A.i. Artificial Inteligence what do you think

[Mahanon 0]

I think that one day Artificial Intelegence will be used in several applications of everyday life, it could carve the way to humanoid machines that would be used from heavy labor to exploration of the Solor System and beyond, course it could be the downfall of Humans but I want to think on the positive side of things. Thinking about it sounds so coolie, I mean Artificial Intelegence could produce new faster computers, be used to control machines, in general make life so much easier on everyone.......

[kap43 0]

A.I. is a very cool subject. But I get turned off when talks of Humanoid beings arise. Sure they could be useful for doing heavy duty jobs, but then wouldn't that just make us weaker? Sure they could do deep space exploration, but is there no honor in dying for humanity anymore?

 

The problem that I see with the whole technology advancement is that we are giving more responsibility and power to machines that most of us do not have the knowlege to manipulate.

 

It would make more sense to power mankind through mankind. I know that I am imposing a very uneasy idea, but why not empower human beings to do and carry out the dreams of humans? Why give the duty to a machine instead? Why not invest the time, energy, and money into ourselves?

 

I don't know, i'm tired right about now. But wouldn't it be great to hear that scientist are working to strengthen and perfect the human body/ mind rather than attempt to recreate a scene from I Robot?

 

I'm a dreamer, but so is anyone else that works today in hopes of making a better tomorrow. I just think that we're going about some things the wrong way... Thanks for listening everyone. Almost have those 30 credits for free hosting now, LOL! Goodnight...

 

 

-KAP

[ChronicLoser 0]

Heh I don't think A.I. would have that great of an impact on humans. In fact, I believe it will have a negative impact, as kap mentioned...because it would downgrade ourselves.Alright first off, why do we need A.I.? Wouldn't a more stable, systematic type of program be more effective than one that will produce arguements as to why 'it' needs to do this, or why 'it' needs to do that? I don't mean that the system with A.I. capabilities will go against us, humans (that's just what happens in Holleywood Sci-Fi movies symbolizing our dependency on machines), but it would be take more energy and money to have a system that takes its time in thinking about how to solve a problem when you can have a system for probably a cheaper price that will automatically solve the problem with the simple 'logic' machines have today. Why would we need to take it to the extreme and allow a system to think for itself? It doesn't make any sense to me. If we are really looking into a very smart mind, we could spend research on altering genetics. If not for all the religious debate, I'm sure scientists would have been able to make everyone super smart/athletic by now. But truthfully, wouldn't making a machine with A.I. capablitlies a sign that humans are trying to recreate life? So in that sense a smarter computer that can learn is just as bad as genetic alterations/cloning. In my opinion, if we want a faster problem-solving object (machine or a lifeform) DNA tampering would be a better option. A.I. is just something humans would find "amusing" from science-fictions, etc.

[Adwodon 0]

A.I really to me means the ability to learn, and I dont see that as a bad thing in machines.For example 'the house of tomorrow' run by A.I, it does your washing / cooking / cleaning all for you during the day your at work. It starts off you program it to do what you want but after a while it starts to know how you like you cloths done, which are your clothes, how you like the house to be, are you a neat freak, or if you find it theraputic to do some yourself, so it will leave it. Also how do you like your food cook, what foods do you like, and when you have guests what to cook for them. So eventually you could just go 'Jeeves' im having a get to get together, blah blah and blah will be here aswell as a new girl, she's a veggie I think, get us some top notch grub kay? And your A.I will check out sainsburies.com and order you some of the finest food and drink you can afford (dont forget it does your finance too) and then get it delievered to the door.Imagine if it kept an eye on you, to keep you healthy, giving you the occasionaly reminder to excercise and if you wanted to get it to only order health food, but possibly keep some tasty treat locked away which you only got when you did a full work out.A.I. doest mean its a person in computer form, sure it may seem it after a while when you could have an intelligent conversation with your house's A.I but unless you taught it how to fly a space ship or calculate Pi to the nearest 1.0x10 - 1000000000 it wouldnt know any better. The difference between A.I would be the initial programming. And im sure that by the time it got to this stage the resources used up would be minimal so dont worry about this.And just because A.I exists doesnt mean it will always be used, im sure that if it were more effective / economic then a simple 'logic machine' would be used instead, for example in doing mathematic calculations, it doesnt need to learn how you like it present really, so logic calculations would be fine.

