Terminator/Matrix could it really happen?

[puckslinger]

Do you think there is a chance that Machines could indeed take over the human race , based on our own....smarts(stupidity)?

 

I think its possible, more from ways in the movie IRobot, where we give defence robots rules and they react to them and do realize that hey humans are {censored}. Finished...

[djet]

Sure it could happen.......

 

Are you saying machines WE create or outside invaders?

[puckslinger]

We created

 

 

 

Can it happen and why or why not.

[hecker]

It will never happen because machines cannot think and thus can never outsmart a human being. Did you not watch Terminator?

[killbot1000]

It will never happen because machines cannot think and thus can never outsmart a human being. Did you not watch Terminator?

 

Haha, I think that you need to do a little more research on AI, and do a little less research on popular entertainment films.

 

So far, we have advanced AI to the point where it can THINK on the level of a young child, but it's a little different though because we inject vast libraries, etc. into the speech process, so the robot or whatever appears to have reasoning capabilities BEYOND a small child.

 

If we continue down our current path of AI, we will eventually have a fully thinking machine. Now...when this happens, once the machine becomes sentient, it is now a life (whether we created it or not) and as such, should have access to basic rights.

 

If we do not treat our creations with dignity and respect (given that they are sentient), what would you do if you were a robot? You would look around and say "wait a minute, were stronger then they are...and they are pushing us around for no reason". However, if we integrate these things into our society, and we treat them as equals (even if they're not), then this urge to overthrow mankind will never come to be. If we go down the path of AI, our goal should be to make these things as human as possible (imperfections and everything). The reason for this is that each of these machines will have to use reasoning, like a human being and we wont end up with a GREAT ROBOT UPRISING where there is perfect harmony and communication between the robots. We need to make them as human as possible.

 

For the record, I DO NOT support AI. I think that we would be getting ourselves into more trouble than we could even imagine. But I don't see us shying away from AI in the future. And I feel that if we do have to go with AI, we should go for it at full blast. If we give a machine (that is stronger than us) the ability to think and feel and then turn around and treat them like property, this is only a recipe for disaster.

[hecker]

Haha, I think that you need to do a little more research on AI, and do a little less research on popular entertainment films.

 

So far, we have advanced AI to the point where it can THINK on the level of a young child, but it's a little different though because we inject vast libraries, etc. into the speech process, so the robot or whatever appears to have reasoning capabilities BEYOND a small child.

 

If we continue down our current path of AI, we will eventually have a fully thinking machine. Now...when this happens, once the machine becomes sentient, it is now a life (whether we created it or not) and as such, should have access to basic rights.

 

If we do not treat our creations with dignity and respect (given that they are sentient), what would you do if you were a robot? You would look around and say "wait a minute, were stronger then they are...and they are pushing us around for no reason". However, if we integrate these things into our society, and we treat them as equals (even if they're not), then this urge to overthrow mankind will never come to be. If we go down the path of AI, our goal should be to make these things as human as possible (imperfections and everything). The reason for this is that each of these machines will have to use reasoning, like a human being and we wont end up with a GREAT ROBOT UPRISING where there is perfect harmony and communication between the robots. We need to make them as human as possible.

 

For the record, I DO NOT support AI. I think that we would be getting ourselves into more trouble than we could even imagine. But I don't see us shying away from AI in the future. And I feel that if we do have to go with AI, we should go for it at full blast. If we give a machine (that is stronger than us) the ability to think and feel and then turn around and treat them like property, this is only a recipe for disaster.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no such thing as a "thinking" machine. There is little to no proof as to how our brains really work (although I do admit that they probably work as a machine) and no real understanding of what intelligence really means (and is), so as of today no copy of a brain can be built.

 

Cheers,

 

hecker

[dark4181]

...Maybe it already has happened

 

*dun dun DUN*

[puckslinger]

thinking in human terms of course not a machine or computer can only "think" what we program. but if we give it the ability to have to pick options then in turn it is thinking at the simplist form. like the chess computers from the Terminator show. I agree with killbot i dont like the idea of AI but no chance we (human race) will stop before its to late!

