No, there are not. There are 8 billion interfaces that can be observed and that cannot (at this time and maybe never) be created artificially. Interface observations do not allow any conclusion as to how and where exactly that behavior is controlled from. But stick to your religion. Just do not expect any respect for putting your head in the sand.
Oh, feel free to define yourself away any time you like. To anybody with actually working intelligence, this is just one thing: Bullshit.
Still you can find even stranger delusions in the religious space. And yes, your convictions are religious. Even the language shows it: "but accept that physical reality is all that exists at the classical and quantum levels.". "Accept the one true God...." sounds a bit similar to that, doesn't it? As Science gives you absolutely no base for that "acceptance", it is a belief. If you accept a belief, then that is religion. Or in other words, you have failed at something pretty fundamental.
More like most human beings are not as smart as they think they are and are generally easy to fool. Just look at religion, advertising, politics, etc. Even fraud working on a fixed script (such as many religions use) can fool many people successfully.
Actually, Quantum Computing (if it ever works and if it turns out the theory holds up when tested this way) gives you performance boosts, but it cannot solve non-computable problems either. For that, more is required and we have no clue how that "more" could look like. We can observe its interface-behavior in action whenever a smart human person thinks, but we have no clue what is happening there. It is certainly not classical computing, or "digital" Quantum Computing.
The other problem is that consciousness does not fit physics. There is just no mechanism for it. You need an "observer" and one cannot be created by purely physical means. An "observer" can do "magic" though and influence physics. That much we already know with a high degree of reliability.
Excellent references though, Penrose is one of the really great thinkers.
So if a machine can do these things, but has arrived at this state by learning with neural nets, or genetic algorithms such that we still can’t define exactly how its intelligence works, does that preclude saying it is intelligent?
If there ever is a machine that can do the things that require, as it is usually put "real insight" and "real understanding", then it is intelligent. Not even a hint of such capabilities can be created today. They can be faked to a degree, but that always fall down when the borders of the illusion are reached.
Incidentally, you do not know that your brain is creating intelligence and insight. For that you need to assume Physicalism is correct and that is a mere belief with no scientific basis. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to make an argument for religion here. The problem is that Physicalism accepted as fact is actually religion, albeit in a less-obvious form and without the usual trappings like a God. It does have absolute truths though (Science does not have them as far as it is applied to physical reality) and it claims there are no other valid models (as most religion does). But when you come right down to it, while often hijacked by religion, Dualism does not imply religion, it merely states that apparently the physical model of reality is incomplete. Science has absolutely not problem with that. In fact, this may even be eventually testable, for example if we find a hard reason why intelligence on the level of a smart human being is not possible in this physical universe.
AI will certainly make a lot of jobs obsolete, as it does not require any actual intelligence to do a lot of jobs and most people doing these jobs are not very smart to begin with. Most production jobs, many service jobs and most administrative jobs will go away, it is just a matter of time.
The way to deal with this is to make "work" optional or only require it from those doing jobs that cannot be automatized. These jobs exist and are essential to keep society going, but it is maybe something like 10% of all jobs. That also means "working" as a means of wealth-distribution will not work anymore and some alternative is required. A possible solution could, e.g., be some form of base income for everybody that is enough for a decent living. There are pretty serious other problems though. For example, how to make people still get an education when it is not required for survival? The 10% would get an education just because they want to, but what about the rest?
I fully agree. Your idea what causes this fear is pretty interesting.
Incidentally, if we compare with computing, we had sort-of a theory how to do that automatically at least 2000 years ago, but lacked the hardware to do it. For strong AI we have absolutely no idea how to create it. This may well mean strong AI is > 2000 years away or infeasible in the first place.
You seem to be unable to understand language. Let me help you:
"Melt-down" consists of "to melt" (happened to the cores in Chernobyl, TMI, Fukushima and partially Windscale, that we know of) and "down" means to go closer to the core of the earth. Now, the active materials in some Fuckushima reactor cores and in TMI have certainly gone "down" to a significant degree, as analysis of radiation intensity clearly shows. Chernobyl would probably better be called a "nuclear blow up", because while the fissible material melted, it did not go down, being prevented by the graphite of this types reactor core.
There really is no problem here, because you have overlooked that the only thing giving time a direction is the observer, namely human beings with consciousness and intelligence. And we still have no idea at all how that works at all.
Your statements have no basis, except for a quasi-religious fundamentalist conviction that Physicalism is the correct model for this universe and all observable in it. That is not science, that is pure belief and one that ignores rather strong indicators to the contrary. Now, I have no idea what form of dualism we actually have here, and it certainly is not a religious one, but when it comes to things like intelligence, consciousness, free will, etc. physics rather obviously does not cut it. There is no space for "emergent behavior" in modern physics.
