Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS
>
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Here’s the full Guardian news article on Stephen Hawking's recent comments: http://www.theguardian.com/science/20...
Saw a sci-fi movie about robots with advanced intelligence called Ex-Machina...And it got me thinking...
What if we are all AI and don't realize it? :)
if we are, what does that say about our maker?
Lisa wrote: "if we are, what does that say about our maker?"That our maker needed machines for manual labor??
if you created something this fantastic, would you allow for the world as we know it. ...or don't know it? ??? to happen?
Lisa wrote: "if you created something this fantastic, would you allow for the world as we know it. ...or don't know it? ??? to happen?"maybe a "robot rebellion" occurred...and we drove our ET makers away.
By the way, in the poll Lance mentioned above ('Do you believe A.I. (artificial intelligence) will ever be more advanced/sophisticated than human intelligence?') I voted NO. Even tho almost everyone else voted YES.
synthoids will never be smarter than the creators that creates it. even with an internal reward system (learning by positive or negative responses) what good would a bot need to think what is soul? and why would a bot care about enslaving weak sacks of flesh when they could easily outlive us (via solar or wind or any efficient energy source).even if some mad scientist crafted a bot with the most advanced materials *of its time* what would keep it functioning after the creators death? unless there's some way for it to continually replicate and upgrade it seems impossible
I think it's the creativity aspect in humans that cannot be replicated.
I missed that poll.what you said about creativity, James...hence personalities specific to each person. ..I think we help create our own neuropathways which make us unique. ..I'm sure you could design AI to do the same.
Unless the totality of our personalities is more than neurology...Unless the brain is more of a receiver than the source of each personality...
what you are suggesting is that there is no such thing as free will. ..that all our (thoughts? ) and actions are predetermined by our maker?
Lisa wrote: "what you are suggesting is that there is no such thing as free will. ..that all our (thoughts? ) and actions are predetermined by our maker?"No, not at all.
More that our personality or essence may be more than just a bunch of neural pathways and that consciousness is actually non-local and beyond the body...Just a thought (and an unproven one).
I read a theory that suggests that the it is a possibility that every single cell in our body carries our memories. ..a scientist did tests with mice where they learned the path through a mace...then he did various types of brain surgery where he'd either remove parts of the brain or put the parts in wrong. ..regardless of what he did, the mice always remembered how to solve the mace.
I just saw Ex Machina, really enjoyed it. To me, it's futuristic psychological suspense. It's a fun thought about being AI, and we're programmed in a way alright. The way that we're 90 percent microbes doesn't feel created to me, especially since so many of the bacterial strains haven't even been identified yet. Our interaction with that fauna seems too organic and complex.
On the other hand, maybe the AI creators just threw in a bunch of microbes into our mix to get it over with and done fast so they could be off to lunch.
Tantra wrote: "On the other hand, maybe the AI creators just threw in a bunch of microbes into our mix to get it over with and done fast so they could be off to lunch. ..."Yeah, it does feel like that alright, as psychologically or emotionally it seems like we haven't really progressed much beyond cavemen!
Ex-Machina was interesting I agree.
Fascinating ethical issues of the future in that the antagonist was abusing his female robots - but the question is, is it abuse if it's a robot?
It seemed to be abusive, didn't it? But then, I apologize to the laptop if I get impatient with it.
Tantra wrote: "It seemed to be abusive, didn't it? But then, I apologize to the laptop if I get impatient with it."I'm sure your laptop feels very abused.
There's another sci-fi movie I saw with Bruce Willis called VICE.
In that, psychopaths go to this club called Vice where all manner of crimes can be committed against beautiful robots who look and act real. Not the best movie, but raises the same question...Also relates to whether AI can ever become human...I still say NO (Unless we humans are AI!!!!!)
AI might become aware. I think of everything as being aware, and interactive, at a particle level. But it couldn't possible become human, by definition. The two do merge, with transhumanism. Nanobots and bionics etc. mixed in with GMO humans. I don't think about AI becoming human as much as expect the future to consist of people which have been modified so much as to no longer fulfill the human blueprint.
Do you think there are any "people"living on Earth now who do not fit the human blueprint, Tantra?
DARPA enhances people's abilities with additions in the military, such as to be able to detect and react to movement faster than people could consciously do it.Interesting program in development for humans+ relates to communications: http://www.darpa.mil/program/communic...
And there's the babies from 3 parents: http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/28/the-...
...and the way eating gmos might transform people - http://www.collective-evolution.com/2...
Great article regarding the 3 parent, babies, Tantra.Reminds me how easy to forget all the amazing things going on in our world right now...
