Page 1 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

MartyMoose
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: Chicago

07 Dec 2009, 1:00 pm

Anyone else interested in A.I.

I'm considering going into that field

THIS IS AWESOME
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18wSJs6LIc0[/youtube]



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

MartyMoose
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: Chicago

07 Dec 2009, 2:50 pm

0_equals_true wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPoANTKo5kA&feature=related[/youtube]
I saw that it was cool



iquanyin
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 159

10 Dec 2009, 12:06 am

have you seen the milo demo?


YouTube - E3 2009 - Project Natal - Milo Demo with Peter Molyneux 720p HD


i don't know why but the link from my address bar posted like that (maybe because of youtube's new partnership today with vevo or whtvr it's called?)


anyway, i'm fascinated with all the things going on in AI.

i think you'll like being in this field if you get into it. thanks for posting the video!



MartyMoose
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: Chicago

10 Dec 2009, 1:07 am

iquanyin wrote:
have you seen the milo demo?


YouTube - E3 2009 - Project Natal - Milo Demo with Peter Molyneux 720p HD


i don't know why but the link from my address bar posted like that (maybe because of youtube's new partnership today with vevo or whtvr it's called?)


anyway, i'm fascinated with all the things going on in AI.

i think you'll like being in this field if you get into it. thanks for posting the video!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDvHlwNvXaM[/youtube]
cool



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Dec 2009, 4:50 am

The cheapest way of producing Intelligence is to make babies. That way you get R.I. (Real Intelligence) instead of A.I.

It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable machine Artificial Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get our robots to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by a human.

ruveyn



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

10 Dec 2009, 10:26 am

ruveyn wrote:
It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable machine Artificial Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get our robots to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by a human.

ruveyn


It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable humans Real Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get out babies to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by physics.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Dec 2009, 1:24 pm

Fuzzy wrote:

It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable humans Real Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get out babies to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by physics.


The universe is what it is. Humans write the laws of physics to describe how the universe is. Laws are man-made artifacts, even the laws of physics.

Humans are no programmed by an intelligent entity. They are physical entities that operate in the manner of physical entities and whose operation is partially described by the man-made laws of physics.

Laws are not causes, they are descriptions.

ruveyn



justMax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 539

10 Dec 2009, 1:36 pm

AI scares me for numerous reasons.

Nonetheless, check out cleverbot.com, it's fun!



Scientist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,524
Location: The Netherlands

10 Dec 2009, 3:31 pm

Fuzzy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable machine Artificial Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get our robots to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by a human.
It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable humans Real Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get out babies to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by physics.
:D
It depends on how you define "intelligence".
We can build and program machines that don't make mistakes humans make.


_________________
1975, ASD: Asperger's Syndrome (diagnosed: October 22, 2009)

Interests: science, experimental psychology, psychophysics, music (listening and playing (guitar)) and visual arts

Don't focus on your weaknesses, focus on your strengths


Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

10 Dec 2009, 3:35 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Fuzzy wrote:

It would also behoove us to stop calling flexibly programmable humans Real Intelligence. No matter how cleverly we get out babies to do things, they are not intelligent. They are simply executing rules specified by physics.


The universe is what it is. Humans write the laws of physics to describe how the universe is. Laws are man-made artifacts, even the laws of physics.

Humans are no programmed by an intelligent entity. They are physical entities that operate in the manner of physical entities and whose operation is partially described by the man-made laws of physics.

Laws are not causes, they are descriptions.

ruveyn


I didnt say squat about human laws. I did not say squat about descriptions or perceptions of physics. I said that humans operate based purely on the interactions that are factors of the universe. Reason or perception has nothing to do with that. Our actions are fully based on the workings of the universe, regardless of how correctly we codify it. I dont believe in free will either. We are ultimately sub atomic automations just as the whole universe is.

I also didnt suggest that humans were created by an intelligence. That which we create is a secondary function of our existence. In that sense, our inventions are no more created by an intelligence than we were.

