|
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:22 AM
#1
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
 Simon
I wanted to know if you still wanted to discuss about artificial intelligence?
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:32 AM
#2
Fanatic Member
Why not?
Where did we leave off?
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment. 
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:40 AM
#3
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
we were about to define it,
you were suggesting that intelligence has to do with self-awareness, and thus artificial intelligence would have to be aware of itself to be called artificially intelligent.
Does self-awareness mean conscious?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:45 AM
#4
Fanatic Member
Originally posted by kedaman
we were about to define it,
you were suggesting that intelligence has to do with self-awareness, and thus artificial intelligence would have to be aware of itself to be called artificially intelligent.
Does self-awareness mean conscious?
Quick question on this - are you thinking that intelligence is basically the ability to do acts that are recognisably the products of intelligence [e.g. have a conversation, flexibly solve 'real world' problems etc.] while consciousness is related to self awareness and so is a different thing?
 Looking for a friendly intelligent chat forum? Visit the white-hart.net 
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:55 AM
#5
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
I think intelligence is the ability to solve a problem yeah, the ability to choose an efficient path, nothing to do with self awareness, but I'm not certain what simon thinks.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 04:56 AM
#6
Fanatic Member
Kedaman
you were suggesting that intelligence has to do with self-awareness, and thus artificial intelligence would have to be aware of itself to be called artificially intelligent.
I am not suggesting that self-awareness is a prerequisite for intelligence parse, however, especially as far as I am concerned, that is the real challenge of AI researchers and of most interest.
Does self-awareness mean conscious?
No, I don't think so.
They say that cats are not self-aware yet who would deny that they are consious? Perhaps they are wrong but I'm not sure.
Self awareness is the ability postulate about oneself in the third person. The intellectual advantage of this must be immeasurable and an AI program that achieved it would have obvious advantages over those that didn't.
Kzin
Quick question on this - are you thinking that intelligence is basically the ability to do acts that are recognisably the products of intelligence [e.g. have a conversation, flexibly solve 'real world' problems etc.] while consciousness is related to self awareness and so is a different thing?
I'm not sure they can be seperated as easilly. Perhaps one needs to be selfaware to solve real world problems that we do every day?
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:00 AM
#7
Fanatic Member
Originally posted by kedaman
I think intelligence is the ability to solve a problem yeah, the ability to choose an efficient path, nothing to do with self awareness, but I'm not certain what simon thinks.
Seems - errm logical. It means that we can assess intelligence by actions rather than by speculation about consciousness. It also means that AI is achievable using what is known already without having to solve the problems of consciousness.
As far as I can tell it means that the Turing test is 'valid' although I'm quite open to being disproved on this.
Looking for a friendly intelligent chat forum? Visit the white-hart.net
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:03 AM
#8
Fanatic Member
Kzin
It means that we can assess intelligence by actions rather than by speculation about consciousness. It also means that AI is achievable using what is known already without having to solve the problems of consciousness.
It depends what you want from AI. I am not personally interested in creating an intelligent machine. However, I would suspect that self-awareness was a stepping stone in the development of human intelligence, without which, we could not have progressed as far as we did.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:04 AM
#9
Fanatic Member
Originally posted by simonm
Kedaman
I'm not sure they can be seperated as easilly. Perhaps one needs to be selfaware to solve real world problems that we do every day?
I can't say that I agree with that. I think that it is just that we would tend to think that as we happen to be self aware intelligences.
Looking for a friendly intelligent chat forum? Visit the white-hart.net
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:08 AM
#10
Fanatic Member
Kzin
I can't say that I agree with that. I think that it is just that we would tend to think that as we happen to be self aware intelligences.
But how can you deny the intellectual advantages to being self-aware?
Being able to hypothesise and postulate about that which is not but might be is thanks to self-awareness. The advantages to problem solving this has cannot be denied.
It is some sort of evolutionary milestone for us to be able to seperate ourselves from our environment.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:08 AM
#11
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
I agree with kzin, you don't know if he is selfaware either, just that he acts as if he was self aware
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:11 AM
#12
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Originally posted by simonm
Kzin
But how can you deny the intellectual advantages to being self-aware?
Being able to hypothesise and postulate about that which is not but might be is thanks to self-awareness. The advantages to problem solving this has cannot be denied.
It is some sort of evolutionary milestone for us to be able to seperate ourselves from our environment.
it doesn't matter, it all depends on what problem you are trying to solve, if thats for you own good then it might be crusial, but not otherways
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:23 AM
#13
Fanatic Member
OK, fine.
You are not intereted in creating self-aware intelligence and that's OK. It is personally what I find most interesting and I just happen to believe that there are various types of problems that cannot be solved without self-awareness.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 05:36 AM
#14
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
I think selfawareness is only nessesarily if you have own goals, and I think if a machine would have these then they we would have competitors.
If selfpreservation is a criteria for a case then it is part of the solution and can be taken into account but that wouldn't bind the processing entity to their physical themselves as we are bound to ours
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 06:45 AM
#15
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
I think I know what you mean. If I'm aware the consequences of impact on myself would have impact on a case I'd consider myself part of the solution for that case. In that case we agree because such self-awareness is like being aware of anything else, not particularly yourself as conscious beings can be.
