i think he’s gone but did he take the message??
Don’t be silly: he hasn’t gone!
He is off researching ‘what is a sense of humour?’.
Oh I do hope ‘The Man from nowhere’ hasn’t deserted Us,You must admit He’s interesting even if I don’t understand most of what He rants on about :~)…Methinks He’s gone seeking for more ‘truths’?
Interesting article for those still interested
"The issue is not whether current computers are conscious or not - no one expects them to be - but rather the problem lies in the strategy that, by building machines that get better and better at doing things that do not require consciousness, the missing ingredient, the feelings that are the essence of our awareness, will somehow materialize. It is like adding ingredients to an increasingly impressive and subtle curry, in the hope that the taste will spontaneously emerge as that of Baked Alaska
I read that article and again it appeared to me to full of pretentious, pseudo-intellectual waffle.
As you have been involved with computers, are involved with computers, you know you build a sound, solid, powerful base first. With this in mind the power of processor is all important. Apparently this power could equal our own brain very soon, and apart from that processors are being developed that are much more suitable for artificial intelligence …
Thinking in Silicon
http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/522476/thinking-in-silicon/
You are right in a way that if you feed only certain programs into a computer then all the computer will ever know can be found within the confines of the program, but there is the tantalising carrot before the donkey scenario: the computer will be stocked up with programs that are solely to make the computer ‘think’ for itself. There is one mad rush now to make the first sentient computer, so the programs fed into it will be of this sort. Not only that every computer engineer knows that the computer itself has to find the solutions to various stimuli hence the growing trend for learning computers, computers that learn and adapt.
With the processing power becoming available along with the acknowledgement that adaptable learning computers are the way forward it isn’t a matter of will a computer ever become aware of it’s own existence but when. Even if a computer doesn’t satisfy all the criteria of ‘awareness’ it might well become very close, close enough to decide to follow it’s own agenda.
The advancement of computer design and technology is so fast now it takes your breath away. Something new pops up nearly every day. You can’t apply the logic of ‘the computer only knows what the programmer wants it to know’ because of the computer altering as it soaks up external stimuli. You think a software engineer would build in safeguards to stop a computer from altering itself - the code itself - if he thought it would help the computer advance in some way?
The only way a computer will become ‘aware’ is when it can alter itself as it sees fit thereby leaving the initial program behind. This will undoubtedly happen eventually.
Interesting article but in the final analysis it simply presents further examples of “building machines that get better and better at doing things that do not require consciousness”
The machine that played Pong wasn’t really “learning” it was simply being programmed. The difference being that the programming wasn’t traditional waterfall program code but event driven logic. Similar “programming” has been done with chimps. It’s a similar problem. A chimp is a “thing” you can’t communicate with via traditional language just like a computer so the “teaching” was done using events and rewards and punishments.
They put 3 shaped solids in front of the chimp, a sphere, a cube and a pointed cone. Beneath the sphere or cube a treat was placed but the cone was rigged to an electrical circuit and touching it gave the chimp a shock. Since the treat was not always in the same place the chimp tried different shapes but quickly learned to avoid the cone. Then they changed the colours of the solids and picked a different one to be electrified and so on.
In the end though, was the chimp learning much? It was simply responding to events that it remembered. It hadn’t for example figured out a way to determine which solid was electrified. The great chess computer appears to be a master at the game but really all it knows are how the pieces move and how millions of other games progressed from millions of different positions. This is not thinking. It is simply programming based on an amount of memory filled with information.
The primary point being made in the article I posted is somewhat prophetic. What is the point trying to make machines better and better, faster and faster and more “human-like” if in the end they will never have an actual consciousness and experience feelings and emotions?
There exists already a machine that has the ability to think like a human, which can process information as fast as the human brain, which can really think and learn and which can maintain itself, find fuel for itself and find ways to repair itself when it gets damaged.
It’s called a baby.
We can already replicate ourselves very nicely thanks very much.
