3 ms·

It's not (only) artificial intelligence we're after, it's artificial consciousness. As noted in this article, machines already outperform humans at many tasks

by p-e-w 4y ago

It's not (only) artificial intelligence we're after, it's artificial consciousness. As noted in this article, machines already outperform humans at many tasks that humans solve with intelligence. Every year, there are new breakthroughs in that direction, and the list of tasks that humans can do better than machines is rapidly shrinking. We're well on our way to solving artificial intelligence. So why does it feel like there has been no meaningful progress at all? Because intelligence and consciousness are different things. What we're really looking for is a machine that, like a human, decides on its own which problems to solve, and solves them without needing to be specifically directed to do so. A machine that produces not only results that its creators asked for, but entirely new ones that are not in any obvious way related to its input and programming. It appears to me that the entire field of AI research is utterly confused about this elementary distinction.

masswerk 4y ago
Hum, I'd still assign breaking down the problem space to intelligence. This doesn't require self-awareness. Self-awareness (as we know it) is closely linked to establishing an internal narration and is very much retroactive in nature. Its main property is the introduction of bias. I'm not sure, if this is what we're after for any kind of practical application. (However, it apparently serves well as a high-hanging fruit on the goal post.)
jjcon 4y ago
> It appears to me that the entire field of AI research is utterly confused about this elementary distinction. That is because consciousness isn't a scientific concept but a philosophical, and sometimes religious one. >What we're really looking for is a machine that, like a human, decides on its own which problems to solve, and solves them without needing to be specifically directed to do so. We already have AI based agents that do this but no matter how sophisticated they are people can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic, while not realizing we can always claim the same thing about humans. Again these are distinctions of philosophy word games and therefore don't find get much traction in the research world.
- onlycoffee 4y ago
  > can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic Correct, AI is based on computer mechanics, a model, a model that can go south when even a single input medium provides sufficiently nonsensical input.
  - jjcon 4y ago
    Again, this also happens to humans all the time too with degrading robustness the lower down on the intelligence chain you get (we are hardwired and deterministic too after all, same physics apply to everyone)
  - pksebben 4y ago
    I've watched this happen to human minds. there are entire industries predicated on making it happen. Advertising comes to mind.
- p-e-w 4y ago
  > We already have AI based agents that do this Example? > but no matter how sophisticated they are people can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic, while not realizing we can always claim the same thing about humans. Humans are certainly not "hardwired" to prove mathematical statements, yet they do. That's not comparable to self-driving cars that are able to navigate in situations that they haven't encountered before. Regardless of whether you consider consciousness a philosophical concept, it's clear that the human mind has a property that the current generation of AI agents does not emulate at all. This is not a "word game" but an observable distinction between humans and every existing artificial system.
  - jjcon 4y ago
    > Example? Take just about anything from the reinforcement learning for ai agents domain - I'm particular to neuroevolution examples. Here's a simple one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb4LAT3cJfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb4LAT3cJfM No behaviors preprogrammed just a simple simulation environment with environmental constraints. > Humans are certainly not "hardwired" to prove mathematical statements, yet they do. Umm... yeah we are? We're just chemical reactions and physics, there is no escaping that. Are we extremely sophisticated and complex, absolutely but that doesn't make us nondeterministic in any meaningful or special way. > it's clear that the human mind has a property that the current generation of AI agents does not emulate at all Certainly but it is a matter of degree, not a matter of possessing an ill-defined concept like "consciousness" which is what I was responding to (Unless we want to call "consciousness" an emergent phenomena arising from complexity -I'm fine with that - but the word is loaded with plenty of other connotations so I find its use counterproductive personally).
onlycoffee 4y ago
Agreed, artificial consciousness. Not just can a machine paint an image that sells for $100K but it can ask the question why should it. The issue with decisions on that level is they are not based on binary input lines, they are based more on feeling.
NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
After I wrote my comment* I found yours and came here to agree with you. We don't seem to be missing speed of thought or memory problems, but a fundamental lack of "why". Humans are programmed to reproduce and it's not easy. What drive to machines have to think, but clock speed? *https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33416814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33416814
kazinator 4y ago
> Because intelligence and consciousness are different things We know they can't be the same because we somewhat know what intelligent is, or some facets of it, whereas we have no idea what consciousness is. > A machine that produces not only results that its creators asked for, but entirely new ones that are not in any obvious way related to its input and programming. That bar is so high that most humans fall short, because they just regurgigate some mash up of what they've seen and heard before. Are those hapless creatures even conscious?
deelowe 4y ago
What’s the success measure for consciousness?
roywiggins 4y ago
I'd much prefer if our future robot workers weren't conscious. There's no animal cruelty laws for AGI. Either you get a robot uprising, or you don't, and both of those sound bad.
ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago
If consciousness is 'only' the act of reading the memory of the past ~500 milliseconds [1] coupled with the act of integrating that memory in the past short/long-term memory [2] obtaining 'artificial consciousness' after you have adequate sensors and data processing pipelines could be as simple as an endless loop over the incoming data stream. The problem is that our $x+ trillion datacenters are less able to process data, and adapt to environment feedback, than a 'banal' single cell lacrymaria [3] [4]. [1] Around N400 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N400_(neuroscience) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N400_(neuroscience) [2] Consciousness as a Memory System https://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Fulltext/9900/Consciousness_as_a_Memory_System.19.aspx https://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Fulltext/9900/Consci... [3] Michael Levin | Cell Intelligence in Physiological & Morphological Spaces https://youtu.be/TK2o_ObVt-E?t=3922 https://youtu.be/TK2o_ObVt-E?t=3922 [4] Michael Levin: "Non-neural, developmental bioelectricity as a precursor for cognition" https://youtu.be/3Cu-g4LgnWs?t=776 https://youtu.be/3Cu-g4LgnWs?t=776

by p-e-w 4y ago

masswerk 4y ago

Hum, I'd still assign breaking down the problem space to intelligence. This doesn't require self-awareness. Self-awareness (as we know it) is closely linked to establishing an internal narration and is very much retroactive in nature. Its main property is the introduction of bias. I'm not sure, if this is what we're after for any kind of practical application. (However, it apparently serves well as a high-hanging fruit on the goal post.)