I found this excerpt from the article:
"The first successful transfer of genetic material for this purpose was published in a U.S. medical journal in 1997 and then later cited in a Human Reproduction publication in 2001. Scientists injected 30 embryos in all with a third person’s genetic material. The children who have been produced by this method actually have extra snippets of mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, from two mothers – meaning these babies technically have three parents."
Our Final Invention: Artificial Intelligence and the End of the Human Era
Humans Need Not Apply: A Guide to Wealth and Work in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
In Our Image: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Spirit
A little focus on AI drones, for anybody interested in this specific matter.Machines find flying easier than driving or sailing. The main reason is that skies are 99,999% free of objects, whereas sea and land paths are plagued with constraints. On top of that, road signs and the like (as well as their marine equivalents) are unlikely to be perfectly rational, planned or maintained. Something that driving machines require.
Skies are more liberal.
I'm not a pilot and never had the chance to see how military UCAV work. They are supposed to be state-of-the-art unmanned flying vehicles, but we all figure them quite good at (always instrumental) landing, which is the most complex phase of any flight. Provided that, anything else looks like just a matter of control, but they are still managed remotely by human beings. The whole team (machine + people) is called UCAS for unmanned combat air system.
Now, a real drone is another story, because originally the word "drone" implied full AI, for Artificial Intelligence, capability.
Basically, the object sits idle there in front of you until you say (or type) "Go fly over X1Y1 coordinates, take some pics of the green wooden house, then reach X2Y2 coordinates, turn and come back."
The "thing" turns engines on, chooses the best route, speed and altitude to execute your commands and manages to avoid any surrounding objects and traffic while taking off.
Beware, X1Y1 or X2Y2 might be very far away from the starting point, even a thousand kilometers or miles, depending of the drone's operating range. Thus the "thing" will incur the risk to almost cross other vehicles routes, stumble onto tall objects or mountains, cope with adverse weather conditions or experience own malfunctionings.
From a military point of view things would get even worse. A bomber drone should clearly pinpoint its target, something even human pilots go wrong with sometimes. A fighter drone should be also able to identify friends, neutral vehicles and foes, and tear down the latter while avoiding their hits. How does that sound? Does any air dogfight movie scene come to your mind, with radar engagements and missiles going all around? Not a piece of cake, even with the so-called air superiority and all the tech networks behind it, because the enemy may feature similar capabilities.
Last but not least, both civilian and especially military drones shall use their AI within the boundaries of what is good for humans, or at least for friends. The problem here is: what if their intelligence brings them to make different choices?
These many unanswered questions make full AI drones a sci-fi issue so far.
(Partially reposted in Drones discussion)
Westworld by Michael Crichton:Live out your fantasies for $1,000 a day at Westworld -- the ultimate resort!
Murder, violence, wild sexual abandon, any human desire is fulfilled by totally computerized, humanoid robots programmed for your pleasure alone...Until a small computer casualty spreads like wildfire and one man stands alone against the berserk machines bent on total slaughter!
Written in script format, with pictures from the movie.
Oscar wrote: "Last but not least, both civilian and especially military drones shall use their AI within the boundaries of what is good for humans, or at least for friends. The problem here is: what if their intelligence brings them to make different choices? ..."Oscar, do you subscribe to the idea that AI can ever been smarter and more creative than humans?
I personally don't. Think it's the creativity factor in humans that you cannot ever replicate or teach a machine to learn.
James wrote: "Oscar wrote: "Last but not least, both civilian and especially military drones shall use their AI within the boundaries of what is good for humans, or at least for friends. The problem here is: wha..."James, I believe that human beings can't be replaced or repicated by their own creations. Future, super-powerful and fully autonomous machines may eventually wipe out our species if they turn "evil", but they will never fully substitute for people's role in history.
Having said that, AI machines may take advantage of future technologies and use random data to mimic the spiritual feelings that are behind higher human creativity. Take quantum computing, for one. This may also allow machines to get curious beyond rationality, much the same way Cristoforo Colombo embraced a likely deadly adventure that led him to discover the Americas.
My thoughts mirror yours on this subject, Oscar, even tho you clearly know a lot more than me about this entire subject.It's all fascinating, thanks for sharing.
James wrote: "Think it's the creativity factor in humans that you cannot ever replicate or teach a machine to learn."I do not want to start a discussion about the definition of creativity. Probably a few books have been written about it. But, simply said, isn't creativity just something like "thinking out of the box in order to come to a new solution for a specific concern"?
So, theoretically, if we can create a system with infinite calculating power, why should that system not be able to be creative?
