Slashdot Mirror
Study Shows Babies Think Friendly Robots Are Sentient
seanonymous writes "A study from University of Washington claims that babies think robots are human, so long as the robots are friendly. No word on what evil robots are thought to be. From the article: 'At 18 months old, babies have begun to make conscious delineations between sentient beings and inanimate objects. But as robots get more and more advanced, those decisions may become harder to make. What causes a baby to decide a robot is more than bits of metal? As it turns out, it takes more than humanoid looks — babies rely on social interaction to make that call.'"
Klaatu barada nikto -now doesn't that sound like clear baby talk?.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
Do they think the dog is sentient?
Correction: Should read "Babies behave towards things the same way they observed adults behaving towards them". The babies in the study didn't behave as if the robots were sentient unless they had watched an adult treat the robot as if it were sentient. Only if they watched an adult 'play' with the robot like a human child did the babies respond as if the robot were alive, even though the robot was programmed with the exact same movements in both set ups. This says a lot more about how children learn from adults than it does about how children perceive robots.
Seriously, where is she?
Though, sometimes she is a little bossy.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Hopefully, this same trick will work on robot babies. We must start at a young age and show them that we are robots. It is the only way to protect our species.
No word on what evil robots are thought to be.
That is simple. They are known to be republicans.
I for one, welcome our new robot babysitter overlords.
the first scientist to upload video of a baby playing with a (friendly) robot wins 20 million youtube views (whatever that's worth). I'd watch.
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
Have you ever watched a young child (18-24 months) interact with a dog or a cat? Yes, they do.
Not at all surprising--there have been conclusive studies done in the past on just how stupid babies are.
I've know kids much older, like 10ish to believe Superman, Spiderman, Santa and the like are all sentient...
So I guess the singularity will arrive shortly (great, I've been concentrating mental pray beams to a deity in hopes for a meteor, singularity or something to fix earth's status quo).
Lawyers.
Babies just have a hard time saying the word.
this only proves that social construct theory is nature rather than nurture / environmental. People form social groups through the avoidance of annoying and hostile relationships. It does not seem far fetched at all to think that people would trend towards useful, interesting, non-hostile, non-living things. People, including babies seek stimulation for learning. A playful robot would hold my attention, and I might lose interest if I thought there was a good chance he robot was going to cause me harm.
This "study" would have been much more interesting if they had only released the video tape and not shared their opinions.
Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
According to psychologist Paul Bloom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bloom_(psychologist) , babies think lots of things are sentient.
If they show a movie to babies with geometrical figures, they assume that the geometrical figures are helping or hindering each other because geometrical figures want to.
He said this makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, because it improves survival if you assume everything around you that moves might be out to get you.
He also says that this is an evolutionary explanation of religion, by finding sentient beings behind all of nature. If you see a storm, there must be a sentient being behind it.
babies are idiots
Their beliefs are based on limited experience. When I was little, I watched musicians doing a live radio show. For a while after that, I thought that all music on the radio was performed live. It's the same kind of thing.
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Maybe this is why my 18 month old thinks tickle me elmo is so fucking scary?
Adults think their pets are human, and humans of different colors are animals. People are generally not a good source of judgment.
What are the qualifications to be be considered sentient?
Eschew Obfuscation
Babies this the TV is sentient. Ask any parent.
...the robot was not impressed.
THL phish sticks
I think there is strong evidence that humans much older than 18 months cannot make a delineation between sentient beings and inanimate objects.
If the supplied evidence is not enough, try this.
I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
My daughter is almost three years-old. One of the most interesting things to observe is how she classifies her world. When she was 18 months old she would have classified a robot as sentient; she thought almost everything was alive (sort of a toddler version of pantheism). If it was a friendly robot, that would have put it in the realm of the three dogs and cat which she was already familiar with.
WTF? Some adults seem to think that computers are sentient so is it surprising that babies think robots are sentient?
Friendly robots are sentient. Friendliness is a quality that only sentient beings can have. If your robot is not sentient, then it is only simulating friendliness.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Dogs are sentient... I'm confused by your question.
I guess in the eyes of a 18month old.. we successfully created AI
I think "babies" fit the "don't understand" clause; interactive robots the "technology" one.
