never have, never will. I'm probably saying I'm old, but I mostly enjoy solo campaigns. I grew with Atari, Coleco, Intelevision, Nintendo and so on. Playing a FPS with kids swearing at you it's not my idea of a videogame. I prefer a good solo player campaign anytime.
So, have you ever asked yourself "What or who am I?"?
Yes, I have, and (in difference to a chatbot) also came up with a "philosophical horseshit" answer (instead of an "if-then" one).
Did you say "yes"? Interesting, because that is exactly how a chatbot would reply to the same question.
No, a chatbox will repeat the most common answer given to it, instead of free thinking about it.
We can talk about my views on "what or who am I", but that is not the point. The point is that I have that philosophical bullshit and can reason about it, and the chatbot can't.
It is completely impossible to say whether any entity, living or not, possesses that kind of introspective intelligence.
Thus, your test is non-falsifiable, or in other words, just a lot of philosophical horseshit.
First of all what I've posted is not a test but a refutation on how all the parent's gadgets were "intelligent". You are putting words in my mouth. IT IS philosophical because as many others here have noted, there doesn't seem to be an agreement on the definition of AI; for me it is the counterpart of biological intelligence in a non-biological way, but some here believes there is more to it. So I may well be wrong, but my comments stand by my context.
Second, for my so called "test" to be non-falsifiable I would have to first perform such tests. I haven't performed such test like Siri against my dog because a) Siri is going to win, and b) my dog outsmarts Siri, only that he doesn't have the same modern technologies Siri has. Siri might as well tell me how to drive to my closest mall, but Siri will not be able to open my front door, or fetch me my keys. Interfaces. My dog can.
Thirdly, It is very possible to spot intelligence. Viruses are not very intelligent, they just follow a pattern, and even then sometimes they win. Patterns are tricky, it's funny somehow some sperm made it to the egg and evolved to some of us, dumb as s%&t. Never mind that, there are intelligence tests to measure those patterns and the introspective intelligence you talk about.
So, to recap, I do have asked myself "What or who am I", and have my on views on it. No, while it opened more questions from it non of it was a chatbot question "why do you think is that?", I may as well go to a psychologist and he will ask you something like that. Lastly, about philosophical horseshit, that is something humans we are able to create, machines can't.
And AI is still, pardon my French, pretty fucking non-existent.
Except for the cell phone in your pocket, that can recognize your commands and search the internet for what you requested, or translate your statement into any of a dozen foreign languages, and has a camera that can recognize faces, and millions of objects, and can connect to expert systems that can, for instance, diagnose diseases better than all but the very best doctors. Oh, and your cellphone can also beat any grandmaster in the world at chess.
However, if you consider AI to be shorthand for "stuff computers can't do yet", then, yes, AI will always be "right around the corner".
All you are listing here are just interfaces and instructions, being the chess example probably the closest thing to a real "AI", but far from it yet.
The key point to intelligence is self consciousness, and nothing in your examples has this. It's like saying a machine with wheels and an engine (a car) is more effective than human legs (it is in its own context (can't climb stairs)) and because of that it's an AI because "stuff computer/machines can't do yet" is not.
Even some animals have Self Consciousness although their intelligence is not at the same level that humans have. So even if someday computers get to emulate neurons, synapses, how the brain works, etc., those machines won't be intelligent enough to match our intelligence, even with their very much superior interfaces we have already given to them.
So, back to your point, it is invalid. We've labeled "intelligence" (e.g. Smart Phones) into our current technology for a marketing purpose (much like the "cloud" term, a marketing term for a technology that pretty much existed when the server pattern was created decades ago (or wasn't a BBS (Bulletin Board System, if you were born after that) a "cloud" system that served an "application" for you to access from a terminal and store messages on such "cloud" without you ever having to store a thing in your local terminal?)).
So if you want to think Siri on your Iphone is a real AI, go ahead, but it's not. Its a set of "if this then that" instructions that uses its advance interfaces for input and output based on this set of instruction computations. It's not more aware of itself than a regular rock, and unable to think for itself in that context.
