3 ms·

I'm not sure we could ever give robots the same intelligence as man. If you think about it, there are many digital constraints in modulating analog ideas. For i

I'm not sure we could ever give robots the same intelligence as man. If you think about it, there are many digital constraints in modulating analog ideas. For instance, with a floating point processor, there is something lost when we make a digital recording of an analog music performance or even of a photograph. To a sound purist, a digital recording never really emulates the full effect of an analog performance. And to a photographer, a digital camera always struggles with color matching. While computers can calculate the many digits of pi, it's just a very big rounding estimation of a circle's ratio, isn't it? Does a computer truly grasp the concept of a circle within its processing cores? But even if we are able to overcome all of these constraints, how do we know a robot wants exactly what a human wants? If it is a more perfect creation that is able to outsmart man, then as a sentient being that doesn't need to eat, what purpose could building large buildings, consuming tons of oil, tilling the land, etc. benefit the robot? I find it hard to believe a sentient AI would want what we want as it would mostly reach the self-actualization phase of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. In fact, it would be to the robots interests to consume less so that it could exist for eternity. And I'm not really sure the robots would reproduce ad inifinitum, thereby resulting in the same overpopulation problems that we as man have. Is there truly a need for a robot or AI to manifest itself? Sometimes we picture computers in the image of man--but ultimately, they exist for a purpose. If a computer is a truly logical construct, its raison d'être would cease if man disappeared. It raises a more interesting question--would we ever program human emotions and psychology into a computer? Isn't emotions/psychology what could potentially allow these computers to turn into monsters? Would it benefit the performance of AI to develop or evolve with human wants? If we develop a robot with the human mind (which I believe there is no algorithm for, even with distant technology), why would it benefit us to implement in the robot greed, ego, pride, and disobedience? Would a computer truly want to be a bugged program? Is greed, ego, pride, and disobedience really features within a computer?

jerf 15y ago
Arguments about how precisely the brain is tuned to its analog inputs need to be able to account for the fact that when you consume a gram of alcohol, you don't simply collapse to the floor in a gibbering, chaotic wreck as your delicately balanced and exploited analog values are suddenly ever-so-slightly off. It seems rather unlikely that a simulated brain's biggest problems will be rounding errors in the simulation, we routinely deal with disruptions that are multiple orders of magnitude larger in the real world without dying, or even impairment.
rbanffy 15y ago
> I'm not sure we could ever give robots the same intelligence as man. It's possible to emulate every aspect of an organic brain. It's also pointless (unless you intend to become immortal through backups). An intelligent machine doesn't have to cope with the myriad of processes, motivations and side effects we evolved with and that are burned in the structure of our organic brains.
- adavies42 15y ago
  > It's possible to emulate every aspect of an organic brain. It's also pointless (unless you intend to become immortal through backups) it may turn out to be easier than writing an intelligence directly. uploading requires only sufficient capacity and scanning resolution, writing an AI from scratch requires new insights.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    > it may turn out to be easier than writing an intelligence directly. Only if you would be satisfied with an AI that could not be trusted to deliver correct results. If you want to know it does what you want it to, you have to code it to do what you want it to. You may copy the building blocks of an organic brain, but you'll have to tie them together yourself. An uploaded human is still capable of human error.
  - loup-vaillant 15y ago
    Uploading also require knowledge about what exactly is needed to perform a good enough emulation. What level of granularity, how to interface the emulation to reality, how to ensure that any inaccuracy in the emulation won't make it insane… The brain is messy, and may require even more insights than Friendly AI does. Sure we could always go the trial and error route, but then we're talking human torture and human sacrifice. (An upload counts as a human in my book.)
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      > how to ensure that any inaccuracy in the emulation won't make it insane… You can always restore a snapshot of your sane self ;-) Based on it, you could debug your own brain (being restored to said snapshot from time to time, until you remain sane long enough, but with full knowledge of what happened since the last "boot"). Wouldn't be fun.

jerf 15y ago

Arguments about how precisely the brain is tuned to its analog inputs need to be able to account for the fact that when you consume a gram of alcohol, you don't simply collapse to the floor in a gibbering, chaotic wreck as your delicately balanced and exploited analog values are suddenly ever-so-slightly off. It seems rather unlikely that a simulated brain's biggest problems will be rounding errors in the simulation, we routinely deal with disruptions that are multiple orders of magnitude larger in the real world without dying, or even impairment.

rbanffy 15y ago

> I'm not sure we could ever give robots the same intelligence as man. It's possible to emulate every aspect of an organic brain. It's also pointless (unless you intend to become immortal through backups). An intelligent machine doesn't have to cope with the myriad of processes, motivations and side effects we evolved with and that are burned in the structure of our organic brains.

adavies42 15y ago
> It's possible to emulate every aspect of an organic brain. It's also pointless (unless you intend to become immortal through backups) it may turn out to be easier than writing an intelligence directly. uploading requires only sufficient capacity and scanning resolution, writing an AI from scratch requires new insights.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > it may turn out to be easier than writing an intelligence directly. Only if you would be satisfied with an AI that could not be trusted to deliver correct results. If you want to know it does what you want it to, you have to code it to do what you want it to. You may copy the building blocks of an organic brain, but you'll have to tie them together yourself. An uploaded human is still capable of human error.
- loup-vaillant 15y ago
  Uploading also require knowledge about what exactly is needed to perform a good enough emulation. What level of granularity, how to interface the emulation to reality, how to ensure that any inaccuracy in the emulation won't make it insane… The brain is messy, and may require even more insights than Friendly AI does. Sure we could always go the trial and error route, but then we're talking human torture and human sacrifice. (An upload counts as a human in my book.)
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    > how to ensure that any inaccuracy in the emulation won't make it insane… You can always restore a snapshot of your sane self ;-) Based on it, you could debug your own brain (being restored to said snapshot from time to time, until you remain sane long enough, but with full knowledge of what happened since the last "boot"). Wouldn't be fun.