Bill Gates said

ToolMaker
Posts
6097
Joined
11/19/2011
Location
Escondido, CA US
Fantasy
762nd
3/7/2017 5:54am
rancor19 wrote:
So, this just occurred to me; Would a computer program have designed a series of nuclear reactors(in a region known for earthquakes/tsunami's) with the emergency generators...
So, this just occurred to me;

Would a computer program have designed a series of nuclear reactors(in a region known for earthquakes/tsunami's) with the emergency generators located on the beach and the backup batteries in the basement?

I don't think so.
Probably, computers do effed up shit all the time.
It amazes me how people are so trusting of computers. Like they are beyond mistakes.
But hey, if you can talk to your phone with perfect results, that's a start.
TM
Rooster
Posts
4430
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton CA
3/8/2017 12:33pm
rancor19 wrote:
So, this just occurred to me; Would a computer program have designed a series of nuclear reactors(in a region known for earthquakes/tsunami's) with the emergency generators...
So, this just occurred to me;

Would a computer program have designed a series of nuclear reactors(in a region known for earthquakes/tsunami's) with the emergency generators located on the beach and the backup batteries in the basement?

I don't think so.
It depends on what the specifications are that the computer has to work with. They are only as smart as we teach them to be. But once they learn something, they never forget and can recall anything they've been taught faster and with far less errors than we can.

Then of course they can also learn on their own. But that is still reliant on some human intervention in how we tell them to process the information they have available. Imagine having a photographic memory of every book, tv show, movie, etc. that you'd ever seen since you were born at the tip of your tongue, but not having the brain capacity to connect the relevant information together to make sense of it all. That ability to connect the dots is what we're teaching computers with AI.

Both computers and people will make the same mistakes based on a faulty set of specs to follow. If cost of construction is more important in the planning stage than safety, then corners will be cut (with regard to safety) by both planners.

If we really were concerned about safety in nuclear reactors, then we'd use thorium reactors for energy production. But then you'd have to find another way to produce fissionable materials for nuclear weapons. Which frankly if we're concerned about safety, we could definitely do without anyhow. Do you think a computer would decide to use a far more dangerous method, just so they could stockpile the waste from it in case they needed to blow everybody up?
TXDirt
Posts
7399
Joined
7/29/2015
Location
Plano, TX US
3/8/2017 1:11pm
JAFO92 wrote:
No question at all IMHO. If a consciousness can be created with a machine, that means it can be, for lack of a better term, backed...
No question at all IMHO. If a consciousness can be created with a machine, that means it can be, for lack of a better term, backed up and/or transferred to another machine to continue on the inorganic intelligence. (crappy analogy; imaging a hard-drive)

Human consciousness is maintained by an organic and perishable container and cannot be moved or repoduced, therefore very precious and fragile.

There would be no comparison between the two in that regard; Robot "lives" wouldnt mean much.
What happens when the robots start to blend with organic matter ([i]as they have been making huge advances in lately[/i])? Inevitably this would lead to full...
What happens when the robots start to blend with organic matter (as they have been making huge advances in lately)? Inevitably this would lead to full organic construction down the road.

What is so interesting about all of this is once we are able to create consciousness is do we then have to redefine what constitutes life? Given that so many people believe that humans are created by someone / something aka a God then who is to say that the life created by a human (in any form of creation) isn't also life in which it shouldn't be valued the same as the creator?

In short:
God "supposedly" creates man -> life is protected
Man creates man -> life isn't protect?

And on the flip side – what happens when we find a way to backup the human mind so that the container isn't precious and fragile?
I wonder if know more about the human brain and consciousness or more about space and time? Both are complex and super interesting and the more we learn the more it seems we really don't know!

I've been reading up on this very topic as of late. At the basic level, the brain process/stores/moves information in electrical pulses. So that made me ask, is the brain analog or digital?

The consensus seems to be both.

The human Brain is Digital but the human Mind is Analog

Analog - just like everything from human’s perspective, even Intel’s processors are analog. Digital is just a more convenient engineering approach for modeling analog systems like electrical circuits. Modeling brain as digital system is a challenge for today’s neurosience teams..

kzizok
Posts
8393
Joined
10/19/2010
Location
AS US
Fantasy
2034th
3/8/2017 7:12pm
JAFO92 wrote:
No question at all IMHO. If a consciousness can be created with a machine, that means it can be, for lack of a better term, backed...
No question at all IMHO. If a consciousness can be created with a machine, that means it can be, for lack of a better term, backed up and/or transferred to another machine to continue on the inorganic intelligence. (crappy analogy; imaging a hard-drive)

Human consciousness is maintained by an organic and perishable container and cannot be moved or repoduced, therefore very precious and fragile.

There would be no comparison between the two in that regard; Robot "lives" wouldnt mean much.
What happens when the robots start to blend with organic matter ([i]as they have been making huge advances in lately[/i])? Inevitably this would lead to full...
What happens when the robots start to blend with organic matter (as they have been making huge advances in lately)? Inevitably this would lead to full organic construction down the road.

What is so interesting about all of this is once we are able to create consciousness is do we then have to redefine what constitutes life? Given that so many people believe that humans are created by someone / something aka a God then who is to say that the life created by a human (in any form of creation) isn't also life in which it shouldn't be valued the same as the creator?