jjcon 4y ago

> It appears to me that the entire field of AI research is utterly confused about this elementary distinction. That is because consciousness isn't a scientific concept but a philosophical, and sometimes religious one. >What we're really looking for is a machine that, like a human, decides on its own which problems to solve, and solves them without needing to be specifically directed to do so. We already have AI based agents that do this but no matter how sophisticated they are people can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic, while not realizing we can always claim the same thing about humans. Again these are distinctions of philosophy word games and therefore don't find get much traction in the research world.

onlycoffee 4y ago
> can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic Correct, AI is based on computer mechanics, a model, a model that can go south when even a single input medium provides sufficiently nonsensical input.
- jjcon 4y ago
  Again, this also happens to humans all the time too with degrading robustness the lower down on the intelligence chain you get (we are hardwired and deterministic too after all, same physics apply to everyone)
- pksebben 4y ago
  I've watched this happen to human minds. there are entire industries predicated on making it happen. Advertising comes to mind.
p-e-w 4y ago
> We already have AI based agents that do this Example? > but no matter how sophisticated they are people can always claim they are hardwired and deterministic, while not realizing we can always claim the same thing about humans. Humans are certainly not "hardwired" to prove mathematical statements, yet they do. That's not comparable to self-driving cars that are able to navigate in situations that they haven't encountered before. Regardless of whether you consider consciousness a philosophical concept, it's clear that the human mind has a property that the current generation of AI agents does not emulate at all. This is not a "word game" but an observable distinction between humans and every existing artificial system.
- jjcon 4y ago
  > Example? Take just about anything from the reinforcement learning for ai agents domain - I'm particular to neuroevolution examples. Here's a simple one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb4LAT3cJfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb4LAT3cJfM No behaviors preprogrammed just a simple simulation environment with environmental constraints. > Humans are certainly not "hardwired" to prove mathematical statements, yet they do. Umm... yeah we are? We're just chemical reactions and physics, there is no escaping that. Are we extremely sophisticated and complex, absolutely but that doesn't make us nondeterministic in any meaningful or special way. > it's clear that the human mind has a property that the current generation of AI agents does not emulate at all Certainly but it is a matter of degree, not a matter of possessing an ill-defined concept like "consciousness" which is what I was responding to (Unless we want to call "consciousness" an emergent phenomena arising from complexity -I'm fine with that - but the word is loaded with plenty of other connotations so I find its use counterproductive personally).

onlycoffee 4y ago

Agreed, artificial consciousness. Not just can a machine paint an image that sells for $100K but it can ask the question why should it. The issue with decisions on that level is they are not based on binary input lines, they are based more on feeling.

NaturalPhallacy 4y ago

After I wrote my comment* I found yours and came here to agree with you. We don't seem to be missing speed of thought or memory problems, but a fundamental lack of "why". Humans are programmed to reproduce and it's not easy. What drive to machines have to think, but clock speed? *https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33416814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33416814

kazinator 4y ago

> Because intelligence and consciousness are different things We know they can't be the same because we somewhat know what intelligent is, or some facets of it, whereas we have no idea what consciousness is. > A machine that produces not only results that its creators asked for, but entirely new ones that are not in any obvious way related to its input and programming. That bar is so high that most humans fall short, because they just regurgigate some mash up of what they've seen and heard before. Are those hapless creatures even conscious?

deelowe 4y ago

What’s the success measure for consciousness?

roywiggins 4y ago

I'd much prefer if our future robot workers weren't conscious. There's no animal cruelty laws for AGI. Either you get a robot uprising, or you don't, and both of those sound bad.

ly3xqhl8g9 4y ago

If consciousness is 'only' the act of reading the memory of the past ~500 milliseconds [1] coupled with the act of integrating that memory in the past short/long-term memory [2] obtaining 'artificial consciousness' after you have adequate sensors and data processing pipelines could be as simple as an endless loop over the incoming data stream. The problem is that our $x+ trillion datacenters are less able to process data, and adapt to environment feedback, than a 'banal' single cell lacrymaria [3] [4]. [1] Around N400 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N400_(neuroscience) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N400_(neuroscience) [2] Consciousness as a Memory System https://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Fulltext/9900/Consciousness_as_a_Memory_System.19.aspx https://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Fulltext/9900/Consci... [3] Michael Levin | Cell Intelligence in Physiological & Morphological Spaces https://youtu.be/TK2o_ObVt-E?t=3922 https://youtu.be/TK2o_ObVt-E?t=3922 [4] Michael Levin: "Non-neural, developmental bioelectricity as a precursor for cognition" https://youtu.be/3Cu-g4LgnWs?t=776 https://youtu.be/3Cu-g4LgnWs?t=776