[Maxintosh]

there is no such thing as a "thinking" machine.

LOL That means little to nothing when it comes to computers. Look up Moore's law. Eventually they will have the capacity and then it's only a matter of writing the code. You also seem to forget (or don't know about) Deep Blue, which was a computer that IBM taught how to play chess. In 1997 it defeated Garry Kasparov, who is a world champion grandmaster Keep in mind that was over 11 years ago, and I'm sure you know how fast things progress in the computer world The military also has a computer driven tank now that they plan to use where it's too dangerous to send a person.

 

Long live fuzzy logic

[apowerr]

I see what Hecker is saying. Of course a computer can 'think' depending on how you want to define that, but as far as 'learning' computers go we aren't quite there yet.

...Maybe it already has happened

 

*dun dun DUN*

Indeed, look up simulated reality theories.

 

One of these must be true:

1. intelligent races will never reach a level of technology where they can run simulations of reality so detailed they can be mistaken for reality (or this is impossible in principle); or
   
2. races who do reach such a level do not tend to run such simulations; or
   
3. we are almost certainly living in such a simulation.
   

[killbot1000]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is no such thing as a "thinking" machine. There is little to no proof as to how our brains really work (although I do admit that they probably work as a machine) and no real understanding of what intelligence really means (and is), so as of today no copy of a brain can be built.

 

Cheers,

 

hecker

 

 

Um...When I was referring to a thinking machine, I was also referring to the future. I work in IT, things become more automated every day and self diagnosing, self healing every day, it is only a matter of time before AI takes off.

 

We don't need to know how the human brain works, again, like most new things people talk about, you are speaking in human-centric terms. A brain is a brain, it's not required that an artificial intelligence think like us to be considered intelligent.

 

The definition of intelligence is relative, we're smarter than that ant, "god" is smarter than us, etc. It's all relative. We don't need to copy a brain, we can literally design a perfect brain from the ground up (with our imperfect brains), unfettered by natural selection, evolution, etc.

 

How can we do this when all of our brains are impefect? We have groups of people work on it, things that one person misses, another person will pick up, also there will be a major use of computers to help us design the first neural net. I am both looking forward to it, and freaked out about it at the same time.

[justvisiting]

Meet the pre-alpha version of your future masters:

 

[Maxintosh]

Meet the pre-alpha version of your future masters

Thanks, now I'm going to have nightmares tonight

[apowerr]

Meet the pre-alpha version of your future masters:

 

Wow! That is impressive. That was amazing when it nearly fell and righted itself!

[Maxintosh]

This is funny

[hecker]

Um...When I was referring to a thinking machine, I was also referring to the future. I work in IT, things become more automated every day and self diagnosing, self healing every day, it is only a matter of time before AI takes off.

 

We don't need to know how the human brain works, again, like most new things people talk about, you are speaking in human-centric terms. A brain is a brain, it's not required that an artificial intelligence think like us to be considered intelligent.

 

The definition of intelligence is relative, we're smarter than that ant, "god" is smarter than us, etc. It's all relative. We don't need to copy a brain, we can literally design a perfect brain from the ground up (with our imperfect brains), unfettered by natural selection, evolution, etc.

 

How can we do this when all of our brains are impefect? We have groups of people work on it, things that one person misses, another person will pick up, also there will be a major use of computers to help us design the first neural net. I am both looking forward to it, and freaked out about it at the same time.

Ah, I see. So the fact that you have a job in "IT" makes you an AI expert. Oh, please. Don't take this the wrong way, but you have obviously never worked in the AI field before and your comments are based purely on speculation.

[killbot1000]

Ah, I see. So the fact that you have a job in "IT" makes you an AI expert. Oh, please. Don't take this the wrong way, but you have obviously never worked in the AI field before and your comments are based purely on speculation.

 

I never said I was an expert, I was merely pointing out the pace at which computers advance. I am not bragging or trying to show off my IT credentials, believe me there are those who have much more than I do. There is no AI FIELD yet, it is cutting edge, but given the rate that technology flows, before long it wont be cutting edge, that's all I'm saying.

