Freedomain Radio Amazon Affiliate Links: United States - Canada - United Kingdom

Sign up for the Freedomain Mailing List: fdrurl.com/newsletter

Welcome to Freedomain Radio Message Board

If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible spam accounts.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ProhibitionKilz

Artificial vs Natural Intelligence

How is it even theoretically possible for artificial intelligence to exceed the intelligence of man?  I can see how it may be more intelligent than most but not all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can't. In order to have human level AI you would need to build a humanoid robot, give it a sex, a desire for reproduction, digestive system, all of a human's senses, desires, etc. Basically you would need to build an artificial human that practically speaking will be indistinguishable from a normal human. The AI issue has been figured out in the 70s. The pundits who keep talking about AI never really did a cursory analysis on the subject. Elon Musk worries that AI will try to take over the world however this is scientifically inaccurate because we know from science (neurology) that a person that has suffered brain injury that affected their reward system (i.e. they're unable to have desires) is tantamount to a vegetable. If we don't program a need to take over the world it won't have the desire to take over the world, and if you say that it will develop a need to take over the world it's like saying a clock can spontaneously create itself from a junkyard. Conquering things is a human trait.

Computer science is not separate from biology. Computer science (transistors, networks, programs, algorithms, etc) are an artificial imitation of biology. Computer science has had 60+ years to develop, biology has had 4 billion years. At the very best computer science can be on par with biology. We can never exceed it because we humans are the ones creating machines and humans are biological. Saying a human can break free of the bonds of biology is like saying a rock can break free of the law of gravity.

A few movies I can think of that have gotten AI correctly are: Ex-Machina, Prometheus, and the original Ghost in The Shell. The GiTS example is interesting because in the movie the AI spontaneously manifested itself and the first thing it did in order to remain sentient was to put limits on itself (like no replicating copying itself) and it searched for a human-like body in order to fully become an autonomous entity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can. In order to have human level AI you build a humanoid robot, give it a sex, a desire for reproduction, digestive system, all of a human's senses, desires, etc. Basically you build an artificial human that practically speaking will be indistinguishable from a normal human. Then remove the code that emulates sleep. You now have AI which works 24 hours a day, exceeding the abilities of human level AI.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intelligence is the ability to process information, find patterns, and come up with theories based on data. The sheer speed of artificial expert AI makes it better suited at those tasks than humans. A general AI will have the same advantages.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/10/2017 at 4:46 AM, ofd said:

Intelligence is the ability to process information, find patterns, and come up with theories based on data. The sheer speed of artificial expert AI makes it better suited at those tasks than humans. A general AI will have the same advantages.

Would it be able to create new theories...if so how?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/10/2017 at 4:08 AM, kenstauffer said:

It can. In order to have human level AI you build a humanoid robot, give it a sex, a desire for reproduction, digestive system, all of a human's senses, desires, etc. Basically you build an artificial human that practically speaking will be indistinguishable from a normal human. Then remove the code that emulates sleep. You now have AI which works 24 hours a day, exceeding the abilities of human level AI.

So an imitation is more intelligent simply because it doesn't need sleep?  I must disagree...the statement, "human level AI" contradicts your hypothesis & implies a limit at human level.  I can see how an AI would have superior intellect but not intelligence.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/10/2017 at 0:54 AM, Wuzzums said:

It can't. In order to have human level AI you would need to build a humanoid robot, give it a sex, a desire for reproduction, digestive system, all of a human's senses, desires, etc. Basically you would need to build an artificial human that practically speaking will be indistinguishable from a normal human. The AI issue has been figured out in the 70s. The pundits who keep talking about AI never really did a cursory analysis on the subject. Elon Musk worries that AI will try to take over the world however this is scientifically inaccurate because we know from science (neurology) that a person that has suffered brain injury that affected their reward system (i.e. they're unable to have desires) is tantamount to a vegetable. If we don't program a need to take over the world it won't have the desire to take over the world, and if you say that it will develop a need to take over the world it's like saying a clock can spontaneously create itself from a junkyard. Conquering things is a human trait.

Computer science is not separate from biology. Computer science (transistors, networks, programs, algorithms, etc) are an artificial imitation of biology. Computer science has had 60+ years to develop, biology has had 4 billion years. At the very best computer science can be on par with biology. We can never exceed it because we humans are the ones creating machines and humans are biological. Saying a human can break free of the bonds of biology is like saying a rock can break free of the law of gravity.

A few movies I can think of that have gotten AI correctly are: Ex-Machina, Prometheus, and the original Ghost in The Shell. The GiTS example is interesting because in the movie the AI spontaneously manifested itself and the first thing it did in order to remain sentient was to put limits on itself (like no replicating copying itself) and it searched for a human-like body in order to fully become an autonomous entity.

