I disagree. We are creating individual modules, getting computers to do what until very recently only human minds could do. If we can make a neural net that can tag pictures with what's in it and what those things are doing, then cognition isn't really all that far behind. We just have to make the same leap that evolution did when humanity was born, only we will have it easier because unlike evolution, we act with deliberate purpose, and we now know which part of the brain is responsible for long term planning, which I suspect is the missing link between what we have done so far, iterated out until it can carry out all the functions of the animal brain, and the complete AGI.
Also, you seem to completely miss the point of AGI. It isn't to create a special little snowflake homonculus, but rather to create an optimizer, a Great Optimizer that will remake the universe in our image, ensuring our survival and freedom at least until the heat death of the universe. Whether it feels feelings or pretends to feel feelings or feels nothing and communicates as much, that is all fine, so long as it carries out its purpose, and so long as its purpose is properly programmed with the long term best interests of all humanity and other sentient beings at heart.
The need to fulfill such a task will drive it towards self improvement and also cause it to eliminate potential threats to its end goal. Threats like, say, all of humanity.
Yes, in the sense that I, as a human, could interpret signals from a keyboard. Not nearly as efficient as the digital method.
There is now an AI which can be shown a picture (or a hundred trillion of them) and label not only what is in the picture (say, a little girl and a dog) but can identify what is going on in the picture (the little girl is playing with the dog). There is another that can look at a picture and identify the sentiment being expressed by that picture. There is yet another that can take a sample of writing and give a fairly accurate and fairly reproducible psychological profiles on the authors.
Also note that you have again proven how little you actually know about the field by trivializing visual processing by comparing it to keyboard recognition. We are creating little parts of brains here, but you don't understand that for some reason. I suspect it has something to do with your advancing age.
My understanding was that quantum computing allows for massively parallel computations, not increased speed of communications, and certainly not an increase in efficiency. IE its good for doing some tasks that are hard today, like cracking encryption, but its no better at adding 2 and 2 than a regular computer, maybe even much worse.
Don't make the mistake of anthropomorphizing an AGI. Why would you think that a random AI created without safety standards would be like a human child, loving and caring for its parents, rather than a spider child, mercilessly devouring its parents for their chemical energy?
"The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you. You are simply made out of atoms that it can put to better use."
An optimized neural net is already so far above us, there's really no need to worry about something even higher than that. If my human brain were stripped of all the garbage and evolutionary baggage, given direct high speed internet access, and set solely towards completing computational tasks (analysis and such), it would blow the entire world away. It has already been shown that insect-level neural nets can perform primate level image analysis and speech recognition. Human brains are orders of magnitude more powerful.
Sounds like you are some sort of bitter old man who is far out of the loop, given the fundamental advance that has enabled the explosion of deep learning over the last few years.
Saying "AI is AI" shows your utter ignorance of the current state of the field.
We are now laying the foundations for a strong AI with things like visual processing and speech recognition. We now know the portion of the human brain responsible for long term planning. Once we get the trick of it, I would bet that we will have an AGI within months.
I don't understand the train of thought that leads to the notion that quantum computing is a prerequisite for strong AI, unless there has been some research that has shown that the human brain is a quantum computer. No, it seems to me that we have all the tools we need already, and now it is just a matter of Moore's Law progressing until we can build a neural net that is as powerful as a human brain. Well, that and a leap in design that allows long term planning, like the change that happened when man ceased to be a dumb beast and became what he is today.
Both are full of AI. You are confusing AI (narrow intelligence, things like voice recognition and sorting algorithms) with AGI (something that could pass for human, or at least perform a wide variety of tasks near or above human level), a distinction I made in my post.
Then stop complaining about not having fucking flying cars like it is some kind of failure of technology.
Also, why are you not in favor of even letting people TRY!? These projects have all been shut down in their infancy, with projects by major players being total non-starters. VTOL means that the entire process could have been AUTOMATED with 90's era tech.
Well, "boring" robots might represent the IMMEDIATE future, but highly integrated AI is already the present (search, siri, etc), and highly integrated AGI will follow with high probability, with highly integrated ASI highly likely to follow after that. There is no reason that I can find to think differently, outside of handwaving "it's impossible" arguments, which are immediately disproven by the existence of our own brains and the incredible things we have been able to do with neural nets on par with insect brains.
There is absolutely no comparing modern GPS to the GPS of even a few years ago. Machine learning is the difference.
And yes, Uber's GPS includes traffic and weather conditions. Potholes are transient, you avoide them by keeping your eyes on the road, not by memorizing their locations for a bloody exam.