What's the next scientific study going to prove, that NASCAR crowds are wowed by nitrous funny cars?
"Your plastic pal who's fun to be with"
I am officially gone from
I have a 2yr old and he thinks Train set is Sentient. So I don't really think this is any kind of breakthrough.
Oh, I don't know...I've heard lots of babies say, "poo-poo."
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
The Sirius Cybernetics Corporation is behind it; this you can be sure of. They're a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
I guess the question is, do you? I do.
?
That's it. I'm gonna build an interaction robot for my cat. So that cat thinks it's sentient and asks it for attention, not me :D
If you think a dog is sentient, then you must be as dumb as one. ;-) Dogs are no smarter than a mouse, or turtle, or any other animal. They simply react to rote repetition. (Run a can opener - they salivate. Pavlovian response not intelligence.)
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
depends on your definition of sentience. By the wikipedia definition for example I'd say dogs are sentient.
from wikipedia...
"Sentience is the ability to feel or perceive. The term is used in science and philosophy, and in the study of artificial intelligence. Sentience is used in the study of consciousness to describe the ability to have sensations or experiences, known to Western philosophers as "qualia""
Do not let the robot hold your baby! I have it on very good authority that this is a bad idea.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
I'm not debating whether or not the babies actually thought the robot was sentient or not (who knows what babies think?). But it's a logical leap to assume that "gaze following" equates to "sentience". It might be that the babies know enough about technology to know that even a robot can focus a gaze. Assuming that a baby is smart enough to know what a gaze is implies they're smart enough to know what a robot is.
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
That's okay, we'll give you a few minutes to look up the meaning of the word sentient. If you're more logically oriented, here's a hint: sentience != sapience.
And as far as pavlovian response (aka classical conditioning) goes, that just happens to play a very large role in human development. It's when something doesn't learn from repetition that there's a good chance of no intelligence. Claiming that the presence of learning in response to repetition isn't intelligence, isn't very intelligent.
My CAPCHA word is: realize. I found that somewhat relevant.
Funny how a lawyer marked this as offtopic. Any advertising is good is it not?
...artificial intelligence already achieved?
Hm. Attack quickly followed by condescending smiley? Check. Viewpoint designed to belittle and offend? Check. Ignorance of topic in question and clear lack of qualification to comment based on statements? Check.
I'm gonna go ahead and ask you to shut the fuck up.
My laptop and phone can feel and perceive. I don't think that qualifies them as sentience.
The problem with the term sentience is that it is a word like 'Lots". We know what it means, but it is a sliding scale.
"I think that's a sentient being". Right. Even if a baby had said that, they might be kidding. Babies are so fucking sarcastic, it's hard to believe.
...Study shows Babies don't know what "sentient" means.
I've heard other people say that, before you.
Shit... I know *adults* who think computers, cars, and other new-fangled things are sentient. So what?
What about the robot in chief?
His head toggles like a metronome while reading off answers from remotely controlled monitors. How do babies rate him?
Those are fictional sentient characters.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
The fetus considers the womb to be an extension of itself. This is the model for consciousness, which the newborn extends into the universe to create its sense of identity. Studies have shown that babies cannot distinguish between their mothers and themselves, they have to be weaned. So until then, babies see everything as sentient.
Your laptop can feel? What does it feel?
Eschew Obfuscation
I don't think my laptop or phone can 'feel or perceive'. These things have sensors, but I don't think it is remotely the same thing.
The problem with the term sentience is that it is a word like 'Lots". We know what it means, but it is a sliding scale.
I agree the line between sentience and non-sentience is very ill defined, but in my opinion its clear that higher animals fall on the sentient side of it while laptops and cell phones fall on the non-sentient side of the line.
If you think a dog is sentient, then you must be as dumb as one. ;-) Dogs are no smarter than a mouse, or turtle, or any other animal. They simply react to rote repetition. (Run a can opener - they salivate. Pavlovian response not intelligence.)
You, like 99% of nerds before you, fail to understand sentience.
You're describing sapience. Dogs, mice, and turtles are not sapient, but they almost definitely are sentient.
They feel my touch, and respond to it.
Babies can be so fucking stupid sometimes.