Seriously, assuming Physicalism is correct is just as baseless and unscientific as all other fundamentalist beliefs, and about as obviously nonsense. I have no idea why this nonsense gets perpetuated and it is mainly an US phenomenon. The only possible explanation I see is that it gets mis-used as religion-surrogate while pretending to not be a belief system, because Science says rather clearly "we do not know" on the question.
Indeed, good summary of the human side of this baseless hysteria.
None of the AI research we have are for strong/true AI that might be a danger. We still do not know whether creating that type is even possible at all in this physical universe. AI research has had impressive results, but none of them produce anything comparable with what smart human beings can do. What AI can do is of a completely different type, in particular it cannot do anything at all that requires the least shred of insight or understanding (which would be the central requirement for strong/true AI). That does not mean it is useless. Far from it. But calling it "automation" would have have been a lot more accurate than calling it AI.
What AI can to is trawl vast masses of data according to exceptionally simplistic rules, but that is essentially it. There is no indication more is even possible.
Seriously, while there are a lot of predictions from "researchers" hungry for grant money, the state-of-the-art is that it is completely unclear whether strong/true AI is possible at all in this universe. There are a few strong hints that it may not be. We also do not even have a theoretical model how it could be built and even if we had a theoretical model, we do not know whether that could be implemented and what performance we would get. We have _nothing_ at all. All we can do is create the appearance of intelligence in very limited circumstances, but that is it and that is not the real thing in any way. Just think of the classical Turkish chess-playing machine.
In fact, we cannot even define intelligence as found in humans in any other way than by what it can do. We have no clue why/how it works. (We do know that it does not work very well in most humans, which explains this AI panic...) And there is the little, often overlooked fact that we only observe strong/true intelligence in connection with consciousness, nowhere else. Which rather strongly suggests it is necessary. But for consciousness, we cannot even really describe what it does and it certainly does not seem to fit this physical universe as far as we do understand it. There simply is no known mechanism in Physics for it.
Given all that, the fears are not "premature", but "completely unfounded" and the whole thing is full blown, baseless hysteria, nothing else. We have been hard at work trying to create true/strong AI for > 40 years and we have absolutely nothing to show for it. True/strong AI is even farther away than it was 40 years ago, as at that time it was thought it was just a question of processing power and storage. That is rather obvious not the case or we would have something by now.
Also a good place to hide a weak point. My induction plate does only have some LEDs though and they are easily replaced. (Well, once you make a triangle-point screwdriver to get it open in the first place, but that took me all of 5 minutes.)
Which does not sound credible to me. On almost all sites where you ask this type of questions, you ask anonymously or with an account, but giving a plain-text email will both not get you responses to it and will get you a lot of spam to it instead.
My take: Parallel construction (i.e. law enforcement criminally lying under oath) and some way to keep Ulbricht quiet about it. Possibly done to hide criminal and possibly unconstitutional snooping practices.
Well, it is sort-of intentional contact after the PVC tubing has degraded...
Your example (silver plating, I expect, but tin-plating can also work) is another time-honored way to implement planned obsolescence. Sometimes it backfires. For example WD hat problem with silver-plated contacts in hard-drives in Russia, since they have more sulfur in the air there due to pollution. As a result, the drives failed too early. Of course nobody honest would ever silver-plate PCB contacts. Gold plating is not really much more expensive and far, far superior.
Research can be correct and still heavily biased. The trick to do it is to not document failed research directions and to just look for things you want to find. Some of these you will actually find and then you can project a completely skewed picture without stating a single untruth. Lying by omission is rampart in the social sciences. In the STEM field, people are a bit smarter and it is harder to do. Still often possible to get away with it even in STEM.
Well, almost no "journalist" these days has the discipline, education and smarts to actually understand a study like this. Not that the study sets a high bar, but journalism used to be something smart people with ideals went for. Not anymore.
I think we do not have that "geek culture" thing here in Europe. We do have some smart, technologically educated people and some of them are even fans of Star Wars or Star Trek or the like, but hardly any are sociologically awkward in the way a member of "geek culture" seems to be required to be. Most of them also know that they are quite a bit superior in their understanding of reality to the average person, but that is just a realistic take on the situation.
To make the problem worse, most people today do not realize that they are not very smart. Dunning-Kruger effect at work. It is amazing how many times actual experts get told these days that they are wrong by complete amateurs that do not even understand the basics.
Slashdot Mirror
No, there are not. There are 8 billion interfaces that can be observed and that cannot (at this time and maybe never) be created artificially. Interface observations do not allow any conclusion as to how and where exactly that behavior is controlled from. But stick to your religion. Just do not expect any respect for putting your head in the sand.
