths, telling his brain how to interpret and respond to what he experiences. I don't think it's quite accurate to say he doesn't experience emotion; at least, it leaves out an important part of the picture.

* Kael goes on rambling about computers and brains, wholly and willfully oblivious to the countless errors and unexamined assumptions he is no doubt making with every sentence.

Kael · #80 09-25-2013, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrotherMan

Even though it never admits it, I think this movie is truely about the great coming singularity.

Her - Official Trailer (HD) Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams - YouTube

From the comments:

Quote:

Sweet lord, my feels are gonna get wrecked by this movie

Ensign Steve · #81 09-25-2013, 09:44 PM

I liked that episode where Data had the memories of all the colonists on his home planet before it was destroyed. He got to talk to the mom of one of the colonists about her son's memories. It's not the same as the son being alive, but at least a part if him was preserved to the point that he could reach out to his loved one one last time, even if he never knew it. She did.

BrotherMan · #82 09-25-2013, 10:16 PM

I can hope that Brent loved it when he got to be Lore. I sort of didn't always notice how good he was as Data so when I see Lore I'm dumbfounded that he's a good actor.

I always thought the Crystaline Entity was a great antagonist because it didn't have any motives or plans, it was just this great big force of nature. (omg, trekverse is marvel - lore was the entity's herald, like the silver surfer and galactus)

:dumb:

GenesisNemesis · #83 10-14-2013, 12:33 PM

I like the idea of the Singularity, but I'm still not convinced that we'll eventually create Strong A.I. However, research in artificial intelligence is still in its infancy, so who knows. Personally, I'm a lot more optimistic about bioengineering, and the eradication of most if not all disease, life extension, etc.

Ensign Steve · #84 10-14-2013, 03:12 PM

What is "Strong A.I." and how will we recognize it if and when we create it?

ceptimus · #85 10-14-2013, 05:29 PM

Strong AI is artificial intelligence that is equal or greater than human intelligence. As far as I know, it is hypothetical at present.

An AI that can pass the Turing Test will, most likely, have to be Strong AI.

lisarea · #86 10-14-2013, 05:51 PM

There are a bunch of different definitions of strong AI, though, so it does depend on who you're talking to. And there are chatterbots that have passed limited purpose Turing tests. There are even annual competitions. (Language is really the hardest part, so while chatterbots might seem a little silly, they're a pretty good measure overall.)

There are even telemarketing AIs that are robust enough that people don't realize they're not talking to a human. (One big one a few years ago was something called The Dove Foundation that was trying to sell censored movies or something to conservatives. If you go read about them, the people complaining about them almost never even noticed they were talking to an AI.)

So I wouldn't eat my hat if we already have strong AI by most definitions.

GenesisNemesis · #87 10-15-2013, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign Steve

What is "Strong A.I." and how will we recognize it if and when we create it?

I would say there are two key factors:

1. Whether it can make useful predictions and discoveries,

and:

2. Whether we can have actual conversations with it, equal to the conversation we are having currently, and is entirely non-scripted, in the sense that it can understand and process language.

Those are the things that would be required if the Singularity is to occur. There are no A.I. that can do those things right now. The chat bots we have aren't even close to that. They might be able to do some creative things, but nowhere near the point where we can, for example, have a debate with one on any subject and lose against it, which is a quality I'd think something of greater intelligence would have.

ceptimus · #88 10-15-2013, 01:25 PM

I think the 'useful predictions and discoveries' part is already being routinely done by machine learning programs.

The conversation/discussion part (aka Turing test) cannot (AFAIK) be done yet by any AI.

I agree that current chatbots fall woefully short of passing the Turing test. It might be possible for a current chatbot to fool people for a short time when 'discussing' a limited topic, but for a general wide-ranging conversation, no chance.

lisarea · #89 10-15-2013, 03:43 PM

Cleverbot has passed a Turing test with a rating of 59.3% human, vs. humans' rating of 63.3% Those are based on four minute conversations, though, so no, there probably aren't chatterbots that would pass consistently in longer tests.

But the primary reason that computers don't yet have a full grasp of natural language is that humans are unable to articulate it. Also, it's not all that immediately useful, so there isn't a whole lot of incentive.

As far as the knowledge bases, there are narrow AIs already making predictions, discoveries, and even decisions. Some with human oversight, and some without. There are lots of examples in this thread.

yguy · #90 10-15-2013, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kael

As a tangent, I always find myself shaking my head at TNG when they keep saying Data can't experience emotion. What he experiences isn't the issue - he even talks about becoming familiar with the input of someone's presence and noticing its absence. His problem

"He" has no problem, because "he" has no desire. Sure, if we had the technology, we could make an android that could act like it has a problem, just like we can program a computer to let out a blood-curdling scream when it runs out of virtual memory; but the bottom line is, there's nobody home, any more than there will be if you upload your "self" to a server.

Ensign Steve · #91 10-15-2013, 04:05 PM

I don't remember if I put this in my lengthy OPs, but growing up in California, I used to always hear about the threat of "The Big One" as in a big earthquake that would strike and shake California off into the Pacific Ocean. (Whether it was going to sink to the bottom or float away to be its own island, I was never quite clear on.) In my junior year in AP physics, I finally had an adult speak the words to me that there is no such thing as some apocalyptical "The Big One" but that there have been and will continue to be lots of earthquakes, some big and some small.

So that's part of how I feel about "The Singularity"TM but I have to go now cuz I have class.

Ensign Steve · #92 10-15-2013, 05:39 PM

I really wish I had more time to write on this. I still have a million and one more points to miss and tortured analogies to introduce. But I am so fucking busy with school and whatnot. This is so much more fun than doing my actual research.

Anyway, I am in the process of reading the book that this video references, which has a lot in common with my opinion on the nature of a possible global intelligence/consciousness:

Eric Schmidt & Jared Cohen - The New Digital Age...

I'm also reading two other books that should make liv very happy. I restarted If on a winter's night a traveller after having put it it down about halfway through, and I'm about up to where I left off. Also, did you guys know about this Dan Brown book, Inferno? It's based on Dante's Inferno, and it is amazeballs!