The entire problem is upside down here. People are trying to create machines to be more human like but which are faster and more efficient.
What they should be doing is finding ways to make humans more “machine-like” such that they are better and faster and more efficient. Therein lies the true future.
You can build yourself the most fantastic pocket calculator that can do incredible sums in a flash, but what’s the point? Wouldn’t it be better if you could equip your own brain to do the same? If we could tap into Carol Voderman’s brain, understand how she can do what she can do and then transfer that ability to everyone else wouldn’t that be such a better end goal?
Humans have sense and reason. Humans can emote and empathise. It is the mechanical machine-like aspects of our bodies that we need to enhance rather than trying desperately to take a machine and turn it into a human.
None of this is really that new, nor that far into science-fiction. The Cyberpunk world has been celebrating this concept for years and there are already many examples of body enhancement in use today.
Meanwhile the powers that be are pumping more and more faster and more efficient ingredients into their chicken curry and still hoping it will turn out like Baked Alaska. In the end all they will ever do is mimic a human. It’s what they are already doing. You can see it in many lines of that article . .
“A new breed of computer chips that operate more LIKE the brain”
“build silicon chips with elements that operate LIKE neurons”
“transistors to EMULATE the electrical spiking behavior of a neuron”
Yet what they build will never have a consciousness. Will never feel, emote, regret, love and empathise. It will simply pretend to do such things. What then is the point ?
The future lies in humans themselves evolving and reaching the next great step in their on-going transition, unlocking the full potential and ability of the brain and mind. Once we do that we will have much less dependency on machines.
Quite a response but all I get is that you are backtracking: in other words what I stated is true - or at least I have the stronger view.
Glad you have the capacity to re-think. Shows promise 
.
Couldn’t help myself - touch of gloating you see 
.
:twisted::twisted::twisted:
I can go deeper yet if I want - can you?
I’ll give you a way out though as I’m on the cider. Things can get a bit bonkers when I’m on the booze.
You’re still trying to “win” an argument. You’re missing the entire point and inherent value in debate and civil discourse. In time, your mind-set will change and you’ll understand what I mean.
The theory you have proposed has no more merit at this point than it did from the outset. People are still building machines and programming them. Not one of them is actually “thinking” in the truest sense of the term. They are doing what they are told. It matters not how varied, good or bad the style of “telling” or programming is. Fact is, they are being programmed. Such machines will never achieve consciousness, they will just do stuff fast and efficient. There’s a place for such machines, they will be useful, but they are not the future of mankind.
Man’s ability to think, love, regret, empathise and emote will forever keep machines where they are now, a long way down the evolutionary chain.
You think that lot is good? Most of the people on this planet think in the most deplorable way. Atrocities committed daily by people thinking in the most outlandish manner. What are such people? They are just brains that have been spoon fed data and have reacted accordingly.
Pure, exact logic, free from desire might be a wonderful thing to behold.
And again you are dictating. ‘Never’ is an almighty powerful word and closes your mind to other possibilities. The word ‘never’ shouldn’t enter your head with regard to this topic. You cannot predict the future so allow it to exist and flourish. It also shows how bloody arrogant you are.
Information, data, does not cause a human to commit acts of atrocity. It is circumstance and life imbalances that lead to such actions imo. Programming and conditioning I think can determine the manner of the action but ultimately it is what humans do to each other that results in the imbalances. Mankind is out of balance, perhaps more so now than ever. The elite 1% of the population have 99% of the wealth and control whilst the other 99% are enslaved and in comparison poor. However, real success, worth and maturity lie not in money and material possessions but in self-awareness and being in balance with Nature and one’s own inner nature.
A great many of the billions of human minds out there are un-trained, un-informed and running wild. That is not to say that the mind itself is inherently flawed and needs replacing with some un-thinking, soulless machine. More that the mind needs to be given the truth, of what it is, of what it is capable of and how to nurture itself. How to exist in harmony with the feelings and emotions surrounding it.