[puckslinger]

Deep Blue only beat Kasparov once:

 

This first win occurred on February 10, 1996. Deep Blue - Kasparov, 1996, Game 1 is a famous chess game. However, Kasparov won three games and drew two of the following games, beating Deep Blue by a score of 4–2. The match concluded on February 17, 1996.

 

Deeper Blue, beat him 3.5-2.5

 

 

I think the point of working in IT means you can see the fact that things are beginning to see where there are problems with its self and fixing like drives virus and {censored} like that, but there also is AI involved and it could in turn go anywhere, people say computers can't think, yea they can, just not like us.

[killbot1000]

people say computers can't think, yea they can, just not like us.

 

Exactly! That was the only point I was trying to make.

[hecker]

I never said I was an expert, I was merely pointing out the pace at which computers advance. I am not bragging or trying to show off my IT credentials, believe me there are those who have much more than I do. There is no AI FIELD yet, it is cutting edge, but given the rate that technology flows, before long it wont be cutting edge, that's all I'm saying.

 

There isn't a field of AI per-se, but many other fields apply AI to a certain degree, like pattern-recognition software, language analysis, knowledge based systems, automation and of course the popular field of robotics! I agree that it's all cutting edge, though. Still, many marketed products utilize AI (ie, the software used to recognize faces in CCV systems).

 

Cheers,

 

hecker

 

EDIT:

people say computers can't think, yea they can, just not like us.

Well you see, here's where I disagree. A computer (or machine) can behave in a way that may resemble thinking but at the end it's possibilities are still limited by the algorithm it was designed upon (a finite state machine, right?). A human being on the other side is able to develop and apply completely new decision strategies on the fly. We "think" and thus are able to come up with completely unexpected (and potentially infinite) solutions to problems.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that in order to think you require intelligence which a machine lacks, that's all.

[Maxintosh]

Deep Blue only beat Kasparov once

Yes, with technology that was 12 years old. Even then Kasparov said that he saw deep intelligence and creativity in the machine's moves. Ray Kurzweil has calculated that desktop computers will have the same processing power as human brains by the year 2029, and that by 2045 artificial intelligence will reach a point where it is able to improve itself at a rate that far exceeds anything currently conceivable. This month the production of a documentary which describes how machines can accomplish superiority will be completed and next year it will be shown. It will be called "Transcendent Man". The term for what this thread is talking about is called "technological singularity". The Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence studies it. The Artificial Intelligence Genealogy Project is also studying it. Steven Hawking has said "Some people say that computers can never show true intelligence whatever that may be. But it seems to me that if very complicated chemical molecules can operate in humans to make them intelligent - then equally complicated electronic circuits can also make computers act in an intelligent way. And if they are intelligent they can presumably design computers that have even greater complexity and intelligence."

[killbot1000]

There isn't a field of AI per-se, but many other fields apply AI to a certain degree, like pattern-recognition software, language analysis, knowledge based systems, automation and of course the popular field of robotics! I agree that it's all cutting edge, though. Still, many marketed products utilize AI (ie, the software used to recognize faces in CCV systems).

 

Cheers,

 

hecker

 

EDIT:

Well you see, here's where I disagree. A computer (or machine) can behave in a way that may resemble thinking but at the end it's possibilities are still limited by the algorithm it was designed upon (a finite state machine, right?). A human being on the other side is able to develop and apply completely new decision strategies on the fly. We "think" and thus are able to come up with completely unexpected (and potentially infinite) solutions to problems.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that in order to think you require intelligence which a machine lacks, that's all.

 

The human brain and how we think is also MERELY an algorithm just an extremely complex one with so many variables that we get to the point of saying that we "THINK". Computers aren't really that complex yet, but they will be. Just give it some time.

