3 ms·

But I saw it working in a Bruce Willis movie. I think he was a hitman-lol. Which is exactly my point. Computers will never be any smarter than the EXACT command

by hackney 10y ago

But I saw it working in a Bruce Willis movie. I think he was a hitman-lol. Which is exactly my point. Computers will never be any smarter than the EXACT commands we as their 'creators' give them. In essence they will never be but an extension, a tool, of ourselves. But to say they can think? Not a chance in hell.

eru 10y ago
> Computers will never be any smarter than the EXACT commands we as their 'creators' give them. You never tried debugging, did you? (Ie computers can do surprising things, even when they do exactly as we tell them.) Also, look at AlphaGo (or any modern chess engine): these programs play better than their their programmers could.
- hackney 10y ago
  When human beings can be defined by the rules and limitations of a chess boardgame, I will agree. That will of course never happen.
nkozyra 10y ago
The entire point of AI is to establish human-like intelligence via the same general mechanisms we use to learn. Our limitations are uniquely human and don't apply here. "Thinking" in the short-term means problem solving, whether through analysis and understanding. Machines are capable of that now, and do so much faster than do humans. The parameters of learning will be bound - at least for now - by human input. But not the boundaries of learning.
- hackney 10y ago
  I agree wholeheartedly with you, except for the definition of learning. Learning implies knowledge and most of what a computer would see as knowledge is garbage to a human being. As well, what exactly a single individual would consider to be true useable knowledge would not even be teachable to a computer, as for the most part, it cannot be truly explained by said individual beyond the individuals own personal viewpoint. If we start trying to marginalize individualism I would think we lose what it means to be human, et al.

by hackney 10y ago

eru 10y ago

> Computers will never be any smarter than the EXACT commands we as their 'creators' give them. You never tried debugging, did you? (Ie computers can do surprising things, even when they do exactly as we tell them.) Also, look at AlphaGo (or any modern chess engine): these programs play better than their their programmers could.

hackney 10y ago
When human beings can be defined by the rules and limitations of a chess boardgame, I will agree. That will of course never happen.

nkozyra 10y ago

The entire point of AI is to establish human-like intelligence via the same general mechanisms we use to learn. Our limitations are uniquely human and don't apply here. "Thinking" in the short-term means problem solving, whether through analysis and understanding. Machines are capable of that now, and do so much faster than do humans. The parameters of learning will be bound - at least for now - by human input. But not the boundaries of learning.

hackney 10y ago
I agree wholeheartedly with you, except for the definition of learning. Learning implies knowledge and most of what a computer would see as knowledge is garbage to a human being. As well, what exactly a single individual would consider to be true useable knowledge would not even be teachable to a computer, as for the most part, it cannot be truly explained by said individual beyond the individuals own personal viewpoint. If we start trying to marginalize individualism I would think we lose what it means to be human, et al.