0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
quote:I believe we will one day be able to create computers/machines that think
quote:I believe we will one day be able to create computers/machines that think (I gather there are computers that already do at a very basic rudimentary level)
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverI believe it comes down to the separation of brain & mind that I spoke of in the "free will" post.If we built a machine that could apparently think for itself, how would we know that it was actually aware of its thoughts? No matter how sophisticated the machine, no matter how highly-developed its apparent self-awareness, what proof could we ever have that it really was sentient?It was questions such as these when I was studying AI as part of my comp sci degree that prompted me to turn to psychology... and I still don't have any answers!
quote:Originally posted by neilepPerhaps we are designed to not discover the truth about ourselves. Maybe it's an impossibility !
quote: However, I believe that in our distant future , the decision to reconcile the problems of deciding about sentience will be fundamental .
quote:Originally posted by neilepMachines of our creation I would imagine would always be designed to be subordinate to man, and though the possibility could arise when they reach the ability to demand rights ,I would expect them to insist upon machine rights and cite human rights as a model.Do you think that despite out best efforts to put ' safety valves ' into the thinking processes of computers that we may make them so advanced one day ,that sentience may happen by consequence rather than design ?
quote:One interesting speculation I saw somewhere was that the first computer program to pass the Turing test may well be a computer virus, or similar piece of malicious code, that is trying to convince an Internet user (possibly on a peer to peer application) that they should download a piece of code, and they do that by convincing the user that the user is actually conversing with a real human being offering real human advice.
quote:Originally posted by neilepI just wonder that even though we may design them to be subordinate, despite the rigidity of the programming that there still may occur a random process that may be akin to a free thought. Something similar to which Dr Eth alluded to in his remark aboutthe event at Brunel University.
quote:Originally posted by neilepI very much enjoy reading another_someones and Dr Eths incites to this (humble mode)
quote:Originally posted by ThondarI think we could design and make a complete system (software and hardware) that could fool a person in some ways, but just in some ways, I don't think that a computer will be even nearly as a human because we way to much complicated.Of course we can make'em to learn, but to learn what? that is the thing I've always stoped to think and the reason is even ourselves as humans, as live being we don't understand many thing in us, on many ways that is. Physicaly we don't see clearly many things that happens to us, but what I'd like to know more is about our mind, which is a mistery not just as a problem resolver, but as a whole "thinking" process that make us act, see, feel and finally think as we do.If we don't know how we work, how we'll be able to teach some other think to do the same things, or learn things as we do.Music should strike fire from the heart of man, and bring tears from the eyes of woman. LVB
quote:The question is whether we either could, or would wish to, build something that was exactly like a human being?
quote:Originally posted by another_someoneIncites or insights? 
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverquote:The question is whether we either could, or would wish to, build something that was exactly like a human being?That is akin to the perennial question about why do people climb mountains. The answer being, because it's there.It's not so much a case of "Why should we?" as "Can we?".
quote:Originally posted by neilepI think it's relatively safe to assume that we will not be able to create a machine that is exactly like a human being.It might resemble humanity but will never live it. Only human beings can do that !
quote:However, the entertainment industry of the future may seek to create robots with humanistic qualities !...the possibilities of human-robots are endless.
quote:As individual proof of concepts, yes; but are we likely to mass produce these things if they have no utility, that is another matter.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverA machine wouldn't necessarily have to look like a human to have human qualities.
quote: The human body is not a particularly efficient design for most tasks we perform. It is a multi-function tool. Historically we have designed machines that our physiology finds easier to use, not necessarily for the efficiency of the machine concerned. These days, however, that is changing. With the development of more "intelligent" machines, human intervention is decreased so the machine can be designed to be more efficient.
quote:Just take housework as an example. If we wanted to design a robot for that task, it's not very likely that it would be humanoid. However, much housework has to be done in situ - for instance dish-washing. What is the point of building a mobile machine to do that? Far better to have a stationary machine that the dishes are brought to; unless, of course, the machine can collect the dishes and then go to a spot where it can plug in to the water supply.However, an intelligent machine that can tell what type of items have been put in it for washing would be sensible. It wouldn't look much like a housewife though! I think we are far more likely to have less-complex machines designed for specific tasks, and with just enough intelligence to be able to perform those tasks.
quote:I have no problem with any of the above, but it does seems different from your earlier comment that appeared to assert that if people were capable of building very human-like machines that they would inevitably do so.
quote:It does not need to look like a human to have some human qualities, but if it were to have all the qualities of a human then it must also look like a human.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverA double amputee doesn't look exactly like the average person, but is still human. Take that argument further. Cut off all of a person's limbs and you are left with a torso & a head. Still human though.
quote:Add prosthetic limbs. Still human? What about transplanting an artificial heart into someone? Does that make them non-human?
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaver quote:It does not need to look like a human to have some human qualities, but if it were to have all the qualities of a human then it must also look like a human.I have to disagree with that statement.
quote:It all depends upon how completely you wish to mimic the entire range of human activity, or merely replicate certain selected functions of human activity. If you need to replicate everything a human does, and perform all the functions exactly as a human would perform such functions, then you must be in all discernible ways, a human (and that includes not deviating in appearance from a human).The reality is I cannot see any reason why anyone would wish to accurately replicate the totality of human function, so that limitation is not really a limitation for that which we might actually wish to achieve with our robots.
quote:Originally posted by DoctorBeaverI misunderstood what you meant by "qualities". I was thinking as a psychologist not a biologist.
quote:Originally posted by neilep The only reason why I think the machine might cite human desires and rights as a model for it's own self is purely because the machine itself is the progeny of mankind. It is designed, constructed and programmed by humans to exist in the human world and therefore its experiences are to be of service to humans in our world....though one would expect it to also favour rights related to it's own manifestation too...ie: a gallon of high grade WD40 every three weeks !
quote:Originally posted by Thondar I think we could design and make a complete system (software and hardware) that could fool a person in some ways, but just in some ways, I don't think that a computer will be even nearly as a human because we way to much complicated.