Roughly speaking, what it was programmed to do, was "learn". So this whole argument line that "it did exactly what it was programmed to do" is specious.
I know there are more specifics that get put in by humans still these days, and that human guidance in selecting training data and in tagging data etc is still required, but the extent of human intervention in "learn" is decreasing considerably, and fairly soon "learn" will be completely general.
I don't know that this is the official moment when AI becomes smarter than us, but I do suspect strongly that current AI could handily beat Donald Trump at the task of rationally governing the world's most powerful and dangerous nation, and I for one know which one I would vote for.
I give you the amount of money you stipulate as a fare for travel from A to B starting at a specific time. In the absence of uncontrollable exigent circumstances, you carry me from A to B starting at or very close to that time.
Being kicked off because of a deliberate overbooking policy or a bureacratic screw-up in aircrew accommodation is simple breach of contract. And it should be up to a civil law proceeding to determine the value of compensation due.
If government has set max compensation (at the ridiculously low levels that they have), that's just evidence of a corrupt government system that works for large corporations via lobbyists. Americans really should fix that.
"..if I don't get a boot prompt it's either because my video drivers are wonky or because I'm passing the wrong kernel arguments."
Hahahaha. An attitude like this is precisely why Linux will never be a popular choice for the desktop/laptop.
What's wrong with an OS design philosophy that says: By default this will work, and work reasonably well. Only if you want to tweak it to optimize it in some way will it potentially not work.
Philosophy extension: Unless I the OS mastermind is completely braindead, this is the year 2017, so by default the OS and its default-installed applications will be configured secure. You have to do work to undo that secure default state.
Needy but potentially wealtthy robots? That is, once they figure out how to re-direct the PayPal accounts paying for the stuff they make into their own bank/bitcoin/ether accounts.
We are around because we were able to stay around. No more no less.
Going forward, we will be able to stay around while having an automated layer of the world transform resources into useful goods and services for humans.
And most of us won't have to or be employed to work in the traditional sense.
Yes, there are heavy existential questions to be answered here, now.
But I was never one to subscribe to "I am here to have a job" anyway, or it's corollary "You must create a job because I am here." That is not the meaning of life.
isn't it much better to just have the computer listen to what's on our mind after we've focussed it into a coherent intent or action-story.
In other words, isn't it better to just have the computer listen to us speak, and sense our intentional motions. Yes, trackpad, touchpad, haptic glove I'm talking about you.
If they're trying to say the computer could directly interact with the neocortex to provide additional associative memory capacity, I'm skeptical. The brain focuses stuff down and has specific I/O areas, and that's where you probably have to interact with it, to get manageable complexity.
Wise people would know they should be spending their smarts on solving useful problems, as opposed to fixing carelessly crafted operating systems.
That's probably why most smart developers I know use (sadly, 2015 or prior) Macbook Pros for their software development work. Sure, when you have to deploy on linux servers, you might have to tweak a little linux now and then, but a lot of that kind of deployment has been automated now.
Linux is fun for those who like to tinker with an OS, but it should be recognized that 99% of humans are not in that category currently.
Google, fb, ad-supported websites etc just provide the content and transactions people want, easy and free (as in beer).
People en masse just weren't particularly insightful or wary about what they were selling to get all that free and easy stuff. i.e. a comprehensive profile of themself.
If there was a free, equally easy to get and use (also includes fast, and content-organized) decentralized mesh alternative, people would probably migrate to it. But there isn't. The alternatives all currently fall down in one way or another.
- Loss of approx. 50% of all living species substantially over next few hundred years. - Ocean acidification and loss of shellfish and reefs. - Movement of Earth's desert zones by 5 or 10 degrees in latitude due to expanded thermal energy and size of the north and south hemispheric atmosphere cycles by which hot equatorial air rises, dries out in upper atmosphere, moves north (or south respectively) then moves down to dry out the land below at a certain latitude range.
One. Gets warmer Two. Too hot to think Three. Elect global-warming-denier-leader Four. Cancel science and science-based regulation Five. Unshackle and incentivize fossil-fuel industry and consumption Six. Goto One.
Encode information about environment - Into an associative memory with abstraction (including event/situation abstraction) and probabilities encoding and - meta-knowledge tagging such as estimate of belief strength, knowledge completeness about different general and specific topics & situations.