Well, good luck with that one. I think a sentient computer will be considering all sorts of possibilities before a fraction of the above will occur.
Will a sentient computer exist soon or not, never mind what state mankind is in, is the question? Soulless and lifeless the computer might appear to be but it should be logical nonetheless.
Personally I’m fed up of mankind’s constant struggle to improve. Religion - greed - aggression - sex, an eternal potpourri of heady emotive thoughts and feelings culminating in pain and suffering, with collateral damage to so many innocent bystanders. Mankind stinks on so many levels. Logical thought without such considerations might well be a revelation, cutting through the all the bullshit that we think is so important.
I agree, there is much currently wrong with human existence and with the balance of life, but our pain and suffering are all a part of the process of our maturing and overall evolution.
“The Prophet” - Kahlil Gibram
"AND a woman spoke, saying, Tell us of Pain.
And he said:
Your pain is the breaking of the shell that encloses your understanding.
Even as the stone of the fruit must break, that its heart may stand in the sun, so must you know pain.
And could you keep your heart in wonder at the daily miracles of your life, your pain would not seem less wondrous than your joy;
And you would accept the seasons of your heart, even as you have always accepted the seasons that pass over your fields.
And you would watch with serenity through the winters of your grief.
Much of your pain is self-chosen.
It is the bitter potion by which the physician within you heals your sick self.
Therefore trust the physician, and drink his remedy in silence and tranquillity:
For his hand, though heavy and hard, is guided by the tender hand of the Unseen,
And the cup he brings, though it burn your lips, has been fashioned of the clay which the Potter has moistened with His own sacred tears.
[I]AND the priestess spoke again and said: Speak to us of Reason and Passion.
And he answered, saying:
Your soul is oftentimes a battlefield, upon which your reason and your judgment wage war against your passion and your appetite.
Would that I could be the peacemaker in your soul, that I might turn the discord and the rivalry of your elements into oneness and melody.
But how shall I, unless you yourselves be also the peacemakers, nay, the lovers of all your elements?
Your reason and your passion are the rudder and the sails of your seafaring soul.
If either your sails or your rudder be broken, you can but toss and drift, or else be held at a standstill in mid-seas.
For reason, ruling alone, is a force confining; and passion, unattended, is a flame that burns to its own destruction.
Therefore let your soul exalt your reason to the height of passion, that it may sing;
And let it direct your passion with reason, that your passion may live through its own daily resurrection, and like the phoenix rise above its own ashes.
I would have you consider your judgment and your appetite even as you would two loved guests in your house.
Surely you would not honour one guest above the other; for he who is more mindful of one loses the love and the faith of both.
Among the hills, when you sit in the cool shade of the white poplars, sharing the peace and serenity of distant fields and meadows – then let your heart say in silence, “God rests in reason.”
And when the storm comes, and the mighty wind shakes the forest, and thunder and lightning proclaim the majesty of the sky, – then let your heart say in awe, “God moves in passion.”
And since you are a breath in God’s sphere, and a leaf in God’s forest, you too should rest in reason and move in passion.[/I]
first a question for Realist - I know MKJ knows the answer already!
- Does an ungly crab have a sense of humour
and a statement:
- I am so looking forward to getting my first female robot - similiar to the the ‘blade runner’ version with a fail safe feature ‘total obedience’ only then will my world be purrfect!:-p
and some comments re the debate here which is really between two protagonists only
I find the comments of realist two lengthy and rambling and as MKJ points out two much of the word ‘never’ - it should never never never have been included in the dictionary
MKJ comments are more punchy and vibrant
both human robots present good and valid points but on a score out of 10 , 10 being the highest:
MKJ 9
Realist 5
OK seconds out and cum out boxing and no punching below the hard drive please!
Pretty obvious stuff but the trouble is the evolving are getting more destructive and dangerous by the second.
