RE: Artificial Intelligence
July 22, 2015 at 8:20 pm
(This post was last modified: July 22, 2015 at 8:53 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Again I would ask how you know that we need several orders of magnitude more processing power, how have you determined a number even in the general? There's no shortage of examples where a human brain has, itself, been reduced - in some cases the reduction may have been almost unbelievably substantial - and this is at least one example of a system capable of presenting the effect desired which we both point to (ignoring any other troubling detail regarding intelligence, of which there are many). Perhaps it's not the size (or density) of your system that's stalling you, but the manner in which you're using it? How have you ruled that out, particularly in light of the examples we have with regards to the human brain. How have you ruled out problems with your criteria for success, as another example? Perhaps there are -already- intelligent machines, just as there are already intelligent plants and animals (in the case of the former, no neural architecture -at all-)....we're simply looking for "human" machines, and failing to find them..deciding that there are no intelligent machines? Finally, how have you determined that our own intelligence wasn't arrived at by "emulating behavior" over successive generations, with the failure conditions being death and/or extinction? Those of us remaining being those that "emulated behavior" in a successful manner given a particular environment or task? The way we think (and the subjects of our thoughts), for example, would fail a flower.....as powerful as we perceive our intelligence to be, and as powerful as it is, it's largely useless to a creature (or system) vastly different to ourselves. Hell, my intelligence might fail me in your environment, at your task and vv - and we're both human. Just how adaptive is -our- method or manner of intelligence?
I think that you're making a great many assumptions about life and intelligence, not computing, that are impossible to justify set against each other and other assumptions stated or implied.
As I mentioned a couple of posts back, it's not your comp sci I'm questioning.
I think that you're making a great many assumptions about life and intelligence, not computing, that are impossible to justify set against each other and other assumptions stated or implied.
As I mentioned a couple of posts back, it's not your comp sci I'm questioning.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