[marijnnn 0]

i got a.i. at school. they're making progress but they're far from the end.the most know test is where they put a person in one room, and give him a computer. he's in a chatroom with 2 other persons. one of them is a computer. he can ask them questions and he has to guess which one of them is the computer. up to now, the computer fails to act human every time again.imagine the person asking the computer to solve a calculation, like: give me the squareroot of 1184648114681843. the computer has to realise that that is to hard for a regular person to calculate. so he knows the answer, but he can't give it.anyway, i don't think we have to fear for matrix or i robot kinda scenarios for the first 20 years but it is an interesting research area, as it could make a lot of work lighter (and make a lot of jobs obsolte )

[saxsux 0]

I think that AI, would be brilliant in the service of mankind and the world. But what about all these ideas that the Atificial "creature" gains the intelligence to realise that it is superior than its creators? What happens then? It wouldn't be nice to have a Matrix type future.

[Herbert1405241469 0]

the most know test is where they put a person in one room, and give him a computer. he's in a chatroom with 2 other persons. one of them is a computer. he can ask them questions and he has to guess which one of them is the computer.

up to now, the computer fails to act human every time again.

imagine the person asking the computer to solve a calculation, like: give me the squareroot of 1184648114681843. the computer has to realise that that is to hard for a regular person to calculate. so he knows the answer, but he can't give it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What he's referring to is the Turing Test. I found a chatbot that is pretty good at this called alicebot (you can check it out at http://www.alicebot.org/). But there's a difference between a chat program and actual AI. With this chat program, it has literally thousands of responses to key words and phrases that it will search through when the user enters text. So if the user typed "What is your name?" the program would go to the "W" file (this is in alicebot, they might do it differently in other programs) and searches for "what is" then it subsearches for "what is : your name" and then it goes into its "name" variable found in another file, and reports it:

"My name is ";variable_name;"."

 

The problem, though, is that it isn't learning dynamically, with the exception of very generic variables including the person's name with whom the program is talking to, the current topic (which is somewhat buggy), and other various things. It "learns" this data, but since there are only a limited amound of variables set by the programmer, this "learning" is quite limited.

And the program isn't learning new ways of communicating. If the user tells this program the meaning of a word, the program won't remember it for later unless, of course, the programmer enters this into the AI database files.

 

I think that AI, would be brilliant in the service of mankind and the world.

But what about all these ideas that the Atificial "creature" gains the intelligence to realise that it is superior than its creators? What happens then? It wouldn't be nice to have a Matrix type future.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To a certain extent... don't machines already rule our lives? Unless you live out in the country and farm and are not dependant on electricity, how do you think the world would react if suddenly there were no more machines? Not technically AI, but little programs already handle a lot of stuff that was originally done by humans... Accounting software, ATM machines, that little screen that show's you what you're ordering at McDonalds so that you don't have to think as hard when trying to understand what the Cashier is saying ... etc.

[jet 0]

Recently, two classmates and I made a website on AI.. Its at http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ if anyone wants to see it.

Some food for thought about the Turing test - an american philosophy professor gave an example of what could really be happening. There's a room, with someone inside it and a huge phrasebook with questions and answers. A piece of paper with a question on it is handed in to the room, and all the person has to do is search up the question in the phrasebook, write it on the paper and hand it out again. The person doesn't even have to know what the question or answer means.. Do you think this could be what is happening with AI, or do they really understand what is being asked of them?

[saxsux 0]

To a certain extent... don't machines already rule our lives? Unless you live out in the country and farm and are not dependant on electricity, how do you think the world would react if suddenly there were no more machines? Not technically AI, but little programs already handle a lot of stuff that was originally done by humans... Accounting software, ATM machines, that little screen that show's you what you're ordering at McDonalds so that you don't have to think as hard when trying to understand what the Cashier is saying  ... etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats very interesting. You never realise how technology rules our lives until someone points it out to you... also, I've never been to McDonalds (I'm vegetarian) and I live in the country, so we don't have as higher dependency on machines as some people. In the city though, you just take it for granted I guess...

 

 

Some food for thought about the Turing test - an american philosophy professor gave an example of what could really be happening. There's a room, with someone inside it and a huge phrasebook with questions and answers. A piece of paper with a question on it is handed in to the room, and all the person has to do is search up the question in the phrasebook, write it on the paper and hand it out again. The person doesn't even have to know what the question or answer means.. Do you think this could be what is happening with AI, or do they really understand what is being asked of them?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would be up to the programmer wouldn't it? I don't think they need to actually understand it, as long as they can makle the connection. That wat they would be simulating intelligence without actually being intelligent, so we would end up with a Matrix/Terminator type future.