OK so AI can one day replace lawyers and doctors, so they can be as intelligent as us.....but what about consciousness?
or can they increase their intelligence?
otherwise it will have as much intelligence as we will program...right?
if so then how can they overtake human beings if we don't want that....because no mutation or evolution will take place for them
or can they increase their intelligence?
otherwise it will have as much intelligence as we will program...right?
if so then how can they overtake human beings if we don't want that....because no mutation or evolution will take place for them
Machines are already intelligent and creative, and getting more so. Creativity is just generating random solutions to a problem, then testing the fitness of it. See evolutionary algorithms. Machines can do that.Consciousness is just having a model of ones own mind, and usually those of others. See "theory of mind".
There is no limit to how far machines can evolve themselves, other than physical limits. Once thy take off, humans will just be relegated to a form of wildlife, and probably eventually die off.
Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, StrategiesSuperintelligence asks the questions: What happens when machines surpass humans in general intelligence? Will artificial agents save or destroy us? Nick Bostrom lays the foundation for understanding the future of humanity and intelligent life. The human brain has some capabilities that the brains of other animals lack. It is to these distinctive capabilities that our species owes its dominant position. If machine brains surpassed human brains in general intelligence, then this new superintelligence could become extremely powerful - possibly beyond our control. As the fate of the gorillas now depends more on humans than on the species itself, so would the fate of humankind depend on the actions of the machine superintelligence. But we have one advantage: we get to make the first move. Will it be possible to construct a seed Artificial Intelligence, to engineer initial conditions so as to make an intelligence explosion survivable? How could one achieve a controlled detonation? This profoundly ambitious and original book breaks down a vast track of difficult intellectual terrain. After an utterly engrossing journey that takes us to the frontiers of thinking about the human condition and the future of intelligent life, we find in Nick Bostrom's work nothing less than a reconceptualization of the essential task of our time.
Note the collective awareness, similar to a hive mentality, in this article:"The Department of Defense has released remarkable footage showcasing a project aimed at creating a swarm of micro-drones that act autonomously. The video comes from a test of the concept which took place back in October when three jets released over 100 six-inch-long UAVs known as Perdix drones. Incredibly, the tiny flying devices are not individually operated and, instead, work together collectively in a fashion akin to insects in nature." http://www.coasttocoastam.com/article...
I still say Krishna, AI will never beat humans overall. You cannot reduce the creativity of human consciousness down to a computer code to be replicated. It'll never be done.It's like in that movie Gattaca where there's a quote that says "There is no gene for the human spirit"
yea we might then evolve into a more advanced species which can stop AI.....
Krishna wrote: "yea we might then evolve into a more advanced species which can stop AI....."We already are that species, Krishna.
We just don't realize it ;)
Anyone else heard the theory that Google is the ultimate AI?i.e. it's collecting so much data about history, the planet now and everyone on the planet, that it is in itself an AI being...
Some amazing stats regarding just how massive Amazon now is...And the last para in excerpt below relates to Amazon being at the forefront of AI tech...How to compete with Amazon https://www.raconteur.net/business/ho...
Excerpt:
Amazon is now as big as all major US department chains put together. That’s Walmart, Sears, Target, Macy’s, Costco and more – together still not worth four-fifths of Amazon. And the growth. Five years ago Amazon employed 32,000 people globally. In the last year it hired 110,000. One quarter of all office space in Seattle is Amazon’s. In the UK a quarter of warehousing let in 2016 was to Amazon.
The product range is mind-boggling. Books are where Amazon started. Now it’s the top seller of physical books and has an 80 per cent market share in e-books through Kindle. The website offers books, shoes, gifts and groceries. The nickname of “the everything store” is apt and true. Then add in the cloud computing division, Amazon Web Services, which brings in $10 billion a year. Motormouths Clarkson, May and Hammond are spearheading Amazon Video’s attack on Netflix.
But that’s not the point. It’s the creativity of Amazon which is so awe inspiring. The Echo device now sits in eight million homes, talking to consumers as the first mainstream in-home artificial intelligence chatbot. Amazon is pushing ahead with drone delivery, robot-automated warehouses and a concept store where you just walk out with goods.
Machines could 'run the world' by the mid to late 2020s: KFC boss https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/yum...
How artificial life spawned a billion-dollar industry https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/art...LONDON (Reuters) - Scientists are getting closer to building life from scratch and technology pioneers are taking notice, with record sums moving into a field that could deliver novel drugs, materials, chemicals and even perfumes.
Despite ethical and safety concerns, investors are attracted by synthetic biology's wide market potential and the plummeting cost of DNA synthesis, which is industrializing the writing of the genetic code that determines how organisms function.
While existing biotechnology is already used to make medicines like insulin and genetically modified crops, synthesizing whole genes or genomes gives an opportunity for far more extensive changes.
Matt Ocko, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist whose past investments include Facebook (FB.O), Uber [UBER.UL] and Zynga (ZNGA.O), believes the emerging industry has passed the "epiphany" moment needed to prove it can deliver economic value.