I think we can go on to the next question now. Do you think artificial intelligence is a turing machine, an entity to process information? In that case isn't any computer an artificial intelligence? If not, what else does an artificial intelligence need?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 30th, 2002, 08:11 AM
#16
Fanatic Member
Kedaman
think we can go on to the next question now. Do you think artificial intelligence is a turing machine, an entity to process information? In that case isn't any computer an artificial intelligence? If not, what else does an artificial intelligence need?
If you are asking whether a turing machine could achieve consiousness, I don't know.
Artificial intelligence, for it's right, doesn't need anything. It is what we need from AI that is the question. What we need from AI depends on who you ask and what I am interesting in seeing is consiousness.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 1st, 2002, 01:28 AM
#17
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
If you are asking whether a turing machine could achieve consiousness, I don't know.
I'm asking if a turing machine can represent artificial intelligence, and if so, if any turing machine is artificially intelligent.
Artificial intelligence, for it's right, doesn't need anything. It is what we need from AI that is the question.
I was talking about constraints
What we need from AI depends on who you ask and what I am interesting in seeing is consiousness.
How can you see consciousness?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 1st, 2002, 02:58 AM
#18
Fanatic Member
How can you see consciousness?
Easy, it's a great big ball of white light... 
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 1st, 2002, 05:13 AM
#19
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
I wonder if you think that artificial intelligence is something mystical, because it almost seems like you don't want to have a precise definition
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 1st, 2002, 05:17 AM
#20
Fanatic Member
It's not that I don't want a definition, it's just that I can't decide upon one.
Do you have a definition?
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 1st, 2002, 05:19 AM
#21
PowerPoster
You can't see it from outside. You are conscious as soon as you can think of something called yourself so you have to self-decide. Better said, as soon as you can decide yourself, you're conscious.
consciousness.... weird word, sorry for typos
-
May 1st, 2002, 09:14 AM
#22
Fanatic Member
Kedaman
I think we can go on to the next question now. Do you think artificial intelligence is a turing machine, an entity to process information? In that case isn't any computer an artificial intelligence? If not, what else does an artificial intelligence need?
I don't think it's a matter of just being able to slap a label on something and call it intelligent.
I think that, with the progress of technology, we will develop more and more powerful problem solving machines but are they becomming more intelligent? I am not inclined to think so.
Can there ever be real intelligence without understanding? Can there ever be real understanding without consiousness?
Fox
I was joking about being able to "see" consiousness. 
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 1st, 2002, 01:20 PM
#23
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
You have a problem with consciousness, obviously, because it clouds your sense of logic. You can't distinguish something without specifications, only speculate.
I do have a simple definition:
the ability to perform a task efficiently, essentially a turing machine, for a given input an unambiguous output, the intelligence is determined by the output conformance to the desired for the task.
In other words a computer.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:07 AM
#24
Fanatic Member
Kedman
You have a problem with consciousness, obviously, because it clouds your sense of logic. You can't distinguish something without specifications, only speculate.
Well, I'm not too sure what you mean there but perhaps my interest in AI lies in attempting to understand the human mind. If we can build a human (like) mind, we can understand our own consiousness.
Your definition seems entirely adequate for a tool that you employ to solve problems but I, personally, am looking for more than that. I want to understand myself; the essence of what I am.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:10 AM
#25
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
I'm afraid that you can't find what you are looking for, Irrational as it seems to be, you can't be intelligent the way a machine is.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:14 AM
#26
Fanatic Member
Kedaman
I'm afraid that you can't find what you are looking for, Irrational as it seems to be, you can't be intelligent the way a machine is.
Well, can a machine be intelligent the way we are? That is what I'm more interested in.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:16 AM
#27
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
Simon
You cannot find out
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:32 AM
#28
Fanatic Member
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:36 AM
#29
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
its irrational, it can't be explained, it can't be measured, its only something that you can experience.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:41 AM
#30
Fanatic Member
Well, are you suggesting then that consiousness is not mechanistic? You may be right but either that's got to proven or else the search will go on.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:45 AM
#31
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
how can you search for something without knowing what to search for?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 03:56 AM
#32
Fanatic Member
how can you search for something without knowing what to search for?
Well, when I say search for consiousness, I also mean searching for it's definition as well.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:01 AM
#33
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
where is the scientist now?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:10 AM
#34
New Member
I saw him by the coffee machine and he definitely didnt look happy. Mumbling something about a stolen choc chip muffin, I believe.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:11 AM
#35
Fanatic Member
Did I say I was a scientist?
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:12 AM
#36
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
so you have changed your mind then`?
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:21 AM
#37
Fanatic Member
A scientist attempts to understand the nature of reality (as far as I am concerned).
If our consiousness is part of the fabric of reality, they are legitimate scientific game.
Everything I say is either loose interpretation of dubious facts or idle speculation rooted in irrational sentiment.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 04:27 AM
#38
Thread Starter
transcendental analytic
and you would have to go trough what I did to do so
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 2nd, 2002, 06:26 AM
#39
Member
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|
Reply With Quote