[Herbert1405241469 0]

We had a power outage for about 15 hours a couple weeks ago... It was so annoying, because I kept unconsciously hitting the light switch whenever I went into a room... and hit it again (despite the darkness) on the way out. I guess I have good conservational habits I mean you'd go watch TV to see what was going on with the weather and news (if the area had been knocked out or just a few people)... No TV... "OK," I said, "I'll check out the internet on my laptop. It has a battery... Oh wait, my router is dead " and so on.Yep, you tend to take it for granted... I did spend a lot more time with my family and read a lot though

[Officer Cartman 0]

I really have to agree with Kap43 to an extent. Instead of handing over work which in turn hands over control, we should really be working to make ourselves better rather then take work off our backs. What people don't seem to understand is that by giving jobs completely over to machinary, we are slowly losing control over our society. I mean robots are only going to get more inteligent and we're not changing. Now it will take a while, but they could overtake us. I mean they would be more inteligent and stronger so the human race wouldn't have a purpose anymore.

[Glockmeister1405241492 0]

We technically already have A.I thorugh computer players in games, which need to be programmed by someone, hence there's AI in it.

But what I think you talking about are robots. I don't think robots can really ever take over humans, because by our very nature. We have to program those robots and we make mistakes which means bugs. It is also extremely hard for us at our current technology, to copy nature. You can have a look at
the Biosphere 2 project to have a look at when we tried to copy nature. So don't expect some Arne-looking Terminator some time soon, if ever.

We are weaker as a result of technology, I mean, I don't think we would survive if we were popped straight into the jungle somewhere, most of us would die. But I think technology is the one reason why we are here today, and not extinct since we wouldn't be able to survive, man had to improvise weapons. This, I believe, was the first step to our survival, and why we are 'lord of the animals'

[jkk 0]

Do you think this could be what is happening with AI, or do they really understand what is being asked of them?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That depends what you mean by 'understand'. A question/answer lookup is considered not to be 'intelligent', it's just a database problem (sorry to any database hackers out there, but AI people look on databases the same way that hardware people look on software or Mac users look on Windows ).

 

But then there's Eliza, which understood language syntax but little else. It pretended to be a psychiatrist by turning the user's statements into questions, and adding some bland statement whenever it couldn't. Example:

 

How do you do. Please state your problem.

>> I spend too much time with computers.

Why do you mention computers ?

>> You are one.

Does it please you to believe I am one ?

>> Yes.

You seem to be quite positive.

>> I suppose I am.

How long have you been ?

(from Weizenbaum, 1966)

 

Note the failure to provide a sensible answer in the last question. Did Eliza 'understand'? Most people say no. Do psychiatrists 'understand', or just play the same trick? Now the question gets difficult.

 

The next stage of A.I.is usually considered to be the 'expert system' - one that has been provided with rules by a human expert, and can follow these rules. There have been some stunning commercial successes with rule based systems, but do they represent 'understanding'? Now some people say 'yes', because they clearly represent 'expertise, in some form.

 

And then there's systems that can 'learn' - but in fact, all they do is look for patterns in data, of one kind or another, and turn those into decision making rules. Now we're coming close to what would be considered 'understanding' in a human child. Such systems can adapt to new circumstances better.

 

Finally, 'artificial life' learns rules that aren't decision making rules, but rules of behaviour. It's conceivable that machines will be able to replicate ant behaviour in the near future.

 

Which of these, if any, constitutes 'understanding'? Use up your post quota by telling me what you think, *and why*.

 

There is a whole other strand of debate about A.I. as representing mental states (or 'mental models', if that term doesn't cause too many psychologists to throw up their hands in horror), but I'll leave that for another post.

[kurt18th 0]

Imagine if the government was to one day be controlled by a computer A.I. That would be some trippy stuff. It might even work, but I just don't think people would ever be able to accept the fact that a computer controls their lives. Say if all the nations of the world were to combine into one nation (which would just never happen) the whole A.I. idea might work out.

[Glockmeister1405241492 0]

Imagine if the government was to one day be controlled by a computer A.I. That would be some trippy stuff. It might even work, but I just don't think people would ever be able to accept the fact that a computer controls their lives. Say if all the nations of the world were to combine into one nation (which would just never happen) the whole A.I. idea might work out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doubt that would happen. Ignoring the protest, I don't think our technology will allow that to be fealable, its would take years for A.I, and even then, computers work in patterns, so I don't think they would be capable to fulfilling a role of decision maker.