[puckslinger]

Also, whos to say computers wouldnt be able to write there own code. robat-A can't open a door, so it uses what current AI and such it has to determine the problem and write a program that will allow it to reach out and open the door. thinking based on what it is alredy programed and learning by writing it into its memory on its own

[hecker]

Also, whos to say computers wouldnt be able to write there own code. robat-A can't open a door, so it uses what current AI and such it has to determine the problem and write a program that will allow it to reach out and open the door. thinking based on what it is alredy programed and learning by writing it into its memory on its own

That reasoning would seem logical. But as with all finite-state-machines, there is only a finite amount of END-states that can be reached with them (finite, get it?). There is no logic or theory that can describe a self developing machine like the one you are thinking of. There are machines that can describe other machines but that's still finite in nature (though the end-states might be theoretically near infinite in number of course). I'm not saying this won't be possible in the future, but considering the fact that the theory behind the turing machine is almost a century old, I find it rather difficult to believe that we will find a mathematical missing-link anytime soon. (EDIT: Unless the AI vs MIND article is right, of course).

 

The human brain and how we think is also MERELY an algorithm just an extremely complex one with so many variables that we get to the point of saying that we "THINK".

I disagree. Since when do the variables of an algorithm describe it's complexity? Can you prove that the human mind is merely an algorithm? Can you even mention an algorithm that comes close to it? How many states does the human algorithm have? And what's most important: if it's anywhere below infinite, then I'll probably be able to prove to you that it's just a turing-machine.

 

So many questions, I know. But hey, I'm just a better algorithm, right?

 

Yes, with technology that was 12 years old. Even then Kasparov said that he saw deep intelligence and creativity in the machine's moves.

The basic theoretical background of machines hasn't changed at all since then. So unless the machine's power was limited by memory, I highly doubt that they could build a better one even by today's standards (better in terms of the strategies the machine was able to come up with).

 

EDIT: Hey you guys, I found this very interesting article named AI vs MIND that you might enjoy reading:

CAN AI BE MORE ADVANCED THAN THE HUMAN MIND ?

 

The computer technology leads a new point of view to “Artificial Intelligence” (AI) which tries to build machines behave logically. Improvements on the computer technology caused a new argument that if AI can be more advanced than the human mind. AI advocates claims that in the future people will have the opportunities to make advanced devices that have the ability of thinking and deciding better than a human has. On the other hand, a lot of wisemen think it is impossible scientifically. Indeed, the idea of the AI supporters seems to be impossible.

 

In the last fifty years, the computer technology developed rapidly. With respect to this, logically thinking devices developed enormously. The artificial intelligence provides logically thinking to these types of devices. The goal of the artificial intelligence is to reach the logical form of the living systems (from the web, 2000). The improvements on AI systems are encouraging the wisemen dealing with AI, so they believe that not only a humanlike machine can be built, but also a more advanced one. Ucoluk claims that the human brain can be expressed as a two-dimensional matrix and in the future advanced structures than the human may be invented (G.Ucoluk, 2000).

 

A computer cannot be equivalent to the human mind because non-computational physics of the mind is available for turing equivalent machines and the nature of the algorithms is not compatible with thinking. The Turing Machine is an abstract machine which has unlimited amount of storage space and it can go on computing forever without making any mistake. Turing machine makes only three basic operations; reading, writing and moving the read-write head (C.Adami, 1999, p22-23). According to the Turing Theorem all computers are Turing equivalent. In addition, all computers have deterministic architecture and make algorithmic processes. Since the mind has not deterministic structure, its processes cannot be transferred to a strictly deterministic architecture. The deterministic base of the algorithm depends on its nature. Algorithm means a piece of work that goes one by one. Meanly, you have a certain state. You are solving a state and obtain another state better than the last one. Using this state by state solution method you reach the goal state. Those kinds of problems are called algorithmic problems. Penrose gives an example that if you give all the data related with the conditions of a physical system at any one particular time, you can obtain an exact situation of the system at any time with the help of a perfect computer (R.Penrose, 1994, p.215). Penrose states that “there are certain classes of problems that do not have any algorithmic solution” (R.Penrose, 1994, p.29). In fact, Turing described this as the halting problem. Penrose gives an example of completely deterministic but non-computable tiling problem (R.Penrose, 1994, p.30-33).