How is an algorithm an imitation of biology or what are algorithms analogous to in biology?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2017 at 2:08 PM, kenstauffer said:

Then remove the code that emulates sleep.

We don't even know why animals sleep in the first place. We can't remove something we have no idea how to build in the first place

 

On 8/10/2017 at 2:08 PM, kenstauffer said:

You now have AI which works 24 hours a day, exceeding the abilities of human level AI.

This is what I don't get. If it's 100% human, albeit artificial, how can it exceed human intelligence?

If you say it's gonna process information faster you would be wrong. It won't. You can't build an artificial human brain that can process faster information than the fastest human. The brain itself is structured on having different processing speeds, some parts of it being slow are a feature not a setback. What if your brain was 2x faster? You think you would be able to move? The second impulse will arrive at your muscles way before your muscles had a chance to react to the first. How will your eyes work or detect motion in the first place? You would see the world as a series of slideshows. Same thing with speaking. Read "Thinking Fast and Slow" for more.

On 8/10/2017 at 2:46 PM, ofd said:

Intelligence is the ability to process information, find patterns, and come up with theories based on data. The sheer speed of artificial expert AI makes it better suited at those tasks than humans. A general AI will have the same advantages.

I have heard Sam Harris make the argument that an AI can live in 1 human second something like 80 years. No... NO... this is antiscienfitic. There are limits to reality colloquially called LAWS OF PHYSICS. There's an upper limit to how fast things can be called the speed of light. We can never, ever, ever surpass it. And even if we get computers to just come close to it then we're entering the realm of relativity which in reality translates to the faster you go the faster time around you will move. Meaning 1 computer second will equal 80 human years (rough generalizations but I hope you get the point).

Computers haven't gotten faster for decades because transistors have already been perfected. Our PC's run faster because of (a) parallel processing and (b) more resilient materials that can run at full speed without burning up.

So returning to your point, if you want to have faster AI you can either have more AI in different bodies making AI no more faster than human society, or more AI's in the same body essentially giving the AI a mental illness.

Again, this stuff has been figured out for literally decades. Feynman after he retired he used to hold lectures on this very topic, the limits of processing power and how we can find tricks to overcome them. He was one of the first to suggest a parallel processing mechanism or starting changing our whole infrastructure to accommodate a ternary system so as to find a use for quantum computers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ProhibitionKilz said:

How is an algorithm an imitation of biology or what are algorithms analogous to in biology?

Feedback loops; in pseudocode: IF (X) THEN (X+1); in biology: hormone system.

You can basically reduce all programs to some if/then. If malware detected then quarantine and delete. If foreign organism detected then quarantine and kill.

Or at the very core of computers, the transistors. They can be either on or off. Nerve cells or muscle cells are the same, they can either be off or on.

Whatever we think we might have figured out through our human ingenuity biology has figured it out first. Like quantum theory: https://arstechnica.com/science/2011/12/more-evidence-found-for-quantum-physics-in-photosynthesis/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

If it is possible, it can be created.

Say we have an artificial body with parts that do not go bad in a clean room environment. Say we start a computer program, its a very simple one:

PRINT <<Combination 1>>

RUN

IF END REPEAT with +1 to Combination

So what happens is it runs "a" then "b" then "c"... etc then "djsdfkjd kr43jr3r9enf" etc every combination of characters. After some crazy amount of time, the code could be so complex that it could stop itself by having so much logic to RUN and to do such that its abilities are indistinguishable from an actual human life.

Can a human type this specific code? No. Could it technically be possible somehow? Yes, in my thought experiment that would take too long to actually be useful in any way.

 

2. MIND EMULATION
More importantly, what about mind uploading? They already do it with mice and stuff. They somehow record the brain patterns and such and then run it on a computer. Is this not artificial life? When they do it to humans, would it not be artificial intelligence?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, smarterthanone said:

2. MIND EMULATION
More importantly, what about mind uploading? They already do it with mice and stuff. They somehow record the brain patterns and such and then run it on a computer. Is this not artificial life? When they do it to humans, would it not be artificial intelligence?

This could be achievable of course but not in the near future. We still haven't figured out ho the brain works in order to simulate it. This is the whole plot of the Ghost in The Shell anime. If you take parts little by little from a human and replace them with artificial ones at some point you'll have a fully artificial conscious person, a machine with a soul. And if that's possible will the reverse also be possible, to create a machine that mimics humans little by little that will eventually develop a conscious?

What do you mean by artificial life and artificial intelligence? We have had artificial intelligence for something verging on a century. Intelligence (defined as the ability to predict the future accurately) and consciousness don't go hand in hand. Life and consciousness don't go hand in hand either.