In short:
God "supposedly" creates man -> life is protected
Man creates man -> life isn't protect?

And on the flip side – what happens when we find a way to backup the human mind so that the container isn't precious and fragile?
TXDirt wrote:
I wonder if know more about the human brain and consciousness or more about space and time? Both are complex and super interesting and the more...
I wonder if know more about the human brain and consciousness or more about space and time? Both are complex and super interesting and the more we learn the more it seems we really don't know!

I've been reading up on this very topic as of late. At the basic level, the brain process/stores/moves information in electrical pulses. So that made me ask, is the brain analog or digital?

The consensus seems to be both.

The human Brain is Digital but the human Mind is Analog

Analog - just like everything from human’s perspective, even Intel’s processors are analog. Digital is just a more convenient engineering approach for modeling analog systems like electrical circuits. Modeling brain as digital system is a challenge for today’s neurosience teams..

Very interesting. Existentialism 2.0.

The Shop

kzizok
Posts
8393
Joined
10/19/2010
Location
AS US
Fantasy
2034th
4/11/2017 9:20pm Edited Date/Time 4/11/2017 9:25pm
lestat wrote:
AI playing poker now ....

AI wins $290,000 in Chinese poker competition http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39564836
Very interesting

I must say, I struggle with stuff like this being AI. I think of what we call AI today is more like efficient information dissemenation, i.e., adaptable mathematics. But it is still just linear algebra. These computers are generating answers only based on the information programmed into them. We have a better undertanding of the information that is programmed which allows for huge mathematical computations that narrow down more "adaptable" type answers.

I think of literal/general AI, as a process of developing its own neural pathway, so to speak, and creating its own organic parameters, separate from any programmed mathematical constraints.

Still interesting stuff though.

motoxracer723
Posts
113
Joined
10/29/2006
Location
West Chester, PA US
4/12/2017 9:07am
kzizok wrote:
Very interesting I must say, I struggle with stuff like this being AI. I think of what we call AI today is more like efficient information...
Very interesting

I must say, I struggle with stuff like this being AI. I think of what we call AI today is more like efficient information dissemenation, i.e., adaptable mathematics. But it is still just linear algebra. These computers are generating answers only based on the information programmed into them. We have a better undertanding of the information that is programmed which allows for huge mathematical computations that narrow down more "adaptable" type answers.

I think of literal/general AI, as a process of developing its own neural pathway, so to speak, and creating its own organic parameters, separate from any programmed mathematical constraints.

Still interesting stuff though.

That's the distinction behind ANI and AGI - Artificial Narrow Intelligence... it's still AI just not what people normally think of AI as 'looking' like. Its great for the task it's created for... a computer designed to play chess not being able to do any other task (Ex Machina example).

AGI is sort of what the smart phones do now "Navigate to this place" "Call this person" etc etc - where they can discern what we're talking about from a multitude of options and still complete the task.

Computers designing computers is a thing at the pinnacle of the industry. This discussion reminds me of a Ted talk by Sam Harris on the subject:

kzizok
Posts
8393
Joined
10/19/2010
Location
AS US
Fantasy
2034th
4/12/2017 4:28pm
kzizok wrote:
Very interesting I must say, I struggle with stuff like this being AI. I think of what we call AI today is more like efficient information...
Very interesting

I must say, I struggle with stuff like this being AI. I think of what we call AI today is more like efficient information dissemenation, i.e., adaptable mathematics. But it is still just linear algebra. These computers are generating answers only based on the information programmed into them. We have a better undertanding of the information that is programmed which allows for huge mathematical computations that narrow down more "adaptable" type answers.

I think of literal/general AI, as a process of developing its own neural pathway, so to speak, and creating its own organic parameters, separate from any programmed mathematical constraints.

Still interesting stuff though.

That's the distinction behind ANI and AGI - Artificial Narrow Intelligence... it's still AI just not what people normally think of AI as 'looking' like. Its...
That's the distinction behind ANI and AGI - Artificial Narrow Intelligence... it's still AI just not what people normally think of AI as 'looking' like. Its great for the task it's created for... a computer designed to play chess not being able to do any other task (Ex Machina example).

AGI is sort of what the smart phones do now "Navigate to this place" "Call this person" etc etc - where they can discern what we're talking about from a multitude of options and still complete the task.

Computers designing computers is a thing at the pinnacle of the industry. This discussion reminds me of a Ted talk by Sam Harris on the subject:

Yeah. You said it better. Like Alexa or Siri.

Your last paragraph is a good example of what I think of when I think of AI.
BMSOBx2
Posts
2088
Joined
2/18/2017
Location
Antioch, CA US
4/13/2017 3:09pm
Any of you see the movie Ex Machina? I highly recommend it. Puts the whole AI thing in perspective. Thought provoking & totally relevant to this discussion.
akillerwombat
Posts
2006
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
4/13/2017 3:13pm
BMSOBx2 wrote:
Any of you see the movie Ex Machina? I highly recommend it. Puts the whole AI thing in perspective. Thought provoking & totally relevant to this...
Any of you see the movie Ex Machina? I highly recommend it. Puts the whole AI thing in perspective. Thought provoking & totally relevant to this discussion.
(and a great movie)

Post a reply to: Bill Gates said

The Latest