6 ms·

Does anyone else have the feeling that with the current trajectory, something exactly like this, but with perhaps a million times the amount of feedback and dat

Does anyone else have the feeling that with the current trajectory, something exactly like this, but with perhaps a million times the amount of feedback and data, thought will just emerge? Yes, this is all 2D and abstract/selective training sets etc, but what if AI is the ultimate fake-it-until-you-make-it?

ionforce 10y ago
If you can define thought and it can be implemented, sure.
- marxidad 10y ago
  Biological nature didn't define thought before implementing it.
gallerdude 10y ago
I don't see this happening. What I do see happening, is it figuring us out. Somewhere out there, there's a function which explains how exactly our society is completely organized in every way. From that, the AI could generate books, movies, and do a lot of things.
- bertiewhykovich 10y ago
  Hoo boy, buddy, do I got some news for you: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  Reminds me of the novel-rewriting-apparatus from 1984, except with more friggin' superheroes and remakes.
7373737373 10y ago
Networks with selective attention already exist, but what if they can learn about themselves? Right now they cannot create any notion of self or "body" (defined as the boundary between the environment that can be predicted vs that which cannot), because their outputs have no causal effect on their inputs. There are no differences within the network that make a difference to itself, there is no intrinsic perspective. Could this change, if, for example - inputs are augmented with the network state (or derived version thereof) - previous outputs of the network / external memory are fed back? This seems to be the kind of self reference self awareness requires. Also, do asynchronous networks have fundamental advantages over synchronous networks? What about static vs dynamic networks?
greendestiny 10y ago
I don't think it's going to emerge without significant effort to make it happen. I think most of the 'intelligence' we desire will be attainable without sentience. Sentience itself will require a lot of specific research directed at the goal. It's certainly a risk though.
unlikelymordant 10y ago
Didn't it just emerge with humans? I don't see why it couldn't happen again. There may be a specific structure or wiring that facilitates thought, but i suspect any large enough net with enough training data can do it.

ionforce 10y ago

If you can define thought and it can be implemented, sure.

marxidad 10y ago
Biological nature didn't define thought before implementing it.

gallerdude 10y ago

I don't see this happening. What I do see happening, is it figuring us out. Somewhere out there, there's a function which explains how exactly our society is completely organized in every way. From that, the AI could generate books, movies, and do a lot of things.

bertiewhykovich 10y ago
Hoo boy, buddy, do I got some news for you: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
Reminds me of the novel-rewriting-apparatus from 1984, except with more friggin' superheroes and remakes.

7373737373 10y ago

Networks with selective attention already exist, but what if they can learn about themselves? Right now they cannot create any notion of self or "body" (defined as the boundary between the environment that can be predicted vs that which cannot), because their outputs have no causal effect on their inputs. There are no differences within the network that make a difference to itself, there is no intrinsic perspective. Could this change, if, for example - inputs are augmented with the network state (or derived version thereof) - previous outputs of the network / external memory are fed back? This seems to be the kind of self reference self awareness requires. Also, do asynchronous networks have fundamental advantages over synchronous networks? What about static vs dynamic networks?

greendestiny 10y ago

I don't think it's going to emerge without significant effort to make it happen. I think most of the 'intelligence' we desire will be attainable without sentience. Sentience itself will require a lot of specific research directed at the goal. It's certainly a risk though.

unlikelymordant 10y ago

Didn't it just emerge with humans? I don't see why it couldn't happen again. There may be a specific structure or wiring that facilitates thought, but i suspect any large enough net with enough training data can do it.