Oh, feel free to define yourself away any time you like. To anybody with actually working intelligence, this is just one thing: Bullshit.
Still you can find even stranger delusions in the religious space. And yes, your convictions are religious. Even the language shows it: "but accept that physical reality is all that exists at the classical and quantum levels.". "Accept the one true God...." sounds a bit similar to that, doesn't it? As Science gives you absolutely no base for that "acceptance", it is a belief. If you accept a belief, then that is religion. Or in other words, you have failed at something pretty fundamental.
Most technological "revolutions" these days are.
More like most human beings are not as smart as they think they are and are generally easy to fool. Just look at religion, advertising, politics, etc. Even fraud working on a fixed script (such as many religions use) can fool many people successfully.
Actually, Quantum Computing (if it ever works and if it turns out the theory holds up when tested this way) gives you performance boosts, but it cannot solve non-computable problems either. For that, more is required and we have no clue how that "more" could look like. We can observe its interface-behavior in action whenever a smart human person thinks, but we have no clue what is happening there. It is certainly not classical computing, or "digital" Quantum Computing.
The other problem is that consciousness does not fit physics. There is just no mechanism for it. You need an "observer" and one cannot be created by purely physical means. An "observer" can do "magic" though and influence physics. That much we already know with a high degree of reliability.
Excellent references though, Penrose is one of the really great thinkers.
So if a machine can do these things, but has arrived at this state by learning with neural nets, or genetic algorithms such that we still can’t define exactly how its intelligence works, does that preclude saying it is intelligent?
If there ever is a machine that can do the things that require, as it is usually put "real insight" and "real understanding", then it is intelligent. Not even a hint of such capabilities can be created today. They can be faked to a degree, but that always fall down when the borders of the illusion are reached.
Incidentally, you do not know that your brain is creating intelligence and insight. For that you need to assume Physicalism is correct and that is a mere belief with no scientific basis. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to make an argument for religion here. The problem is that Physicalism accepted as fact is actually religion, albeit in a less-obvious form and without the usual trappings like a God. It does have absolute truths though (Science does not have them as far as it is applied to physical reality) and it claims there are no other valid models (as most religion does). But when you come right down to it, while often hijacked by religion, Dualism does not imply religion, it merely states that apparently the physical model of reality is incomplete. Science has absolutely not problem with that. In fact, this may even be eventually testable, for example if we find a hard reason why intelligence on the level of a smart human being is not possible in this physical universe.
Well, as uninformed as a researcher that has followed AI research closely for 30 years can be.
AI will certainly make a lot of jobs obsolete, as it does not require any actual intelligence to do a lot of jobs and most people doing these jobs are not very smart to begin with. Most production jobs, many service jobs and most administrative jobs will go away, it is just a matter of time.
The way to deal with this is to make "work" optional or only require it from those doing jobs that cannot be automatized. These jobs exist and are essential to keep society going, but it is maybe something like 10% of all jobs. That also means "working" as a means of wealth-distribution will not work anymore and some alternative is required. A possible solution could, e.g., be some form of base income for everybody that is enough for a decent living. There are pretty serious other problems though. For example, how to make people still get an education when it is not required for survival? The 10% would get an education just because they want to, but what about the rest?
I fully agree. Your idea what causes this fear is pretty interesting.
Incidentally, if we compare with computing, we had sort-of a theory how to do that automatically at least 2000 years ago, but lacked the hardware to do it. For strong AI we have absolutely no idea how to create it. This may well mean strong AI is > 2000 years away or infeasible in the first place.
You seem to be unable to understand language. Let me help you:
"Melt-down" consists of "to melt" (happened to the cores in Chernobyl, TMI, Fukushima and partially Windscale, that we know of) and "down" means to go closer to the core of the earth. Now, the active materials in some Fuckushima reactor cores and in TMI have certainly gone "down" to a significant degree, as analysis of radiation intensity clearly shows. Chernobyl would probably better be called a "nuclear blow up", because while the fissible material melted, it did not go down, being prevented by the graphite of this types reactor core.
In other words, you are full of it.
There really is no problem here, because you have overlooked that the only thing giving time a direction is the observer, namely human beings with consciousness and intelligence. And we still have no idea at all how that works at all.
Your statements have no basis, except for a quasi-religious fundamentalist conviction that Physicalism is the correct model for this universe and all observable in it. That is not science, that is pure belief and one that ignores rather strong indicators to the contrary. Now, I have no idea what form of dualism we actually have here, and it certainly is not a religious one, but when it comes to things like intelligence, consciousness, free will, etc. physics rather obviously does not cut it. There is no space for "emergent behavior" in modern physics.