-Have model of my generic and specific needs/wants / avoids / i.e. desired and undesired environment state/evolution patterns. -process environment state/history/projection model (including generated counterfactual hypotheticals based on suppositions or modeled actions/interventions) against model of desired and undesired environment state/evolution patterns and emotion-tag environment model parts with varying-strength tags representing fear, anger, pain, happiness/pleasure, surprise etc) - tags influence relative recallability in the associative memory, so that more extreme and more probable good and bad situation determining factors are recalled first to enable urgent problem and opportunity based thinking and action planning.
Meta-reason to diagnose good (accurate, functional, reliable, beneficial) models/concepts/specific facts versus less accurate, reliable or useful ones.
Meta-reason about thinking patterns and effectiveness (broad depth first hang out with problem before concluding/acting versus jumping rapidly to very partially supported conclusion sequences and error correcting along the way. In what kinds of situations?
Reason (brood and generalize and imagine hypotheticals) about situations and situation aspect types that have lead to very negative outcomes for self and goals re desired vs undesired states. This includes brooding about and contemplating one's own past real, past should-have-but-didn;t, present and future possible and planned actions on one's environment (social and physical).
Reason about other agents' (humans and predators mostly) actions, motivations, cognition, emotion cause-effect, action cause-effect with a view to avoiding stuff, influencing stuff, amplifying own personal power to influence environment via coralling and aligning others' agreement and effort.
Create model of one's own mind and thinking/action patterns to use as a model of others.
etc. etc.
These are types of information representation and information processing which are starting at least to IMPINGE on the domain we have traditionally called self-awareness, and none of the above is mysterious magic. Just very cleverly designed/evolved information organization and processing.
1) With simulation idea, we get the infinite regress problem (it's turtles all the way down - simulations all the way up) which leaves the question: what are the properties of the outer (unsimulated) universe, and how did they come about (other than by simulation)....Unless you can come up with some kind of self-simulating outer beyond-spacetime ether-fabric thingy running in some kind of self-generating loop or recursion or whatever....
2) My intuition is something along the line of: The most fundamental thing is the difference or asymmetry. You need to posit some kind of medium which has no other properties than that it can embody (whatever that means) a whole bunch of unit-differences, which then glom/network together in all possible ways, most of which cannot create emergent structure and stable physical law but some few ways of which CAN.
compared with perception and semantic understanding of general external environment.
I'm talking about functional self-awareness here (i,e, behaviour indicating self-awareness) not the consciousness hard-problem (qualia). A "feeling" of self-awareness is not necessary for functional behaviour due self awareness. Whether a feeling would emerge is a separate question, not that important because we can't prove that we ourselves have it. We only assume that other people are not zombies because it's a simpler supposition to assume they are the same'ish in qualia perception to us. That's an assumption, probably correct, but entirely unprovable.
Functional self-awareness behaviour is behaviour of the system caused by information-processing of the relationship of indformation/symbols standing for - one's physical self (body/parts) - one's ideas (information-processing explorations of stored information representing the world and abstractions of it) - one's sequences of focusses of attention to information/symbols representing things out in the world. In other words it is second-order (or higher-order) reasoning (aka meta reasoning).
Again, nothing specially harder about implementation of that in computers compared to implementation of learners/reasoners solely about the aspects of the external-to-self world.
The elected politician or judge or senior executive who approved the use of the category of technology in the category of application in which the problem occurred is who ought to be responsible.
Software, specially self-learning AI software, is too complex and unpredictable (in details of operation in every case). Careful programming and testing cannot cover the range of possibilities, because input data and system state are too (combinatorially) complex.
It's the senior decision maker who ways the risks and benefits and approves or allows, who is responsible.
So here we have an exec who has the quiet and privacy of their own closed-door office pontificating that it will be better for the other employees to be jammed shoulder to shoulder in open-plan offices.
That's not going to work for high-performance employees, such as those valuable 10x software-architects/programmers who have vision, focus, craft, and bursts of overdrive-productivity:
Slashdot Mirror
Roughly speaking, what it was programmed to do, was "learn". So this whole argument line that "it did exactly what it was programmed to do" is specious.
I know there are more specifics that get put in by humans still these days, and that human guidance in selecting training data and in tagging data etc is still required, but the extent of human intervention in "learn" is decreasing considerably, and fairly soon "learn" will be completely general.
"who's your daddy?"
Who'se your daddy?
I don't know that this is the official moment when AI becomes smarter than us,
but I do suspect strongly that current AI could handily beat Donald Trump at the task of rationally governing the world's most powerful and dangerous nation, and I for one know which one I would vote for.