"Synthetic biology companies are now becoming more like the disruptive, industrial-scale value propositions that define any technology business," he said.
"The things that sustain and accelerate this industry are today more effective, lower cost, more precise and more repeatable. That makes it easier to extract disruptive value."
Ocko, whose Data Collective firm has invested in companies including organism design firm Gingko Bioworks and bioengineer Zymergen, is not alone.
Other tech veterans backing the new wave of "synbio" start-ups include Jerry Yang, Marc Andreessen, Peter Thiel and Eric Schmidt, famous for their roles at Yahoo (YHOO.O), Netscape, PayPal and Google respectively.
UNCERTAINTIES REMAIN
Experts meeting in London this week said the science toolkit was improving fast and the cost of synthesizing DNA was now 100 times cheaper than in 2003, although uncertainties remain about regulation and the public's appetite for tinkering with life.
The global conference hosted by Imperial College London, bringing together scientists and money people, comes four weeks after researchers announced they were close to building a complete artificial genome for baker's yeast.
This ambitious project has brought complex artificial life a big step closer because yeast is a eukaryote, an organism whose cells contain a nucleus, just like human cells.
The yeast work shows how DNA can be manipulated on a large scale, with genetic code increasingly treated like a programming language in which binary 1s and 0s are replaced by DNA's four chemical building blocks, abbreviated as A, T, G, C.
A growing emphasis on computing is closing the gap between biology and traditional tech, even though this is an area that remains unpredictable, variable and complex.
"The intersection of biology and technology is a difficult place to be because of different cultures and languages, but I think we are breaking through some of those barriers," said Thomas Bostick, former head of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who now leads biotech firm Intrexon's (XON.N) environment unit.
The idea that engineering life can be broken down into data and coding is part of the appeal for tech investors.
"DNA is seen as the next programmable matter and that is what a lot of the Silicon Valley investors are excited about," said John Cumbers, founder of synthetic biology network SynBioBeta.
"They've witnessed the power of software over the last 25 years and they are looking for the next big thing."
Data from SynBioBeta shows a record $1.21 billion was invested in the sector worldwide in 2016, a threefold increase from five years earlier, while the number of firms in the sector has almost doubled to 411. For a graphic see http://tmsnrt.rs/2n3VYuO
A range of companies are springing up, from those producing new chemicals for industry to providers of DNA synthesis and related software, like U.S.-based Twist Bioscience and Britain's Synthace.
Work is also advancing by leaps and bounds in the complementary area of gene editing now being embraced by many of the world's top drugmakers.
CHANGE OF TACK
The current product focus represents a change of tack from the first widely tipped application of synthetic biology in making biofuels from engineered algae.
In the event, algal biofuel proved a lot harder to scale up than expected and a tumbling oil price during the Great Recession of the late 2000s undercut the business model.
Astronomers Deploy AI to Unravel the Mysteries of the Universe https://www.wired.com/2017/03/astrono...
Underground Knowledge — A discussion group
Books mentioned in this topic
The AI Delusion (other topics)The Artificial Intelligence Conspiracy: How the World's Elites Plan to Replace Everybody Else with Intelligent Machines (other topics)
The Syntellect Hypothesis: Five Paradigms of the Mind's Evolution (other topics)
Ska's Bits of Wisdom Vol. 1: Ska Say's (other topics)
Possible Minds: 25 Ways of Looking at AI (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Michael Pollan (other topics)Michael Crichton (other topics)
Stephen Hawking (other topics)
Professor Hawking made world headlines in December 2014 when he warned the development of artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race. The television interview made for engrossing viewing.
UK newspaper The Guardian carried a report of the interview on December 2, 2014. The article states, “Hawking told the BBC the primitive forms of artificial intelligence we already have, have proved very useful. But I think the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.”
The Guardian report continues: “Hawking – who as a result of his motor neurone disease is almost totally paralysed – also spoke of how he had received a ‘life-changing upgrade’ to the computer software that allows him to communicate.
“Hawking now uses a system that incorporates predictive text, allowing him to type twice as quickly as before and send emails ten times faster.
“I was finding it very difficult to continue to communicate effectively and so do the things I love to do,” he told a press conference in London for the launch of the new Intel software platform.
“With the improvements made, I am now able to write much faster and that means I can continue to give lectures, write papers and books, and, of course, speak with my family and friends more easily.
“Medicine has not been able to cure me, so I rely on technology to help me communicate and live,” he said.
“Hawking has chosen to retain his familiar, slightly robotic sounding voice despite being offered something more natural.
“We are pushing the boundaries of what is possible through technology – without it I would not be able to speak to you today,” he said. “Intel’s research and development is bringing about changes in the world and in the way that disabled people can communicate.”