There was a start-up of a non-invasive brain-wave scanner that you would place on your head (like headphones) and it would be able to read off brainwaves with a pretty good degree of accuracy. The idea of it was to be used as a computer peripheral, instead of using a keyboard shortcut you can map some macro or whatever to some specific brainwave and trigger the macro just by thinking about it. Here's the TED talk.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Would it be able to create new theories...if so how?

In theory, coming up with new theories is a trival task. In most cases, hypotheses about empirical phenomena are abductive reasoning. That can be well simulated with a Bayesian, self correcting approach.

 

Quote

I have heard Sam Harris make the argument that an AI can live in 1 human second something like 80 years.

I listened to that podcast too. I remember that the argument was that AIs can theoretically process the information a human gathers in 80 years in one second. This is true to some extent for expert AI systems today, the Go Ai can study hundreds of games in a few seconds, while it takes humans days or months to do so.

Here http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/explainer/2012/04/north_korea_s_2_mb_of_knowledge_taunt_how_many_megabytes_does_the_human_brain_hold_.html

is a good article that gives you the specs of a human brain. In short, you have 100 billion neurons, running at a kilohertz, with about 2,5 petabytes of storage. Technology is still a far way away from that, when you compare that data with graphic cards that have a similar architecture (massive parallel computation). https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/10series/geforce-gtx-1070/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11-8-2017 at 11:11 PM, ProhibitionKilz said:

Would it be able to create new theories...if so how?

(paraphrasing an example from the Master algorithm)

Imagine you're trying to cure cancer, you would need to have a way to interrupt the process of cancer cells while leaving the other cells unharmed. In order to do that you need an accurate model of the cells workings, precise enough to identify weak-points unique to cancer cells. Also cancer cells have many different mutations which causes them meaning you'll need to be able to individually identify the cancer within each patient.

In theory you could accomplish this by creating a Markov model (let's just say it's a spinoff from Bayesian models) which explores each possible state and calculates the probabilities of different state transitions. You of-course need to manually note down each state or specify observations in a way that states could be inferred. You'll also need an algorithm to manipulate the states, add possible logical statements (hypotheses) and then the Markov model will check if they're likely or not. You then have an algorithm which can model the workings of that cell.

In the real world though we can't even see all the states and workings of a cell to begin with making the state plane incomplete. A Markov model can't handle that and you'll need a way to reduce the noise (or a better observer).

On 10-8-2017 at 9:54 AM, Wuzzums said:

Elon Musk worries that AI will try to take over the world however this is scientifically inaccurate because we know from science (neurology) that a person that has suffered brain injury that affected their reward system (i.e. they're unable to have desires) is tantamount to a vegetable. If we don't program a need to take over the world it won't have the desire to take over the world, and if you say that it will develop a need to take over the world it's like saying a clock can spontaneously create itself from a junkyard. Conquering things is a human trait.

Something doesn't need the desire to take over the world in order to actually take over the world. A goal state could have a requirement to take over the world. Besides, most goal states (such as taking over to world) are too complex to formulate manually. You'll need to let the AI observe a goal state, infer the conditions behind it and then let it do it's thing.

Furthermore the main point is not that sky-net happens but more that once an AI exists which can outsmart most of mankind we wouldn't be able to stop it once it set out to do whatever we wanted it to do. A faulty goal state could then cause serious damage.

On 10-8-2017 at 9:54 AM, Wuzzums said:

The AI issue has been figured out in the 70s.

Which papers?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kikker said:

Which papers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm#History

8 hours ago, Kikker said:

Something doesn't need the desire to take over the world in order to actually take over the world. A goal state could have a requirement to take over the world. Besides, most goal states (such as taking over to world) are too complex to formulate manually. You'll need to let the AI observe a goal state, infer the conditions behind it and then let it do it's thing.

Furthermore the main point is not that sky-net happens but more that once an AI exists which can outsmart most of mankind we wouldn't be able to stop it once it set out to do whatever we wanted it to do. A faulty goal state could then cause serious damage.

Taking over the world is a goal state in of itself (your words) so it cannot NOT be a goal state by being part of a larger goal state.

Again, I'll repeat myself. In order to get a computer to do something you can either (a) program it or (b) it will have a desire to do it. If you don't program it it won't happen. If it doesn't have a desire for it it won't happen. If it has a desire for it then the AI is tantamount to a human and lots of humans have a desire to rule the world but none manage it so it won't be able to take over the world.

Furthermore lots of humans have a desire to stop those who seek to take over the world, so it's only logical to assume that a human level AI will eventually express the same desire.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to call bull on the AI that made its own language that even people couldn't understand. They couldn't understand it because it was gibberish nonsense and the AI failed. They pushed it for publicity for a story. The end.

I am a php developer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0