You can even simulate curiosity (a trade of intelligence) on a program, like today's chatbots do. If you ask a chatbot (basically a complicated script and a database) something it doesn't know (not in the database), it will ask you "What is that thing you are talking about?" (curiosity simulation for new data input purposes), but it will not ask itself, for itself, "What or who am I?" and have the intelligence to ponder about it. Not much different in that aspect from the decades old calculator, or your cellphone examples. Technologically superior? sure. So are modern fuel injection engines, yet not intelligent but from a marketing standpoint.
-Gabe.
"Right now what is lacking across Europe is a standard law to handle notice-and-take-downs of illegal sites like the U.S.'s DMCA..."
I always suspected the DMCA site was illegal.
Easy task. Just get a PS3 slim and stream your content with Ps3 Media Server.
Works charms with me. It even muxes subtitles on the fly, for my non-english speaking girlfriend.
Can do 1080p just fine, assuming you've got a decent server.
I believe another example is the world "island" -- why the "s" ?? It's totally unpronounced? Well, the spelling was modified to look more like Franco-Latin as opposed to the english pronunciation...
Actually, Island is pronounced without an 'S' to differentiate the word from the word Iceland, the country (which, by the way, is written as 'Ísland' or 'Islandia' in other countries, and is actually an island).
But 2Wire routers come with the serial number being the default password... thus it's impossible for the hacker to know the password of every 2wire router.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you saying the millennials not longer support buying expensive cars and homes if they can, or even Uber rides? They should move to Cuba.
Where did you read this last week? Just curious cause I'm always looking for other news sources.
Let me google that for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=virus+par... Second hit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...
Read this last week on other outlets. Anyway, this would explain the behavior of some of my peers and acquaintances. Makes sense.
never have, never will. I'm probably saying I'm old, but I mostly enjoy solo campaigns. I grew with Atari, Coleco, Intelevision, Nintendo and so on. Playing a FPS with kids swearing at you it's not my idea of a videogame. I prefer a good solo player campaign anytime.
MS is trying to have a say in the VR game and they think Minecraft would be a nice entry point.
You are a bad person.
:(
So, have you ever asked yourself "What or who am I?"?
Yes, I have, and (in difference to a chatbot) also came up with a "philosophical horseshit" answer (instead of an "if-then" one).
Did you say "yes"? Interesting, because that is exactly how a chatbot would reply to the same question.
No, a chatbox will repeat the most common answer given to it, instead of free thinking about it. We can talk about my views on "what or who am I", but that is not the point. The point is that I have that philosophical bullshit and can reason about it, and the chatbot can't.
It is completely impossible to say whether any entity, living or not, possesses that kind of introspective intelligence. Thus, your test is non-falsifiable, or in other words, just a lot of philosophical horseshit.
First of all what I've posted is not a test but a refutation on how all the parent's gadgets were "intelligent". You are putting words in my mouth. IT IS philosophical because as many others here have noted, there doesn't seem to be an agreement on the definition of AI; for me it is the counterpart of biological intelligence in a non-biological way, but some here believes there is more to it. So I may well be wrong, but my comments stand by my context.
Second, for my so called "test" to be non-falsifiable I would have to first perform such tests. I haven't performed such test like Siri against my dog because a) Siri is going to win, and b) my dog outsmarts Siri, only that he doesn't have the same modern technologies Siri has. Siri might as well tell me how to drive to my closest mall, but Siri will not be able to open my front door, or fetch me my keys. Interfaces. My dog can.
Thirdly, It is very possible to spot intelligence. Viruses are not very intelligent, they just follow a pattern, and even then sometimes they win. Patterns are tricky, it's funny somehow some sperm made it to the egg and evolved to some of us, dumb as s%&t. Never mind that, there are intelligence tests to measure those patterns and the introspective intelligence you talk about.
So, to recap, I do have asked myself "What or who am I", and have my on views on it. No, while it opened more questions from it non of it was a chatbot question "why do you think is that?", I may as well go to a psychologist and he will ask you something like that. Lastly, about philosophical horseshit, that is something humans we are able to create, machines can't.
