RE: Artificial Intelligence
July 23, 2015 at 10:28 am
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2015 at 11:03 am by The Grand Nudger.)
I binned the majority of my reply in an edit, I think that the above encapsulates what I;m hoping to learn from you. I'm going to have to remind you here that no explanation of how we model systems, or what that entails for the system is capable of clearing up the issue that I have with your claim. Not a bit. I'm having trouble accepting your claim in principle..at a fundamental level. Not in it's practical achievement. I would -need- to see your range of "x" to be able to accept that claim as true, and though neither you nor I could point to a demonstrable machine with strong AI between us, we both ought to be able to point to existing organisms with strong intelligence, or else we have no means of comparison...and thus your claim -could not- be true.
General definitions of intelligence allow for plants and even bacteria to be intelligent, even strong intelligence. In our conversation, more specificity is required. If we're using general behavior, or some observed effect in a range of systems as the measure for whether or not a system is intelligent, and how strong that intelligence is - then this needs to be bluntly laid out as the basis for that conversation. It cannot proceed in the absence of that declaration, and so we could not make claims regarding the minimum processing power as a requirement. We have to be able point to a system and say "at least that much". Once we have, we could discuss how much "that much" -is-.
(lol, @ "fast idiots" I used a variation of that alot myself back when I was in the PCB and component manufacturing business, telling people that computers are, almost by definition, retarded - so maybe they shouldn't expect them to shore up their mistakes. As a bit of background, hopefully to ameliorate any need on your part to explain how these machines work to me, I used to be a process engineer for cisco, qlogic, and DoD boards, before dropping out and getting into production management instead with the same firm. I assure you, I'm familiar with the construction and operation of comp systems at a fundamental and practical level - but we're talking about intelligence here, so that only gets me so far - as your comp sci only gets -you- so far. I -could- drown the conversation with lengthy explanations from my new career path, explaining how auxin receptors work and what it might take to make a functional or practial ai modeled out of an entirely disparate, biological, and chemical architecture...but this wouldn't be any more indicative of the relationships we're discussing than your explanations of the various models currently available within comp sci.)
General definitions of intelligence allow for plants and even bacteria to be intelligent, even strong intelligence. In our conversation, more specificity is required. If we're using general behavior, or some observed effect in a range of systems as the measure for whether or not a system is intelligent, and how strong that intelligence is - then this needs to be bluntly laid out as the basis for that conversation. It cannot proceed in the absence of that declaration, and so we could not make claims regarding the minimum processing power as a requirement. We have to be able point to a system and say "at least that much". Once we have, we could discuss how much "that much" -is-.
(lol, @ "fast idiots" I used a variation of that alot myself back when I was in the PCB and component manufacturing business, telling people that computers are, almost by definition, retarded - so maybe they shouldn't expect them to shore up their mistakes. As a bit of background, hopefully to ameliorate any need on your part to explain how these machines work to me, I used to be a process engineer for cisco, qlogic, and DoD boards, before dropping out and getting into production management instead with the same firm. I assure you, I'm familiar with the construction and operation of comp systems at a fundamental and practical level - but we're talking about intelligence here, so that only gets me so far - as your comp sci only gets -you- so far. I -could- drown the conversation with lengthy explanations from my new career path, explaining how auxin receptors work and what it might take to make a functional or practial ai modeled out of an entirely disparate, biological, and chemical architecture...but this wouldn't be any more indicative of the relationships we're discussing than your explanations of the various models currently available within comp sci.)
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!
