Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI (Humans)
by xeno6696 
, Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, September 15, 2010, 11:54 (4991 days ago)
Graham Dunstan Martin starts out his attack on materialism by simply attacking whether or not humans could create consciousness. -The crux of his argument is this: -Language itself is imprecise when it deals with the world; and is more imprecise yet when we try to describe experience itself, or 'tacit' knowledge. -Machines can only understand the explicit; therefore they will never understand the tacit. -Therefore, we will never build a true human intelligence based on this fact alone.-Currently I am forced to agree; however I disagree with the statement "never." We are just getting to the point where we can even think of actually building a brain. I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. -The deeper problem would be how to come up with a way that machines could use tacit knowledge. I don't see at present how this can be done; and though I hold the door open to the future, I am firmly in realization of a possible limit. -Martin also points out that there is a gap between the theoreticians in the field of AI and the practitioners; the practitioners seem much more modest in what they think their machines can do, whereas the theoreticians are not.
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"
Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, September 15, 2010, 15:05 (4991 days ago) @ xeno6696
I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. > -IF nano-technology were acting as the biochemical properties of the brain, it MIGHT be possible, but I remain skeptical. Whether it would have the same capability as the human brain, I almost completely disagree. There are a couple of tests that could sort of validate it. One would be the spontaeous generation of thought using unrelated without a pre-generated algorithm to determine the parameters. More simply stated, spontaneous without a human providing the input or the method to disassemble, reassemble, interpret, and create a new idea that has no current frame of reference other than the random data. Call it imagination. The other would be a test to see if the machine was capable of emotional response, which is in its way independent of logical data analysis.
Chapter 1 of \"Does it Matter?\": No such thing as AI
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Thursday, September 16, 2010, 01:43 (4990 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
I know Balance_Maintained would object by saying we would need to construct a biological brain, but I don't see that as necessary for several reasons. > > > > IF nano-technology were acting as the biochemical properties of the brain, it MIGHT be possible, but I remain skeptical. Whether it would have the same capability as the human brain, I almost completely disagree. There are a couple of tests that could sort of validate it. One would be the spontaeous generation of thought using unrelated without a pre-generated algorithm to determine the parameters. More simply stated, spontaneous without a human providing the input or the method to disassemble, reassemble, interpret, and create a new idea that has no current frame of reference other than the random data. Call it imagination. The other would be a test to see if the machine was capable of emotional response, which is in its way independent of logical data analysis.-Both of these things could be easily faked. Hell, sociopaths fake emotional response all the time--in fact they simply copy what they see because they don't actually feel.
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"