Not as stupid as Republicans. http://online.wsj.com/itp/20101015/us/opinion
Hm. Attack quickly followed by condescending smiley? Check. Viewpoint designed to belittle and offend? Check. Ignorance of topic in question and clear lack of qualification to comment based on statements? Check.
Good boy. Here's a treat.
Have gnu, will travel.
I have a Pavlovian response to the sound of a beer being poured in to a frosty glass.
I agree the line between sentience and non-sentience is very ill defined, but in my opinion its clear that higher animals fall on the sentient side of it while laptops and cell phones fall on the non-sentient side of the line.
I don't disagree with this. But, feel and perceive is not in any way what defines it.
Dogs can follow a point and can communicate through pointing. If you have a kid, you realize that at about a year old (when they really start pointing) how much of a huge communications jump this is. Other than humans, primates, and dogs, I don't know of any other animal that can communicate through pointing.
Dogs were selected as pets/companions because they have a unique set of gifts that humans find complimentary. One of those is an enhanced ability to communicate. Another is that some dogs are very cuddly.
In related news, it was discovered that AI researchers thought sentient robots were friendly.
Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
Do they think the dog is sentient?
Initially, yes. Interestingly, when our toddler was developing her language skills, she practiced three sets of sounds - English language sounds that she heard her parents speaking, Spanish-language sounds that she heard from her nanny and grandmother and growly barky sounds that she heard from the dog. Eventually she realized the dog was a lower-order being and stopped trying to speak dog.
Robots have successfully passed the 18 month old turring test. That's actually pretty cool.
or else!
...after all, they created the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
If you think dogs are not sentient, then you know nothing about dogs or the proper definition of sentience.
You're off your rocker! Dogs are absolutely in the category of sentient beings, that's not even debatable, it's science. Not only can they feel, perceive, and have high-level problem solving skills, but there is evidence that they can have "spiritual experiences". (Last part debatable, still need more research: http://news.discovery.com/animals/animals-spiritual-brain.html)
I just skimmed your past post, commodore64_love, and it seems you don't usually troll like this.
Maybe you didn't realize this post was trolling? I could see how you might be unaware of the technical definition of "sentient," and further how you might be using the word "intelligent" in a Cartesian-esque Boolean sense (rather than any meaningful sense), and further how you might share the common human need to justify our position at the top of the food chain by saying that all the animals in the world have a category of fundamental inferiority that makes them little more than soft robots themselves (unlike us, of course)...
but even so, you MUST know how strongly people feel about their dogs, and how commonly dogs are considered to be members of the family, and how your post will necessarily elicit a whole train wreck of angry responses.
So, good troll.
If you think a dog is sentient, then you must be as dumb as one. ;-) Dogs are no smarter than a mouse, or turtle, or any other animal. They simply react to rote repetition. (Run a can opener - they salivate. Pavlovian response not intelligence.)
This raises the obvious question: is a person with a severe mental handicap sentient?
If your answer is yes, then the requirements for sentience which you've listed here are irrelevant, and you're operating off some other definition. If your answer is "no", then you're internally consistent, but I'm not sure I agree with your definition of sentience.
Also, it's worth pointing out that dogs have about the same level of intelligence as a human child early in it's developmental cycle. Is a 6 month old baby sentient? How about a 1 year old? 2 years? When exactly do we achieve sentience?
Um, that's your lap, not your laptop!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Arthur C. Clarke, "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Ditto mine. Considering how she adores & coddles her inanimate doll, methinks "sentience" to the very young is a matter of affinity & affection, not activity.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
+1 Dogs, cats, mice, turtles are all sentient.
Some creatures like jellyfish and some simple insects which have simple nervous systems that "hardwire" reactions instead of a complex brain are in more of a gray area. But anything that can learn very much deserves to be called sentient.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Before anyone jumps in asking whether I consider those "chat with a computer" apps to be sentient, I was strictly talking about animals. Any AI needs to first pass some tests that any animal would before it could be considered for classification as "sentient." - how does it react to certain stimuli, etc. Getting out of the jellyfish/simple insect gray area won't be easy either.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Humans have sensors that allow them to feel and perceive also. That is how we do it.
Sensors are necessary but not sufficient.
I don't disagree with this. But, feel and perceive is not in any way what defines it.
