Slashdot Mirror


Can Your PC Become Neurotic?

Roland Piquepaille writes "This article starts with a quote from Douglas Adams: 'The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong, it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair.' It is true that machines are becoming more complex and 'intelligent' everyday. Does this mean that they can exhibit unpredictable behavior like HAL, the supercomputer in '2001: A Space Odyssey'? Do we have to fear our PCs? A recent book by Thomas M. Georges, 'Digital Soul: Intelligent Machines and Human Values,' explains how our machines can develop neurosis and what kind of therapy exist. Check this column for a summary or read this highly recommended article from Darwin Magazine for more details."

11 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. I was going to write that paper last night.. by Open_The_Box · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...but my PC just wanted to snuggle. ;-)

    --
    If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
  2. it depends on the user's technical level by drgroove · · Score: 5, Insightful

    for instance, my wife is already 'afraid' of windows... she just does not 'get' computers. I on the other hand have no problem w/ them, but of course I'm a developer. i think OS & hardware manufacturers could do a much better job taking the 'fear' aspect out of their systems, making them more user friendly, even 'user-proof', if that makes sense (i.e., the user can 'break' anything by clicking on the wrong button, etc.)

  3. its happening today by KingRamsis · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean that they can exhibit unpredictable behavior...
    Yes our W2K exchange server became self-aware today and decided to commit suicide...

  4. Isn't it great by Apreche · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it great when someone comes along and makes assumptions about technology that doesn't exist yet. Not only does this guy do that, but he doesn't even seem to understand current technology. He claims that a computer that can change its own goals might select weird goals and appear crazy. Or that it might be set with two conflicting goals at once and mess up.

    With current computer technology this is not a possibility. And older computer will just crash or wont do anything because multitasking is not an option. A newer computer will do it just fine. I could have one program that formats the hard drive and another that writes data to all of it and I can make the both go at the same time, and it will work.

    Everything else in the article about a theoretical AI or an intelligent computer is bs. As I said he is assuming things about a technology that doesn't exist yet. It really pisses me off when someone says "when we have this a long time from now, this is how you have to go about fixing it". You can't know how to fix something if you don't know how to make it in the first place! Common sense. The scary thing is that I think this guy is getting paid to write this stuff. Where to I sign up??

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
  5. Easy solution... by acehole · · Score: 5, Funny

    What I do is keep smashed up computer parts next to the tower so it knows what will happen if it displeases it's master.

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
  6. Technophobia is not confined to computers. by Chemisor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Many people are just as afraid of:
    • Programming the VCR.
    • Changing the oil.
    • Using the TV without a remote.
    • Programming jobs on copiers (yes, those Xerox-like machines)
    • Copying movies off their camera tapes.
    • Figuring out why the microwave has more than one mode of operation.
    • Learning to make felled seams on a Singer.
    • Insert your own favorite technophobia.
  7. Neurotic.....no by revery · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I clicked on the link, I got the following error:

    411 Your computer doesn't care

    So, is my computer neurotic? No, but it's apathetic attitude is getting to be a pain.

    --

    Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
    or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.

  8. What would YOU do? by gosand · · Score: 5, Funny
    Does this mean that they can exhibit unpredictable behavior...

    Yes our W2K exchange server became self-aware today and decided to commit suicide...

    Well, what would YOU do if you suddenly became self-aware, and realize you were an Exchange server?

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  9. ARRGH!!! by iceT · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hate it when people say that computers are getting 'smarter'. They are *NOT* getting smarter. They are handling more tasks. They are getting FASTER. But, until it can handle things like associative pattern recognition (Ok. I made up that term. Basically, it's the idea that a computer can handle the following logic: It's not shaped like a coffee cup, but I know it's a coffee cup.) or can demonstrate the ability to learn and adapt to a changing environment at even REMOTELY the rate that even the simplest of creatures can... then, I'll consider them 'smart'.

    Until then, by personifying computers, you are only FEEDING these types of irrational fears.

    There is no HAL today, and probably won't be until we get a computer to recognize the fact that one everything in the universe is black and white. One and Off. The world isn't binary... it's analog.

    --
    -- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
  10. Old News by AlecC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is old news - it has been "true" for years. It is actually a corrolary of Clarke's law ("Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"). If we understand how a system works normally, then any misbehaviour it shows is a fault. If we don't, then we can classify the misbehaviour as a "neurosis". Unskilled users often believe their computer sare sufferring from a neurosis. This usually means that at some time in the past they have installed some app or extension which is trying to do something they don't understand. A more skilled user can come along and "cure" that neurosis, because they understand the system at a deeper level.

    A car I once had displayed what appeard to be a "neurosis" - it seemed to be frightened of going more than 30mph. It would run fine up to that speed, but if you went any faster it "paniced" and stalled. Dirt in the fuel line: at low flow rates, it lay flat and let fuel pass. At higher flow rates, it flipped up and blocked the flow completely, causing the engine to stall before it had time to flip down again. The point is, the first analysis of "neurosis" was corrected to "fault" once the problem was understood.

    So the diagnosis of "neurosis" is relative - it means "I don't understand this failure mode". It can, of course, become absolute if nobody understands it.

    So, are we building systems so large that nobody understands them? Definitely. Networks are already bordering on incomprehensible. Particularly, of course, the Internet. It would not surprise me at all if the Internet started showing "neurotic" behaviour. Indeed, it already does - if you ragard humans and their input as part of the net istelf. DOS attacks and the /. effect are both "twitches" in the body of the Internet. (And spam is a cancer which requires operating now) Thus far, these nervous ticks have expanded into full-scale neurosis - but they could.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  11. Re:To think... by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not directly related, but as I was watching the Floyd's PanAm flight dock with the spinning station, I suspected that Clarke and Kubrick never foresaw this; a world of microtechnology, for the consumer. It was all grand projects back then, a single computer the size of a building, not a building full of single computers.

    Just imagine, going back to 1968 by time machine and telling Kubrick, Clarke or some egghead from Stanford or MIT, how the techology will evolve in 2001. Tell these guys the Apollo XVIII will be actually the last spaceship to leave the vicinity of Earth. Tell them that the global network developed by ARPA will be a major hit, used mostly for distrubution of p0rn, warez and mindless discussions like these on Slashdot. Tell them everybody will own a supercomputer way beyond PDP's and IBM's, but everybody will use it mostly as a typewriter and a gaming console. Tell them the main scientific discoveries by the end of century will be a pill for erection and a pill for good mood. I just can't imagine their reply.