I can’t and won’t read stuff from the likes of Kahlil Gibram. I gave up on religion and philosophy a long time ago or reading anything that resembles a parable. I find such stuff doesn’t get to the point and is designed to confuse.
yes prophets are for profit - profit of the soul?
they make no useful contribution to scientific discussion - realist has perhaps become unreal?
I am evolving but do not believe that I am destructive and dangerous. I stand back, detatch, observe and understand.
It’s probably called ‘learning’
Gees, aren’t atheists a non for prophet organisation?
And yet your theory prescribes that we engineer fantastically powerful robots and machines and have these same destructive and dangerous people programme them! Pretty sure that strategy led to the atomic bomb, the slaughter of countless people in Hiroshima and the rapid rise for the need of lots of other countries to build up their own nuclear arsenal and sit with their fingers poised over the buttons just in case.
I too gave up on “religion” as such and the “Church” as such finding them now both somewhat perverted and corrupt systems of conditioning resulting in varying forms of violent extremism or the sapping of the human mind of all desire and ability to think freely.
Nevertheless, when earnestly considering who and what I am, I find myself compelled to acknowledge that a part of me at least, does not sit entirely in the physical world. Rationally I concede that this could be a complete delusion on my part or a misinterpretation of signals from my brain. The onus is on me to explore and seek out whether it is true or not.
Mainstream religion and the Church as a whole do not have the answers imo. However, the efforts and works of many philosophers and sages throughout history provide some insights that can help us. Personally I doubt that any man or woman is capable of providing the answers specific to another person. Rather I suspect that every human is unique and individual and has their own path to walk and their own journey to traverse to arrive at the answers that are relevant to them.
Even so, I suspect others CAN help to equip us with the tools and methods by which we might unlock our minds and understand better who and what we are.
If you have a combination safe that is locked and you want to know what is inside it, then I can not help you given that I do not know the secret combination. However, were I a locksmith or safe cracker I could teach you how a safe works and thereby how to perform the tasks that will allow you to open it.
It’s for this reason that my mind is open to the field of Philosophy and esoteric works. There is much to be found in there to help frame ones thoughts and better appraise the world and our experience of it. I will still find my own answers and the journey itself shall doubtless provide one of the most valuable experiences to learn from. Yet had I continued to stumble on through life, yielding to the social programming and conditioning constantly bombarding us, I would never have reached the point where I find myself now. I needed guides and the inputs from works of all kinds to help me set foot on the path that is undoubtedly now before me.
It seems somewhat curious, even illogical, to imagine or expect that humans, who have not yet worked out who and what they are, nor who have tapped and understood the full potential of the brain and mind, could be capable of building a robot that could itself determine those things and become “conscious”. It would be rather like drawing a face on a balloon and hoping that one day it might actually talk to you.
Man can not create a living “end-product” for Nature itself does not do this. For example we can not build or make a courgette. That end-product is formed by a cycle of growth beginning from a seed. Nature acts upon it causing the seed to put down roots and grow into a seedling, then to a young plant, then to a mature plant. It then goes into a phase of flowering in order that it can be pollinated and then the cycle turns to the production of the fruit or vegetable and so on.
Man can imitate Nature, even speed her processes up in some cases but he must always work hand-in-hand with Nature because we are bound by her environment and processes, because we are ourselves, a part of that Nature.
Thus I think that we must as humans, continue through the cycles of growth and evolution before us. Making machines seems unlikely to achieve this for us. The caterpillar would gain little if it were capable of picking up tools and building itself a set of mechanical butterfly wings. The caterpillar must itself enter the cocoon stage and become the real butterfly, thereby ridding itself of the things that previously limited its existence. Similarly Man I suspect, must seek out and enter his own spiritual “cocoon” and be transformed into the next part of existence that Nature has in store for him. I suspect that once this is done, we will have very little need for clunky machines and robots !
OMG what garbidge!
show us ya t… honey!!