Seriously, assuming Physicalism is correct is just as baseless and unscientific as all other fundamentalist beliefs, and about as obviously nonsense. I have no idea why this nonsense gets perpetuated and it is mainly an US phenomenon. The only possible explanation I see is that it gets mis-used as religion-surrogate while pretending to not be a belief system, because Science says rather clearly "we do not know" on the question.
Indeed, good summary of the human side of this baseless hysteria.
None of the AI research we have are for strong/true AI that might be a danger. We still do not know whether creating that type is even possible at all in this physical universe. AI research has had impressive results, but none of them produce anything comparable with what smart human beings can do. What AI can do is of a completely different type, in particular it cannot do anything at all that requires the least shred of insight or understanding (which would be the central requirement for strong/true AI). That does not mean it is useless. Far from it. But calling it "automation" would have have been a lot more accurate than calling it AI.
What AI can to is trawl vast masses of data according to exceptionally simplistic rules, but that is essentially it. There is no indication more is even possible.
Seriously, while there are a lot of predictions from "researchers" hungry for grant money, the state-of-the-art is that it is completely unclear whether strong/true AI is possible at all in this universe. There are a few strong hints that it may not be. We also do not even have a theoretical model how it could be built and even if we had a theoretical model, we do not know whether that could be implemented and what performance we would get. We have _nothing_ at all. All we can do is create the appearance of intelligence in very limited circumstances, but that is it and that is not the real thing in any way. Just think of the classical Turkish chess-playing machine.
In fact, we cannot even define intelligence as found in humans in any other way than by what it can do. We have no clue why/how it works. (We do know that it does not work very well in most humans, which explains this AI panic...) And there is the little, often overlooked fact that we only observe strong/true intelligence in connection with consciousness, nowhere else. Which rather strongly suggests it is necessary. But for consciousness, we cannot even really describe what it does and it certainly does not seem to fit this physical universe as far as we do understand it. There simply is no known mechanism in Physics for it.
Given all that, the fears are not "premature", but "completely unfounded" and the whole thing is full blown, baseless hysteria, nothing else. We have been hard at work trying to create true/strong AI for > 40 years and we have absolutely nothing to show for it. True/strong AI is even farther away than it was 40 years ago, as at that time it was thought it was just a question of processing power and storage. That is rather obvious not the case or we would have something by now.
Also a good place to hide a weak point. My induction plate does only have some LEDs though and they are easily replaced. (Well, once you make a triangle-point screwdriver to get it open in the first place, but that took me all of 5 minutes.)
Which does not sound credible to me. On almost all sites where you ask this type of questions, you ask anonymously or with an account, but giving a plain-text email will both not get you responses to it and will get you a lot of spam to it instead.
My take: Parallel construction (i.e. law enforcement criminally lying under oath) and some way to keep Ulbricht quiet about it. Possibly done to hide criminal and possibly unconstitutional snooping practices.
But here's a puzzler: This is 2015. Why are people still asking stupid questions?
Still the same old obsolete v1.0 model, I guess ;-)
This is 2015. Why are pencils still made?
See how stupid that sounds?
Well, it is sort-of intentional contact after the PVC tubing has degraded...
Your example (silver plating, I expect, but tin-plating can also work) is another time-honored way to implement planned obsolescence. Sometimes it backfires. For example WD hat problem with silver-plated contacts in hard-drives in Russia, since they have more sulfur in the air there due to pollution. As a result, the drives failed too early. Of course nobody honest would ever silver-plate PCB contacts. Gold plating is not really much more expensive and far, far superior.
But given that Star Wars stretches the boundaries "age", you know Anakin would have been all of ten years old when he married Queen Amydala
Yikes, so Amydala is a pedo?
Naaa, they are lying to you because they want to sell you something.
Research can be correct and still heavily biased. The trick to do it is to not document failed research directions and to just look for things you want to find. Some of these you will actually find and then you can project a completely skewed picture without stating a single untruth. Lying by omission is rampart in the social sciences. In the STEM field, people are a bit smarter and it is harder to do. Still often possible to get away with it even in STEM.
Well, almost no "journalist" these days has the discipline, education and smarts to actually understand a study like this. Not that the study sets a high bar, but journalism used to be something smart people with ideals went for. Not anymore.
I think we do not have that "geek culture" thing here in Europe. We do have some smart, technologically educated people and some of them are even fans of Star Wars or Star Trek or the like, but hardly any are sociologically awkward in the way a member of "geek culture" seems to be required to be. Most of them also know that they are quite a bit superior in their understanding of reality to the average person, but that is just a realistic take on the situation.
To make the problem worse, most people today do not realize that they are not very smart. Dunning-Kruger effect at work. It is amazing how many times actual experts get told these days that they are wrong by complete amateurs that do not even understand the basics.