The logical conclusion is that anything we create has the potential to achieve exactly that which we can and have achieved. "no matter how cleverly we get our babies..."

Lately your posts have sounded suspiciously like several old guys that should have known better.

You know Lord Kelvin? It was said for the first half of his life he was never wrong. For the second half, he was never right.
Lord Kelvin wrote:
"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now, All that remains is more and more precise measurement."
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
"Radio has no future."
"Trust you will avoid the gigantic mistake of alternating current."


Quote:
...no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery, and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which man shall fly long distances through the air...
- Simon Newcomb (1835-1909)


Lately you seem to be dulling in your arguments, dismissive of potentialities that disrupt your world view.

Are you getting feeble rigid, unable to grasp a future that you will not see?

It is said that in the beginning of life, we can see the future, but only vaguely. In the middle years, we have some vision both ways. But in the autumn of our years, life is primarily about hindsight. About life already lived.

Lately you sound like "There is nothing new to be discovered". How ridiculous is that?

I'd like to close with this:
Quote:
If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done.
- Peter Ustinov


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Last edited by Fuzzy on 10 Dec 2009, 3:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Scientist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,524
Location: The Netherlands

10 Dec 2009, 3:42 pm

Fuzzy wrote:
I don't believe in free will either. We are ultimately sub atomic automations just as the whole universe is.
:) Nice to read that. I had a discussion with someone about it (free will) recently. I said about the same thing (I said we do what we do because our brains work that way).


_________________
1975, ASD: Asperger's Syndrome (diagnosed: October 22, 2009)

Interests: science, experimental psychology, psychophysics, music (listening and playing (guitar)) and visual arts

Don't focus on your weaknesses, focus on your strengths


ManErg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,090
Location: No Mans Land

10 Dec 2009, 7:53 pm

Scientist wrote:
We can build and program machines that don't make mistakes humans make.

How could a creature that makes mistakes build one that doesn't make mistakes?


_________________
Circular logic is correct because it is.


Scientist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,524
Location: The Netherlands

10 Dec 2009, 9:55 pm

ManErg wrote:
Scientist wrote:
We can build and program machines that don't make mistakes humans make.
How could a creature that makes mistakes build one that doesn't make mistakes?
We don't need to be as good as a computer to be able to build and program a good computer. In order to build and program a good computer, we don't need to function the same way a computer functions. We only need to know how a machine should function and how to build and program one. Humans for instance forget things, fill in their memory without knowing, many humans are not very good at logical reasoning, humans don't always detect all (even small) changes, most humans can't do complex calculations in a sec without errors, human emotions can effect our thinking and can prevent information from being encoded correctly into memory. But we developed technologies so we can make machines that don't have these weaknesses, we learned how to make machines that don't make mistakes we make.


_________________
1975, ASD: Asperger's Syndrome (diagnosed: October 22, 2009)

Interests: science, experimental psychology, psychophysics, music (listening and playing (guitar)) and visual arts

Don't focus on your weaknesses, focus on your strengths


justMax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 539

10 Dec 2009, 10:02 pm

Scientist wrote:
Fuzzy wrote:
I don't believe in free will either. We are ultimately sub atomic automations just as the whole universe is.
:) Nice to read that. I had a discussion with someone about it (free will) recently. I said about the same thing (I said we do what we do because our brains work that way).


If I'm right about acausal interactions, then there is no reason to have to discard free will even from a super-deterministic model.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Dec 2009, 2:36 am

justMax wrote:
Scientist wrote:
Fuzzy wrote:
I don't believe in free will either. We are ultimately sub atomic automations just as the whole universe is.
:) Nice to read that. I had a discussion with someone about it (free will) recently. I said about the same thing (I said we do what we do because our brains work that way).


If I'm right about acausal interactions, then there is no reason to have to discard free will even from a super-deterministic model.


I think you are onto something. It is somewhat analogous to chaotic dynamics emerging from a deterministic system.

ruveyn