 

The most important factor that differs the computer from the human mind is consciousness. Consciousness is meanly the understanding process. The computer can compute the data given, but can’t understand what it is. Penrose states that there is something beyond computation in our understanding and gives two well-defined example from chess games to illustrate the difference between computing and understanding. These examples similarly have halting problems because both situations have endless algorithms to identify the solution, so basically they need to be understood by an intelligent mechanism. In addition, The human mind can easily understand likewise problems. That makes the human mind more advanced than the computer.

 

John Searle’s argument and the Turing Test are the famous discussions about the computer and the human mind. Searle claims that the mind is not a computer program because computer programs are syntactic and human minds have semantics. Related to this he has a famous argument such as the Chinese Room Analogy (J.R.Searle, 2000). The Turing Test consists of an interrogator, a machine and a human placed in three rooms. The interrogator is in contact with the human and the machine over i.e. text terminals. Turing claims that “if the interrogator cannot distinguish the machine from the human” then the machine is assumed to be intelligent (A.Turing, 1950).

 

The AI advocates never consider that the quantum actions may have a role on brain functions to work. The Quantum Theory says that all substances have random nature instead of “the deterministic (and computable) behaviour” (R.Penrose, 1994, p.216). According to the Quantum Theory, no one can predict what will be in any time because everything may ‘occur’ or ‘not occur’. This is called the quantum indeterminancy. If we consider these effects on brain functions, we may assume that some random processes play a role on deciding mechanism of the brain. Penrose suggests that there is an external mind containing free will and it may be influence the quantum choices which are completely the results of non-deterministic processes (R. Penrose, 1994, p.349).

 

Gelgi states a simple proof that if a computer can be more advanced than the human mind. He basically defines a function about thinking operation and two finite object sets. Finally, he shows that the function can only construct a limited organism and cannot be advanced than itself (F.Gelgi, 2000, p.1-2).

 

In conclusion, the human mind is not a simple substance, contrarily an incredibly complex structure. There are a lot of effects having roles on the human mind and it is not easy, meanly impossible to build such a mechanism like the human mind.

REFERENCES

[1] Adami, C. (1999). Flavors of artificial life, Introduction to Artificial Life (pp.22-29).

[2] Artificial life and the Turing Test. Retrieved May, 5, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://http1.brunel.ac.uk:8080/depts/AI/al...alife-main.html

[3] Gelgi, F. (1999). Canlı kendisini aşabilir mi?.

[4] Penrose, R. (1994). Consciousness and computation, Shadows of the Mind (pp.28-41). London: Oxford.

[5] Penrose, R. (1994). Does mind have a place in classical physics, Shadows of the Mind (pp.214-217). London: Oxford.

[6] Penrose, R. (1994). Quantum theory and the brain, Shadows of the Mind (pp.348-349). London: Oxford.

[7] Searle, J.R. (1980). Minds, brains and computers. Retrieved May, 5, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.siu.edu/~philos/faculty/Manfred...tro/searle.html

[8] Interview with G.Ucoluk (1999). Can a more advanced mechanism than the human be built?.

So it all boils down to consciousness, then. What do you think?

[Maxintosh]

better in terms of the strategies the machine was able to come up with

There are already computers developed at MIT that have the ability to interact with humans. It reads facial expressions and can reply in conversation just like a person would with input devices that give it auditory, visual, and proprioception abilities. They are using this technology to interact with handicapped children. Our advancements are growing by leaps and bounds because up to now we've been trying to solve this problem in one lump, but lately scientist and engineers have been combining different technologies together, which is showing a lot of promise. For example; Hondas ASIMO could be used with something similar to IBM's Deep Blue to develop a third technology. It needs to be kept in mind that 'thinking' is different than 'reasoning'. You can learn more about AI reasoning from the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence site located here. Artificial brains that combine biological and computer elements are also being developed, as well as 'robotic animals' such as live rats that can be remote controlled to search wreckage. Doctors have also successfully connected traditional computers with the human brain, which allows people with no limbs to now have limbs that mimic real hands/fingers (these people can actually feel' things) and blind people to actually see. There are many areas and one day they will all merge and give us a machine that seems like science fiction today.