-Gabe.
Sorry, my first post since a long time, didn't know slashdot would kill the break lines. It looks like a horrible one paragraph bunch of text.
And AI is still, pardon my French, pretty fucking non-existent.
Except for the cell phone in your pocket, that can recognize your commands and search the internet for what you requested, or translate your statement into any of a dozen foreign languages, and has a camera that can recognize faces, and millions of objects, and can connect to expert systems that can, for instance, diagnose diseases better than all but the very best doctors. Oh, and your cellphone can also beat any grandmaster in the world at chess.
However, if you consider AI to be shorthand for "stuff computers can't do yet", then, yes, AI will always be "right around the corner".
All you are listing here are just interfaces and instructions, being the chess example probably the closest thing to a real "AI", but far from it yet. The key point to intelligence is self consciousness, and nothing in your examples has this. It's like saying a machine with wheels and an engine (a car) is more effective than human legs (it is in its own context (can't climb stairs)) and because of that it's an AI because "stuff computer/machines can't do yet" is not. Even some animals have Self Consciousness although their intelligence is not at the same level that humans have. So even if someday computers get to emulate neurons, synapses, how the brain works, etc., those machines won't be intelligent enough to match our intelligence, even with their very much superior interfaces we have already given to them. So, back to your point, it is invalid. We've labeled "intelligence" (e.g. Smart Phones) into our current technology for a marketing purpose (much like the "cloud" term, a marketing term for a technology that pretty much existed when the server pattern was created decades ago (or wasn't a BBS (Bulletin Board System, if you were born after that) a "cloud" system that served an "application" for you to access from a terminal and store messages on such "cloud" without you ever having to store a thing in your local terminal?)). So if you want to think Siri on your Iphone is a real AI, go ahead, but it's not. Its a set of "if this then that" instructions that uses its advance interfaces for input and output based on this set of instruction computations. It's not more aware of itself than a regular rock, and unable to think for itself in that context. You can even simulate curiosity (a trade of intelligence) on a program, like today's chatbots do. If you ask a chatbot (basically a complicated script and a database) something it doesn't know (not in the database), it will ask you "What is that thing you are talking about?" (curiosity simulation for new data input purposes), but it will not ask itself, for itself, "What or who am I?" and have the intelligence to ponder about it. Not much different in that aspect from the decades old calculator, or your cellphone examples. Technologically superior? sure. So are modern fuel injection engines, yet not intelligent but from a marketing standpoint. -Gabe.
"Right now what is lacking across Europe is a standard law to handle notice-and-take-downs of illegal sites like the U.S.'s DMCA..." I always suspected the DMCA site was illegal.
Yes, Ps3 seems to be pissy about that, But I've found that ps3 meda server resolves all these issues.
The Ps3 can do all the formats you want using Ps3 media server.
Easy task. Just get a PS3 slim and stream your content with Ps3 Media Server. Works charms with me. It even muxes subtitles on the fly, for my non-english speaking girlfriend. Can do 1080p just fine, assuming you've got a decent server.
On the same lines, we shouldn't let our kids watch Fantasia, for the matter.
Im pretty sure Island was a word before Iceland was.
Probably then, the S was pronounced.
I believe another example is the world "island" -- why the "s" ?? It's totally unpronounced? Well, the spelling was modified to look more like Franco-Latin as opposed to the english pronunciation...
Actually, Island is pronounced without an 'S' to differentiate the word from the word Iceland, the country (which, by the way, is written as 'Ísland' or 'Islandia' in other countries, and is actually an island).
It's called Minority Report! God forbid you of putting your murderous thoughts down in paper, because they will come and get you!
this wish list isn't stored on a DataBase... They might get sued.
I belive that the console that earns the greatest console title owes it for its games.
So it would be, IMHO, the nes.
But 2Wire routers come with the serial number being the default password... thus it's impossible for the hacker to know the password of every 2wire router.