Check the wikipedia article so that we are on the same page with a common working definition of "sentience". I think you might be using sentience in another sense, perhaps to include "cognizance" or "sapience" or some other characteristic... Or perhaps you are simply over simplifying sentience so that its undistinguished from 'feel or perceive'.
I know full-grown adults who think plants have feelings.
" When exactly do we achieve sentience?" I'm not sure, but that's the day the sentient robots fear. "Dear Asimov..... GroundNet has achieved sentience."
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Eventually she realized the dog was a lower-order being and stopped trying to speak dog.
Or maybe she realized the adults only use English or Spanish to talk to the dog, and not dog-speak?
You guys have done it again. Now define feel or perceive.
They feel my touch, and respond to it.
And every time I go out of the door and press the doorhandle, it opens. This must mean that the doorhandle is actually feeling my touch and that it is sentient. No wait...
The fact that an object reacts when it's touched does not mean the object knows it is being touched. Modern computers aren't any more sentient than typewriters and calculators. Sure, they are really fancy typewriters and even fancier calculators, but we are far from creating any sort of sentient machine.
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
I have an IQ of 185 and I'm still convinced my AtariST was Sentient.
In a related study, infants judged geeks to be 18% less human than the robots.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I would imagine that robots, in turn, think friendly babies are sentient.
-kgj
An explanation for the popularity of Al Gore!
my 3 year old thought a 5 dollar motorized bug was real, same reaction as to a real bug. Took her months before she could tell the difference. I don't think the study say's anything about 'sentience', perception/recognition develops over time naturally, ability to identify/distinguish will of course vary based on age/ability/culture....
Let dogs be, and evolve in their own way.
If babies get conditioned to warm to dogs at an early, they can be conditioned to accept robots. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I think we shouldn't develop the cylons instead of having to worry about the ethical question of their rights being equal or better to humans.
I came to this party late. I not only remember records, but I remember when they were 16's and 78's, FM radios didn't have AFC, there were three TV networks and the stations went off the air after the Night Owl Movie was over.
I seriously dislike children on my lawn.
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Your laptop can feel? What does it feel?
It despises it's dirty fingered owner.
Well, they think imaginary people are real, so why not?
Athy, athier, athiest.
"Go stick your head in a pig" (Hey /., your lameness filter is too loose. Maybe you should freeze an account for fifty fucking years after each post! Please stick your collective heads in a pig.)
Athy, athier, athiest.
when our toddler was developing her language skills [...] she realized the dog was a lower-order being and stopped trying to speak dog.
Later, she'll discover twitter and revert to dog-level discussions.
>>>wikipedia definition
hahahahahahahahahahaahaha! Hilarious. Look it up in a real dictionary (one with research staff, linguists, historians, etc) and your dog nor any other animal is sentient by their definition.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
I know when the damn dog jumps on me, or slobbers all over me, I automatically consider the THING to be inferior to human beings.
Hell even that Android Data has more intelligence then a damn bitch.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
No. No. No. And no.
If an organism can't achieve at least 80 on an Adult IQ test, I don't consider it sentient, although it may have the potential to reach that point someday (after maturing and/or several million years evolution). And yes I know the test has flaws but there has to be a standard which separates Homo sapiens from less creatures, just the same as HR Offices establish 3.0 or 3.2 for their minimum requirements for new hires.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Robots that respond to their environment are essentially sentient. Dogs certainly are sentient. Neither are SAPIENT.
Sci-fi has misused the work sentient when they meant to say sapient.
That does NOT mean that sentient means self aware, it means the sci-fi writers and everyone else who says sentient when they mean sapient are WRONG.
Yes, even if the dictionary agrees with them.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentience
SENTIENCE
1 : a sentient quality or state
2 : feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought
Dog qualifies.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0755520#m_en_gb0755520.005
sentient (sen|tient)
Pronunciation:/sn()nt/
adjective
* able to perceive or feel things:
Dog qualifies.
hahahahahahahahahahaahaha! Hilarious. Look it up in a real dictionary (one with research staff, linguists, historians, etc) and your dog nor any other animal is sentient by their definition.
Perhaps next time you should look it up before you make an ass of yourself.
If the robot is remote controlled aren't the babies the smart ones in realizing that a sentient being is "behind" the robotic form?