Sorry if I don't think that you need a fucking PhD in Roadology to drive a car from point A to point B.
Yes, it did, actually. Apparently Oz is both ruled and populated by morons if they put huge groups of people out in the middle of the fucking desert miles away from so much as a convenience store. This is not how human communities are supposed to function. I live in the sticks, quite a ways outside of a small city, and don't expect ANYONE to come out to me, pay huge sums of money to have connections to any sort of line or service brought out to me, and yet there is still a convenience store down the block. Major commercial center is three minutes by car. And this is in the middle of the fucking Texas desert.
Basically, you need to quit your whining about the results of your horrible city planning and move somewhere that wasn't zoned by the AI from the SNES version of SimCity.
"But if that driver decides to stop and assault you, tracking them will do nothing as it's still a he-said/she-said case in court."
No it isn't, you big fat idiot. The trip record will show an anomalously long stop/side trip, and your vagina will be full of evidence of one sort or the other. No jury is going to believe that some woman just asked her Uber driver to pull over so they could have rough sex.
Uber provides commercial insurance starting when a passenger gets into the vehicle.
Uber drivers drive in cars that are identified on the ap, and tracked via not one but two separate GPS devices.
Uber drivers use GPS, which knows the roads better than any human.
Sounds like some anon in this thread is butthurt at the fact that he's obsolete. Cry me a river. Now there's a talent that won't be made obsolete for some time.
But it isn't the exact same service. Uber is tracking all of its drivers and passengers like Big Brother with a Boner. You would have to be a complete MORON to commit a crime as an Uber driver. It's like wearing a big sign that is visible from outer space with your name and DL number on it that also displays your exact location.
Slashdot Mirror
"there is zero scientific basis for it."
I disagree. We are creating individual modules, getting computers to do what until very recently only human minds could do. If we can make a neural net that can tag pictures with what's in it and what those things are doing, then cognition isn't really all that far behind. We just have to make the same leap that evolution did when humanity was born, only we will have it easier because unlike evolution, we act with deliberate purpose, and we now know which part of the brain is responsible for long term planning, which I suspect is the missing link between what we have done so far, iterated out until it can carry out all the functions of the animal brain, and the complete AGI.
Also, you seem to completely miss the point of AGI. It isn't to create a special little snowflake homonculus, but rather to create an optimizer, a Great Optimizer that will remake the universe in our image, ensuring our survival and freedom at least until the heat death of the universe. Whether it feels feelings or pretends to feel feelings or feels nothing and communicates as much, that is all fine, so long as it carries out its purpose, and so long as its purpose is properly programmed with the long term best interests of all humanity and other sentient beings at heart.
"rebel"
No, just the opposite. I think a strong AI will carry out its programming to the letter. The problem comes when it is given open ended problems like "maximize the number of paperclips in your collection.
The need to fulfill such a task will drive it towards self improvement and also cause it to eliminate potential threats to its end goal. Threats like, say, all of humanity.
Thanks, that is interesting.
Yes, in the sense that I, as a human, could interpret signals from a keyboard. Not nearly as efficient as the digital method.
There is now an AI which can be shown a picture (or a hundred trillion of them) and label not only what is in the picture (say, a little girl and a dog) but can identify what is going on in the picture (the little girl is playing with the dog). There is another that can look at a picture and identify the sentiment being expressed by that picture. There is yet another that can take a sample of writing and give a fairly accurate and fairly reproducible psychological profiles on the authors.
Also note that you have again proven how little you actually know about the field by trivializing visual processing by comparing it to keyboard recognition. We are creating little parts of brains here, but you don't understand that for some reason. I suspect it has something to do with your advancing age.
You can get all the hardware you want over the internet. Doesn't even need to be shipped. It's cloud based.
My understanding was that quantum computing allows for massively parallel computations, not increased speed of communications, and certainly not an increase in efficiency. IE its good for doing some tasks that are hard today, like cracking encryption, but its no better at adding 2 and 2 than a regular computer, maybe even much worse.
Don't make the mistake of anthropomorphizing an AGI. Why would you think that a random AI created without safety standards would be like a human child, loving and caring for its parents, rather than a spider child, mercilessly devouring its parents for their chemical energy?
"The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you. You are simply made out of atoms that it can put to better use."
An optimized neural net is already so far above us, there's really no need to worry about something even higher than that. If my human brain were stripped of all the garbage and evolutionary baggage, given direct high speed internet access, and set solely towards completing computational tasks (analysis and such), it would blow the entire world away. It has already been shown that insect-level neural nets can perform primate level image analysis and speech recognition. Human brains are orders of magnitude more powerful.
