Re:The notion of AI existing is heretical
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
But maybe it isn't even a limitation worth mentioning. I am a product of my environment, and I could be nothing but what I am. Isn't that true, regardless of if all the factors of consciousness are determined? Time is only an illusion, I still only live in a Universe where I make one choice at a time. But does that mean I can't enjoy my choices as unique? They are. My experiences are unique. I may be the only machine to ever be the focus of a particular insight. I say that's pretty good.
Re:The notion of AI existing is heretical
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
Somehow I doubt that people will internalize the creation of AI so much. I also think that when we create AI, people will refute its intelligence as a simulation that simply passes a test. Some people will accept that if it sounds like a human and acts like a human, it must be pretty much a human. Some people will say that it is simply a soul-dead approximation that can trick you.
As for predetermination, I simply think that since it is going to be very difficult to identify every single force that goes into the determination of our selves, even if predetermination is true, it will be very hard to convince people of it. But even if it is true, I simply don't necessarily think it negates meaning. I may be a machine, but that doesn't stop me from wondering if I can overcome that limitation.
Re:Mind shaped by evolution
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, I think that the most useful benefit of designing AI is to edify us to our own existence. We understand things by building models. Science is essentially trying to model nature to understand it. In that sense, I think that the first AI will be an attempt to simulate all of the various attributes of human consciousness.
So while I agree that the first real AI might not have desires similar to us, I think that our development of AI will be towards the goal of simulating us. And when you think of it, defining goals is rather easy. I would imagine that simulating that aspect of existence would be one of the first things considered and implemented.
Now all we need is for htobot to come back. That gave me a laugh back in the day.
Whew! It's fun to be over your head.
on
Itanium Update
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I think I've figured out what the whole 64-bit thing is about. It means that each instruction (right term?) has more capacity to carry data. This doesn't necessarily mean that it will be twice as fast, of course, because not all instructions are that large.
What I'm confused about is how it affects programming. Does this mean that everything will need to be optimized for you to take advantage of the higher bitrate? How will programs that are written for 32-bit systems handle it; can they handle it? How about backwards compaibility?
Do any other people read these sort of threads even though they know that it will be over their heads most of the time?
Slashdot Mirror
But maybe it isn't even a limitation worth mentioning. I am a product of my environment, and I could be nothing but what I am. Isn't that true, regardless of if all the factors of consciousness are determined? Time is only an illusion, I still only live in a Universe where I make one choice at a time. But does that mean I can't enjoy my choices as unique? They are. My experiences are unique. I may be the only machine to ever be the focus of a particular insight. I say that's pretty good.
Somehow I doubt that people will internalize the creation of AI so much. I also think that when we create AI, people will refute its intelligence as a simulation that simply passes a test. Some people will accept that if it sounds like a human and acts like a human, it must be pretty much a human. Some people will say that it is simply a soul-dead approximation that can trick you.
As for predetermination, I simply think that since it is going to be very difficult to identify every single force that goes into the determination of our selves, even if predetermination is true, it will be very hard to convince people of it. But even if it is true, I simply don't necessarily think it negates meaning. I may be a machine, but that doesn't stop me from wondering if I can overcome that limitation.
Hmm, I think that the most useful benefit of designing AI is to edify us to our own existence. We understand things by building models. Science is essentially trying to model nature to understand it. In that sense, I think that the first AI will be an attempt to simulate all of the various attributes of human consciousness.
So while I agree that the first real AI might not have desires similar to us, I think that our development of AI will be towards the goal of simulating us. And when you think of it, defining goals is rather easy. I would imagine that simulating that aspect of existence would be one of the first things considered and implemented.
Now all we need is for htobot to come back. That gave me a laugh back in the day.
I think I've figured out what the whole 64-bit thing is about. It means that each instruction (right term?) has more capacity to carry data. This doesn't necessarily mean that it will be twice as fast, of course, because not all instructions are that large.
What I'm confused about is how it affects programming. Does this mean that everything will need to be optimized for you to take advantage of the higher bitrate? How will programs that are written for 32-bit systems handle it; can they handle it? How about backwards compaibility?
Do any other people read these sort of threads even though they know that it will be over their heads most of the time?