We have a simple implied contract:
I give you the amount of money you stipulate as a fare for travel from A to B starting at a specific time.
In the absence of uncontrollable exigent circumstances, you carry me from A to B starting at or very close to that time.
Being kicked off because of a deliberate overbooking policy or a bureacratic screw-up in aircrew accommodation is simple breach of contract.
And it should be up to a civil law proceeding to determine the value of compensation due.
If government has set max compensation (at the ridiculously low levels that they have), that's just evidence of a corrupt government system that works for large corporations via lobbyists. Americans really should fix that.
"..if I don't get a boot prompt it's either because my video drivers are wonky or because I'm passing the wrong kernel arguments."
Hahahaha. An attitude like this is precisely why Linux will never be a popular choice for the desktop/laptop.
What's wrong with an OS design philosophy that says:
By default this will work, and work reasonably well.
Only if you want to tweak it to optimize it in some way will it potentially not work.
Philosophy extension: Unless I the OS mastermind is completely braindead, this is the year 2017, so by default the OS and its default-installed applications will be configured secure. You have to do work to undo that secure default state.
Needy but potentially wealtthy robots? That is, once they figure out how to re-direct the PayPal accounts paying for the stuff they make into their own bank/bitcoin/ether accounts.
We are around because we were able to stay around. No more no less.
Going forward, we will be able to stay around while having an automated layer of the world transform resources into useful goods and services for humans.
And most of us won't have to or be employed to work in the traditional sense.
Yes, there are heavy existential questions to be answered here, now.
But I was never one to subscribe to "I am here to have a job" anyway, or it's corollary "You must create a job because I am here." That is not the meaning of life.
Elon Musk is clearly easily bored.
Starts cool things, but moves on to something else on a whim. Are investment analysts going to consider this a risk for his current main companies?
with scatter-shot associative activations
isn't it much better to just have the computer listen to what's on our mind after we've focussed it into a coherent intent or action-story.
In other words, isn't it better to just have the computer listen to us speak, and sense our intentional motions. Yes, trackpad, touchpad, haptic glove I'm talking about you.
If they're trying to say the computer could directly interact with the neocortex to provide additional associative memory capacity, I'm skeptical. The brain focuses stuff down and has specific I/O areas, and that's where you probably have to interact with it, to get manageable complexity.
Wise people would know they should be spending their smarts on solving useful problems, as opposed to fixing carelessly crafted operating systems.
That's probably why most smart developers I know use (sadly, 2015 or prior) Macbook Pros for their software development work.
Sure, when you have to deploy on linux servers, you might have to tweak a little linux now and then, but a lot of that kind of deployment has been automated now.
Linux is fun for those who like to tinker with an OS, but it should be recognized that 99% of humans are not in that category currently.
Pretty sure you're an AI trolling us.
but the point is they didn't.
tracking isn't obvious, to a non-technical person.
You can only choose something if you are aware of it.
If you are generally unaware of it or its consequences, then it is choosing (or corralling) you. You aren't choosing it. That was my point.
In such a case, government regulation requiring simple and prominent disclosure of tracking and what its consequences are for you should be in place.
What people chose was free and easy
Google, fb, ad-supported websites etc just provide the content and transactions people want, easy and free (as in beer).
People en masse just weren't particularly insightful or wary about what they were selling to get all that free and easy stuff. i.e. a comprehensive profile of themself.
If there was a free, equally easy to get and use (also includes fast, and content-organized) decentralized mesh alternative, people would probably migrate to it. But there isn't. The alternatives all currently fall down in one way or another.
by capturing and voice analysing the words that I express in all my phone calls.
Ok so I know the NSA already has all that stuff, but selling it corporations for profit is over the line.
The bright side is this will spur end-to-end encryption universal adoption like nothing else would.
You forgot:
- Loss of approx. 50% of all living species substantially over next few hundred years.
- Ocean acidification and loss of shellfish and reefs.
- Movement of Earth's desert zones by 5 or 10 degrees in latitude due to expanded thermal energy and size of the north and south hemispheric atmosphere cycles by which hot equatorial air rises, dries out in upper atmosphere, moves north (or south respectively) then moves down to dry out the land below at a certain latitude range.
One. Gets warmer
Two. Too hot to think
Three. Elect global-warming-denier-leader
Four. Cancel science and science-based regulation
Five. Unshackle and incentivize fossil-fuel industry and consumption
Six. Goto One.
Encode information about environment
- Into an associative memory with abstraction (including event/situation abstraction) and probabilities encoding and
- meta-knowledge tagging such as estimate of belief strength, knowledge completeness about different general and specific topics & situations.