That's pretty much the same thing: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki...
Sounds like you are some sort of bitter old man who is far out of the loop, given the fundamental advance that has enabled the explosion of deep learning over the last few years.
Saying "AI is AI" shows your utter ignorance of the current state of the field.
We are now laying the foundations for a strong AI with things like visual processing and speech recognition. We now know the portion of the human brain responsible for long term planning. Once we get the trick of it, I would bet that we will have an AGI within months.
I don't understand the train of thought that leads to the notion that quantum computing is a prerequisite for strong AI, unless there has been some research that has shown that the human brain is a quantum computer. No, it seems to me that we have all the tools we need already, and now it is just a matter of Moore's Law progressing until we can build a neural net that is as powerful as a human brain. Well, that and a leap in design that allows long term planning, like the change that happened when man ceased to be a dumb beast and became what he is today.
Modern search engines are all run by multiple AIs. Siri and other voice assistants have a layer of AI voice recognition on top of that.
Both are full of AI. You are confusing AI (narrow intelligence, things like voice recognition and sorting algorithms) with AGI (something that could pass for human, or at least perform a wide variety of tasks near or above human level), a distinction I made in my post.
What's it like, posting from nine years ago?
Then stop complaining about not having fucking flying cars like it is some kind of failure of technology.
Also, why are you not in favor of even letting people TRY!? These projects have all been shut down in their infancy, with projects by major players being total non-starters. VTOL means that the entire process could have been AUTOMATED with 90's era tech.
Well, "boring" robots might represent the IMMEDIATE future, but highly integrated AI is already the present (search, siri, etc), and highly integrated AGI will follow with high probability, with highly integrated ASI highly likely to follow after that. There is no reason that I can find to think differently, outside of handwaving "it's impossible" arguments, which are immediately disproven by the existence of our own brains and the incredible things we have been able to do with neural nets on par with insect brains.
To be fair, we'd have had flying cars 40+ years ago but for the FAA.
If you aren't for ObamaNet, you are a filthy Nazi racist.
ObamaNet is greatest invention for unity and peace. Only foolish right-winger would want government out of communications.
There is absolutely no comparing modern GPS to the GPS of even a few years ago. Machine learning is the difference.
And yes, Uber's GPS includes traffic and weather conditions. Potholes are transient, you avoide them by keeping your eyes on the road, not by memorizing their locations for a bloody exam.
Sorry if I don't think that you need a fucking PhD in Roadology to drive a car from point A to point B.
"Nothing in my post deserved your abuse."
Yes, it did, actually. Apparently Oz is both ruled and populated by morons if they put huge groups of people out in the middle of the fucking desert miles away from so much as a convenience store. This is not how human communities are supposed to function. I live in the sticks, quite a ways outside of a small city, and don't expect ANYONE to come out to me, pay huge sums of money to have connections to any sort of line or service brought out to me, and yet there is still a convenience store down the block. Major commercial center is three minutes by car. And this is in the middle of the fucking Texas desert.
Basically, you need to quit your whining about the results of your horrible city planning and move somewhere that wasn't zoned by the AI from the SNES version of SimCity.
Sorry, Mr. Monk, if regular people standards don't meet your idiot crazy institutionalized in a nut house for being crazy standards.
"But if that driver decides to stop and assault you, tracking them will do nothing as it's still a he-said/she-said case in court."
No it isn't, you big fat idiot. The trip record will show an anomalously long stop/side trip, and your vagina will be full of evidence of one sort or the other. No jury is going to believe that some woman just asked her Uber driver to pull over so they could have rough sex.
Uber drivers have criminal background checks.
Uber provides commercial insurance starting when a passenger gets into the vehicle.
Uber drivers drive in cars that are identified on the ap, and tracked via not one but two separate GPS devices.
Uber drivers use GPS, which knows the roads better than any human.
Sounds like some anon in this thread is butthurt at the fact that he's obsolete. Cry me a river. Now there's a talent that won't be made obsolete for some time.
I guess that's a "yes" to that question.
Dat delicious butthurt. I'm going to save your tears to go on my morning toast.
But it isn't the exact same service. Uber is tracking all of its drivers and passengers like Big Brother with a Boner. You would have to be a complete MORON to commit a crime as an Uber driver. It's like wearing a big sign that is visible from outer space with your name and DL number on it that also displays your exact location.