AI, Aristotle, G-d and the bootstrap problem ...

Started by Baruch, December 31, 2016, 10:15:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hakurei Reimu

Quote from: Baruch on January 05, 2017, 07:20:04 AM
He needs to define terms (he likes to teach anyway) and give us a full course in theory of computation ;-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_computation
I have to assume some form of knowledge on the part of the student unless I learn otherwise.

Quote from: Baruch on January 05, 2017, 07:20:04 AM
I agree with him, that Turing machines aren't sentient ... in which case AI is a fraud.  If he claims that some Turing machines are sentient, he needs to produce one, and test it with something better than the naive Turing Test.  Most people won't pass the Turing Test.  They actually have this test from time to time, and it is a joke, an exercise in human projection or anthropomorphism ... which dates back to the Eliza program (an online psychologist).
Baruch, I said that Turing machines in general aren't sentient. There are plenty of examples where a Turing machine cannot really be ascribed sentience. (Like the busy beaver family.) However, I don't go as far as to say that it's impossible. You, on the other hand, speak in confidence about the sentience of Turing machines, when it's clear you don't really know much about either sentience or Turing machines â€" the former because nobody really knows enough about it to say, the latter because... well, you have spectacularly failed to demonstrate any knowledge at all about them.

Turing never intended that the Turing test be the test for sentience. It was a thought experiment to decide whether or not a computer could imitate a human well enough for a human to be fooled, and carried out in a way such that to succeed, the computer would have to develop some form of a theory of mind about how humans think and respond to questions. That's a much more stringent test than the Turing tests that humans have failed and computers have passed in practice â€" those have been much more restricted in scope of conversation. In these restricted scopes, computers can do well to fool humans, and a knowledgeable human can display encyclopaedic enough knowledge that humans erroneously believe no human can be that knowledgeable.

Now, if you want to call a computer "sentient" because it can play that imitation game, that's your business. However, to point to improperly carried out Turing tests as evidence that AI is a fraud is really disingenuous on your part. You haven't demonstrated that there's anything mystical about thinking and sentience that would forbid a sophisticated enough computer from having it, yet you make grand pronouncements that an entire field that has produced useful results is a fraud. Yeah, that's not going to wash.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Unbeliever

Quote from: Jason78 on January 04, 2017, 02:11:29 AM
That's not splitting hairs.   That's a genuine concern within the field of computer science.  It's almost on the level of the P vs NP problem.




God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Unbeliever

Quote from: Cavebear on January 04, 2017, 11:18:45 PM
The universe cannot be a Turing Machine.  A Turing Machine involves self awareness or the simulation of such.  I have yet to see an argument supporting the idea that the "universe" has self-awareness.

I would submit that through us the universe does, indeed, have self-awareness. The universe generated us, we're a part of the universe, and we're aware of the universe, thus we are the universe being aware of itself.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Baruch

Quote from: Unbeliever on January 05, 2017, 04:25:40 PM
I would submit that through us the universe does, indeed, have self-awareness. The universe generated us, we're a part of the universe, and we're aware of the universe, thus we are the universe being aware of itself.

But that is not the same thing, as the universe can use sentient biological beings to build sentient non-biological beings, or that sentient biological beings can be used by the universe to build non-biological beings (living, not sentient).  Not only is the universe self aware thru us, but that it has a very bad case of multiple personality ;-))
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Unbeliever

W
Quote from: Baruch on January 05, 2017, 07:28:34 PM
Not only is the universe self aware thru us, but that it has a very bad case of multiple personality ;-))

Not really, since I'm the sole existent...




God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Baruch

Quote from: Unbeliever on January 06, 2017, 02:01:51 PM
W
Not really, since I'm the sole existent...






That is what Brahman explained to all us Atmans out here ;-)  Reality is just Brahman having a wet dream while sleeping.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Unbeliever

Is that why we have rain - Brahman's wet dreams?


:rrotflmao:
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Journey_To_Mars

The problem with creating a true AI is that it has to be totally separate from what we have now. Machines like Google's Deep Mind do have somewhat of a programmed network to allow to perform complicated decision making, but that's all Deep Mind is, a computer programmed to perform a task that we set up for it. Going from Deep Mind to true AI would mean that the AI could change its own function without the need of human involvement, and I do think that we will reach that point sometime in the near future.
"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." - Voltaire

Maths is a game where you make the rules and play around within them.

Baruch

Quote from: Unbeliever on January 11, 2017, 04:06:02 PM
Is that why we have rain - Brahman's wet dreams?


:rrotflmao:

The European version ... Zeus/Jupiter taking a piss.  Which brings more joy ... relief of a full bladder, or masturbation?
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Sal1981

What's so special about human brains that makes us impossible to improve upon them?

Granted, it isn't exactly making a mouse trap, but I don't see anything particularly special about human brains, or any brain for that matter, that can't be engineered into existence.

SGOS

Quote from: Jason78 on January 01, 2017, 05:03:04 PM
My computer boots up every morning.   The bootstrap problem is solved.

My computer shuts down if I leave it for an hour.  But what I need is a computer that turns itself on like the coffee maker.  It should also link to this forum automatically.

Baruch

Quote from: Sal1981 on January 13, 2017, 08:24:46 AM
What's so special about human brains that makes us impossible to improve upon them?

Granted, it isn't exactly making a mouse trap, but I don't see anything particularly special about human brains, or any brain for that matter, that can't be engineered into existence.

Brains aren't engineered .. unless you are a theist ;-)  They happen spontaneously, at random, after 14 billion years of twiddling natures thumbs.

Yes, human brains aren't special, even other chordates have them ;-)  But plants don't have nerves, so it is speculative if they have brains or not.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Sal1981

What I mean is that there is nothing special about brains, they're entirely material, as-in they're not made of exotic stuff.

Given this tautology, what's to stop us from gaining the knowledge to engineer brains into existence? None, right?

Unbeliever

Quote from: Sal1981 on January 13, 2017, 02:36:43 PM
What I mean is that there is nothing special about brains, they're entirely material, as-in they're not made of exotic stuff.

Given this tautology, what's to stop us from gaining the knowledge to engineer brains into existence? None, right?


What's to stop us is: not surviving long enough to learn how.

Other than that, I see no reason such a thing won't eventually come about.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Baruch

Maybe after a very long time .. most people couldn't reset their clock on their VHS .. back in the day.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.