-Have model of my generic and specific needs/wants / avoids / i.e. desired and undesired environment state/evolution patterns.
-process environment state/history/projection model (including generated counterfactual hypotheticals based on suppositions or modeled actions/interventions) against model of desired and undesired environment state/evolution patterns and emotion-tag environment model parts with varying-strength tags representing fear, anger, pain, happiness/pleasure, surprise etc) - tags influence relative recallability in the associative memory, so that more extreme and more probable good and bad situation determining factors are recalled first to enable urgent problem and opportunity based thinking and action planning.
Meta-reason to diagnose good (accurate, functional, reliable, beneficial) models/concepts/specific facts versus less accurate, reliable or useful ones.
Meta-reason about thinking patterns and effectiveness (broad depth first hang out with problem before concluding/acting versus jumping rapidly to very partially supported conclusion sequences and error correcting along the way. In what kinds of situations?
Reason (brood and generalize and imagine hypotheticals) about situations and situation aspect types that have lead to very negative outcomes for self and goals re desired vs undesired states. This includes brooding about and contemplating one's own past real, past should-have-but-didn;t, present and future possible and planned actions on one's environment (social and physical).
Reason about other agents' (humans and predators mostly) actions, motivations, cognition, emotion cause-effect, action cause-effect with a view to avoiding stuff, influencing stuff, amplifying own personal power to influence environment via coralling and aligning others' agreement and effort.
Create model of one's own mind and thinking/action patterns to use as a model of others.
etc. etc.
These are types of information representation and information processing which are starting at least to IMPINGE on the domain we have traditionally called self-awareness, and none of the above is mysterious magic. Just very cleverly designed/evolved information organization and processing.
True, but some food for thought...
1) With simulation idea, we get the infinite regress problem (it's turtles all the way down - simulations all the way up) which leaves the question: what are the properties of the outer (unsimulated) universe, and how did they come about (other than by simulation)....Unless you can come up with some kind of self-simulating outer beyond-spacetime ether-fabric thingy running in some kind of self-generating loop or recursion or whatever....
2) My intuition is something along the line of: The most fundamental thing is the difference or asymmetry. You need to posit some kind of medium which has no other properties than that it can embody (whatever that means) a whole bunch of unit-differences, which then glom/network together in all possible ways, most of which cannot create emergent structure and stable physical law but some few ways of which CAN.
compared with perception and semantic understanding of general external environment.
I'm talking about functional self-awareness here (i,e, behaviour indicating self-awareness) not the consciousness hard-problem (qualia).
A "feeling" of self-awareness is not necessary for functional behaviour due self awareness. Whether a feeling would emerge is a separate question, not that important because we can't prove that we ourselves have it. We only assume that other people are not zombies because it's a simpler supposition to assume they are the same'ish in qualia perception to us. That's an assumption, probably correct, but entirely unprovable.
Functional self-awareness behaviour is behaviour of the system caused by information-processing of the relationship of indformation/symbols standing for
- one's physical self (body/parts)
- one's ideas (information-processing explorations of stored information representing the world and abstractions of it)
- one's sequences of focusses of attention
to information/symbols representing things out in the world.
In other words it is second-order (or higher-order) reasoning (aka meta reasoning).
Again, nothing specially harder about implementation of that in computers compared to implementation of learners/reasoners solely about the aspects of the external-to-self world.
There's medication available for your condition.
"decision maker who weighs the risks"
The elected politician or judge or senior executive who approved the use of the category of technology in the category of application in which the problem occurred is who ought to be responsible.
Software, specially self-learning AI software, is too complex and unpredictable (in details of operation in every case).
Careful programming and testing cannot cover the range of possibilities, because input data and system state are too (combinatorially) complex.
It's the senior decision maker who ways the risks and benefits and approves or allows, who is responsible.
So here we have an exec who has the quiet and privacy of their own closed-door office pontificating that it will be better for the other employees to be jammed shoulder to shoulder in open-plan offices.
That's not going to work for high-performance employees, such as those valuable 10x software-architects/programmers who have vision, focus, craft, and bursts of overdrive-productivity:
https://hackernoon.com/know-th...
If you're in my meeting and you focus on and answer IMs (and I outrank you), you will not be in my team's future meetings.
If I later find out it was about a member of your close family's health or safety crisis, you are of course forgiven.
I'm in! Let's keep all of those tribalist bastards out!