[Kryptid]

What do you mean fairies aren't real? 

There is no evidence they exist or don't exist.  My point being never rule out something unless you know it is absolute impossible.   In an alternative reality there might be fairies for all we know.  The thought of a fairy being a past experience observed.  Who is to say it isn't ?

It is bit like saying there is no God, prove there isn't or prove there is ?  Both a seemingly impossible task, however I found the answer by using my logic to get one answer.

I don't rule things out that might be possible, but I also don't think it's a wise move to accept a claim as true without evidence for the claim.

AI can't give an answer to a paradox, natural intelligence can.

Evidence for that claim is going to be necessary.

[guest39538]

Evidence for that claim is going to be necessary.

Ask Sophia to give an answer to a paradox.  Ask a human , a human will attempt it although they might answer subjectively.

[Kryptid]

Ask Sophia to give an answer to a paradox.  Ask a human , a human will attempt it although they might answer subjectively.

Concluding that AI cannot answer particular questions because Sophia cannot is akin to concluding that no one can perform a successful heart transplant because a 5 year-old cannot.

[guest39538]

Ask Sophia to give an answer to a paradox.  Ask a human , a human will attempt it although they might answer subjectively.

Concluding that AI cannot answer particular questions because Sophia cannot is akin to concluding that no one can perform a successful heart transplant because a 5 year-old cannot.

No its not, in simple terms I do not think AI could make up there own theory that was plausible .

[Kryptid]

No its not

Actually, it is. They're both different forms of the same kind of fallacious reasoning: you are claiming that the inability of a subset  (Sophia) of a greater set (AI) to perform a particular task (resolve a paradox) is proof that no member of the greater set can perform that particular task. You are taking the properties of a specific case and assuming them to be true for all cases. That is not rational.

in simple terms I do not think AI could make up there own theory that was plausible .

Then it's just your opinion, not actual evidence for anything.

[guest39538]

Then it's just your opinion, not actual evidence for anything.

I believe any form of AI can only be a condition of programming.  AI answers to the program, natural does not conform to anything.  Cognitive freedom as opposed to cognitive control.

[Kryptid]

I believe any form of AI can only be a condition of programming.  AI answers to the program, natural does not conform to anything.  Cognitive freedom as opposed to cognitive control.

I suppose you can demonstrate that "natural does not conform to anything"?

[guest39538]

I believe any form of AI can only be a condition of programming.  AI answers to the program, natural does not conform to anything.  Cognitive freedom as opposed to cognitive control.

I suppose you can demonstrate that "natural does not conform to anything"?

I am natural , demonstrated.

[Kryptid]

I am natural , demonstrated.

That doesn't demonstrate that your thoughts and decisions don't conform to some form of programming (a combination of instinct and things that you have learned over the course of your life). Even if your mind didn't conform to something else, you haven't demonstrated that artificial intelligence can't be constructed to do the same thing.

[guest39538]

I am natural , demonstrated.

That doesn't demonstrate that your thoughts and decisions don't conform to some form of programming (a combination of instinct and things that you have learned over the course of your life). Even if your mind didn't conform to something else, you haven't demonstrated that artificial intelligence can't be constructed to do the same thing.

A man walks into a bar,

oww, is poor head

Can AI joke without having a joke programmed?

[Kryptid]

A man walks into a bar,

oww, is poor head

Can AI joke without having a joke programmed?

If they are an AI capable of self-reprogramming by learning, I don't see why not. All it would take is the right pattern-recognition software and they could figure out what makes something funny.

[guest39538]

A man walks into a bar,

oww, is poor head

Can AI joke without having a joke programmed?

If they are an AI capable of self-reprogramming by learning, I don't see why not. All it would take is the right pattern-recognition software and they could figure out what makes something funny.

What about love ? 

How could AI ever feel or have a chat up line for example?

[Kryptid]

What about love ? 

How could AI ever feel or have a chat up line for example?

Without knowing what makes us feel, there is no way to know.

[guest39538]

What about love ? 

How could AI ever feel or have a chat up line for example?

Without knowing what makes us feel, there is no way to know.

I consider feelings are conditioned by dependency.   I am not sure that AI could ever develop dependency .  I do not think AI could ever fear death.   But in saying that , dependency is also dependent to situation.  Quite clearly there is much variation involved in most things. Lots of answers to the same thing.

[Kryptid]

I consider feelings are conditioned by dependency.   I am not sure that AI could ever develop dependency .  I do not think AI could ever fear death.   But in saying that , dependency is also dependent to situation.  Quite clearly there is much variation involved in most things. Lots of answers to the same thing.

Come to think of it, AI would have to be able to feel, love, joke and fear death. At least according to what you consider to be AI. You think that 99% of humanity is AI, yet those same 99% are well-capable of having those same feelings that you claim AI should not have.

[guest39538]

You think that 99% of humanity is AI, yet those same 99% are well-capable of having those same feelings that you claim AI should not have.

A good point, but you know me, when I say something it is often being used not according to strict definition.  People have the potential to not have AI and have natural intelligence. What I mean by this, is that the artificial part of intelligence in humans, is most of what they know is not their own thinking, it belongs to somebody else.  Most people do not even understand what they think they know because their picture is often not the same as the original thinker.
However technology is improving to help with this such as VR to share thoughts to see the same picture.

[Bored chemist]

Can AI joke without having a joke programmed?

Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_humor

This whole thread seems to be based on TheBox's refusal to accept evidence  and the conventional definitions of natural and artificial.
I suspect the driver for that may be wishful thinking.

  I think I would prefer artificial than pond life, at least means we have a creator and a purpose .

[guest39538]

Can AI joke without having a joke programmed?

Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_humor

This whole thread seems to be based on TheBox's refusal to accept evidence  and the conventional definitions of natural and artificial.
I suspect the driver for that may be wishful thinking.

  I think I would prefer artificial than pond life, at least means we have a creator and a purpose .

Do you accept that evidence can be refuted?

Well then!

[Kryptid]

A good point, but you know me, when I say something it is often being used not according to strict definition.  People have the potential to not have AI and have natural intelligence. What I mean by this, is that the artificial part of intelligence in humans, is most of what they know is not their own thinking, it belongs to somebody else.  Most people do not even understand what they think they know because their picture is often not the same as the original thinker.
However technology is improving to help with this such as VR to share thoughts to see the same picture.

So do 99% of humans have AI or not?

[guest39538]

What about love ? 

How could AI ever feel or have a chat up line for example?

Without knowing what makes us feel, there is no way to know.

I would of thought chemical balances makes us feel ?