Ai Forums Home Welcome Guest    Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Ai Site > Ai Forums > Language Mind and Consciousness > Why is human general ai looked ... Last PostsLoginRegisterWhy Register
Topic: Why is human general ai looked up like a genius thing? Wouldn't a feral or an impaired maked a better postion?

lordjakian
posted 5/2/2016  07:23Send e-mail to userReply with quote
Why is human general ai looked up like a genius thing? Wouldn't a feral or an impaired maked a better position?



Last edited by lordjakian @ 5/2/2016 7:24:00 AM

nicku
posted 5/2/2016  16:28Send e-mail to userReply with quote
 
lordjakian wrote @ 5/2/2016 7:23:00 AM:
Why is human general ai looked up like a genius thing? Wouldn't a feral or an impaired maked a better position?



 
It is seen that way, because normal human life is automatic and not based on analytical decision making. If it were a case of everyone is original, creative beings who choose to do things in their life because they want to, then many people wouldn't have a family and pair up in a relationship. Look at almost every philospher in the philosophy of mind or any other area and they get married, have kids and have a very ordinary existence. This shows how automatic we are, if choice and variation through creativity was relevant, many people would not have a relationship at all, or breed. We are as much captive in our daily achievements, as a cow in a field. The range of originality is severely limited. We are mundane, deterministically constrained animals, just like any other non-human animal.

That being the case, in answer to your question, AI is viewed as a genius thing, because a genius breaks with convention, does not conform and dispels established paradigms. When you engage in AI you are doing the opposite of your parents, the opposite of almost every person who has lived.


Obviously that does not say anything about how good we are at developing AI or about how we understand consciousness. I would say though that many individuals just want to get on with AI, without any real clue about what they are talking about. You need to understand what consciousness is, before you replicate it, 1st rule of science, define what you are talking about. If you don't know that consciousness doesn't exist in the way that we heuristically think about it, then you'll get no-where.


If you start with the fact that all consciousness is one or other retention of sensory data, then you've made the first step. At least you have the physical constituents of consciousness and can replicate this in a computer based model. It is then vital to incorporate the fundemental two things that makes us intelligent, a processor with stm/ltm memory for computing and most importantly, write in to your system, 'A belief in agency', belief in consciousness or any construct in which the machine has a set of outputs that describe itself as if it were conscious. That's all we are, an animal with a neurological component that spits out thoughts that describe the machines behaviour/processing as if we did exist. We can't ordinarilly tell the difference, our system acts as if we have the powers that we assume we have.


It's important to realise that during evolution, the animals that developed a sense of agency/self, acted in a superior way, cooperated and hence were selected. Consciousness as Joe public understand it isn't actually there, just the outputs that describe a situation as if it were there. That is what AI needs to do, make a Alan bot that has a 'belief in consciousness' set of outputs to internally processed content. We assume that a machine that acts in every way as if it were conscious, actually isn't. Turing got it right without knowing it, a machine that acts like it is conscious, is actually what we are, we are a biological machine that describes it's data in reference to a fictitious being, our sense of self. When you say, 'yeah but I know i'm alive, i think' that is exactly the kind of output which I've described, you are outputting descriptions of what it would be like if you were a thinking entity. Evolution don't care if there is a 'you' there or not, it just needed us to act as if there were.

All the best, Nick.

Last edited by nicku @ 5/2/2016 4:30:00 PM

tkorrovi
posted 5/3/2016  12:18Send e-mail to userReply with quote
 
nicku wrote @ 5/2/2016 4:28:00 PM:
We are as much captive in our daily achievements, as a cow in a field. The range of originality is severely limited.

 
One cow turns to the other cow and says, "Moooooo!" "Hey", the other cow replies, "I was just about to say the same thing."


AiHasBeenSolved
posted 5/3/2016  23:53Send e-mail to userReply with quote
AI was hard to create, but it is here to stay.

 human general AI

tkorrovi
posted 5/10/2016  13:36Send e-mail to userReply with quote
 
nicku wrote @ 5/2/2016 4:28:00 PM:
Look at almost every philospher in the philosophy of mind or any other area and they get married, have kids and have a very ordinary existence.

 
I am not married, and never have been, so all is not lost. But then i'm not a prominent scientist.

I think Arthur is not married either, and here are several others not married. We then weirdly differ, yes, from philosophers in the philosophy of mind. Do our ideas also differ? One should admit, yes.

 Artificial Consciousness ADS-AC project

hakobian
posted 5/24/2016  00:28Send e-mail to userReply with quote
"It is seen that way, because normal human life is automatic and not based on analytical decision making."

No, you misunderstand my idea.

Are impaired humans not more efficient?

They lessen planning, prioritizing, organizing, impulse control, etc. What they do use is what the focus of AI should be.



Last edited by hakobian @ 5/24/2016 1:44:00 AM

AiHasBeenSolved
posted 5/24/2016  02:56Send e-mail to userReply with quote
 
tkorrovi wrote @ 5/10/2016 1:36:00 PM:
I am not married, and never have been, so all is not lost. But then i'm not a prominent scientist.

I think Arthur is not married either, and here are several others not married. We then weirdly differ, yes, from philosophers in the philosophy of mind. Do our ideas also differ? One should admit, yes.

 
Just like tkorrovi, I am not (have never been) married, but I do envy those who have children. I like to think that I am reproducing my mind, if not my body.

 Artificial Consciousness thread in the subReddit for Artificial Intelligence

nicku
posted 6/8/2016  23:48Send e-mail to userReply with quote
Then you're aim is to walk before you can run. You aim to make a deep brain or perhaps a non-human animal AI analogue. That makes sense to start at a simpler level.


However, the truth stands, even with an impaired human, we're still talking processing of sensory data, less complex processing, but still very similar. The biggest trick nature has played is that it doesn't need you to be conscious, it only needs you to act and produce outputs as if you did exist. The Turing test inadvertently, ( or maybe he realised the same thing), created a test for what we call real consciousness. Only problem is that we misunderstood what awareness is, so the only reason we are held back in creating true AI, is that our false definition of consciousness, will not permit the truth to be entertained. It's a heck of a situation, where almost the whole of academia is so completely tied in knots by a commonly held misconception that consciousness is a thing and awareness needs a self to do the experiencing.

Cheers, Nick.


tkorrovi
posted 6/9/2016  00:41Send e-mail to userReply with quote
It is impossible to argue with nihilists, and people who simply deny everything. Like say it was raining, because there is water on the ground. They say no, there is no reason to think that it was raining, say me one reason. There is water on the ground? No, i don't remember anyone saying that there is water on the ground.

The junkyards still don't fly into space. Why, what are they lacking?

Last edited by tkorrovi @ 6/9/2016 1:43:00 AM
  1  
'Send Send email to user    Reply with quote Reply with quote    Edit message Edit message

Forums Home    The Artificial Intelligence Forum    Hal and other child machines    Alan and other chatbots  
Contact Us Terms of Use