6 ms·

He's talking about control theory, and other kinds of optimisation systems too. I think AI is a fine blanket term for all of that stuff.

DonHopkins 2y ago
Rodney Brooks is the Godfather of Out of Control Theory. FAST, CHEAP AND OUT OF CONTROL: A ROBOT INVASION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM: https://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/papers/fast-cheap.pdf https://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/papers/fast-cheap.pdf
- bubblyworld 2y ago
  "Out-of-Control Theory" is a great name, love it =) thanks for the link, although I guess the idea never really took off.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    It certainly did take off, it's called "Subsumption Architecture", and Rodney Brooks started iRobot, who created the Roomba, which is based on those ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsumption_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsumption_architecture Subsumption architecture is a reactive robotic architecture heavily associated with behavior-based robotics which was very popular in the 1980s and 90s. The term was introduced by Rodney Brooks and colleagues in 1986.[1][2][3] Subsumption has been widely influential in autonomous robotics and elsewhere in real-time AI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRobot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRobot iRobot Corporation is an American technology company that designs and builds consumer robots. It was founded in 1990 by three members of MIT's Artificial Intelligence Lab, who designed robots for space exploration and military defense.[2] The company's products include a range of autonomous home vacuum cleaners (Roomba), floor moppers (Braava), and other autonomous cleaning devices.[3]
    - bubblyworld 2y ago
      Okay, interesting, but I meant nobody actually ended up sending thousands of little robots to other planets. No doubt the research led to some nice things. Edit: the direct sensory-action coupling idea makes sense from a control perspective (fast interaction loops can compensate for chaotic dynamics in the environment), but we know these days that brains don't work that way, for instance. I wonder how that perspective has changed in robotics since the 90s, do you know?
      - DonHopkins 2y ago
        About four years before Rodney Brooks proposed Subsumption Architecture, some Terrapin Logo hackers from the MIT-AI Lab wrote a proposal for the military to use totally out-of-control Logo Turtles in combat, in this article they published on October 1, 1982 in ACM SIGART Bulletin Issue 82, pp 23–25: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1056602.1056608 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1056602.1056608 https://donhopkins.com/home/TurtlesAndDefense.pdf https://donhopkins.com/home/TurtlesAndDefense.pdf >TURTLES AND DEFENSE >Introduction >At Terrapin, we feel that our two main products, the Terrapin Turtle ®, and the Terrapin Logo Language for the Apple II, bring together the fields of robotics and AI to provide hours of entertainment for the whole family. We are sure that an enlightened application of our products can uniquely impact the electronic battlefield of the future. [...] >Guidance >The Terrapin Turtle ®, like many missile systems in use today, is wire-guided. It has the wire-guided missile's robustness with respect to ECM, and, unlike beam-riding missiles, or most active-homing systems, it has no radar signature to invite enemy missiles to home in on it or its launch platform. However, the Turtle does not suffer from that bugaboo of wire-guided missiles, i.e., the lack of a fire-and-forget capability. >Often ground troops are reluctant to use wire-guided antitank weapons because of the need for line-of-sight contact with the target until interception is accomplished. The Turtle requires no such human guidance; once the computer controlling it has been programmed, the Turtle performs its mission without the need of human intervention. Ground troops are left free to scramble for cover. [...] >Because the Terrapin Turtle ® is computer-controlled, military data processing technicians can write arbitrarily baroque programs that will cause it to do pretty much unpredictable things. Even if an enemy had access to the programs that guided a Turtle Task Team ® , it is quite likely that they would find them impossible to understand, especially if they were written in ADA. In addition, with judicious use of the Turtle's touch sensors, one could, theoretically, program a large group of turtles to simulate Brownian motion. The enemy would hardly attempt to predict the paths of some 10,000 turtles bumping into each other more or less randomly on their way to performing their mission. Furthermore, we believe that the spectacle would have a demoralizing effect on enemy ground troops. [...] >Munitions >The Terrapin Turtle ® does not currently incorporate any munitions, but even civilian versions have a downward-defense capability. The Turtle can be programmed to attempt to run over enemy forces on recognizing them, and by raising and lowering its pen at about 10 cycles per second, puncture them to death. >Turtles can easily be programmed to push objects in a preferred direction. Given this capability, one can easily envision a Turtle discreetly nudging a hand grenade into an enemy camp, and then accelerating quickly away. With the development of ever smaller fission devices, it does not seem unlikely that the Turtle could be used for delivery of tactical nuclear weapons. [...]
oska 2y ago
There will never be, and can never be, "artificial intelligence". (The creation of consciousness is impossible.) It's a fun/interesting device in science fiction, just like the concept of golems (animated beings) are in folk tales. But it's complete nonsense to talk about it as a possibility in the real world so yes, the label of 'machine learning' is a far, far better label to use for this powerful and interesting domain.
- QuesnayJr 2y ago
  This is a category error, and basically a non-sequitur to the discussion. Whether or not LLMs are conscious is not the topic of discussion (and not a position I've seen anyone seriously advocate).
- bubblyworld 2y ago
  I'll happily engage in specifics if you provide an argument for your position. Here's mine (which is ironically self-defeating but has a grain of truth): single-sentence theories about reality are probably wrong.
  - oska 2y ago
    I just went back and added a parenthetical statement after my first sentence before seeing this reply (on refresh). > The creation of consciousness is impossible. That's where I'd start my argument. Machines can 'learn', given iterative training and some form of memory but they can not think nor understand. That requires consciousness, and the idea that consciousness can be emergent (which it is my understanding that the 'AI' argument rests upon), has never been shown. It is an unproven fantasy.
    - ilaksh 2y ago
      You can start to refine your incorrect thinking on this by decomposing these associated characteristics and terms rather than conflating all of them. Thinking, understanding, self-aware, awake, integrated sensory stream, alive, emotional, visual, sensory, autonomy, adaptiveness, etc.

DonHopkins 2y ago

Rodney Brooks is the Godfather of Out of Control Theory. FAST, CHEAP AND OUT OF CONTROL: A ROBOT INVASION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM: https://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/papers/fast-cheap.pdf https://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/papers/fast-cheap.pdf

bubblyworld 2y ago
"Out-of-Control Theory" is a great name, love it =) thanks for the link, although I guess the idea never really took off.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  It certainly did take off, it's called "Subsumption Architecture", and Rodney Brooks started iRobot, who created the Roomba, which is based on those ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsumption_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsumption_architecture Subsumption architecture is a reactive robotic architecture heavily associated with behavior-based robotics which was very popular in the 1980s and 90s. The term was introduced by Rodney Brooks and colleagues in 1986.[1][2][3] Subsumption has been widely influential in autonomous robotics and elsewhere in real-time AI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRobot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRobot iRobot Corporation is an American technology company that designs and builds consumer robots. It was founded in 1990 by three members of MIT's Artificial Intelligence Lab, who designed robots for space exploration and military defense.[2] The company's products include a range of autonomous home vacuum cleaners (Roomba), floor moppers (Braava), and other autonomous cleaning devices.[3]
  - bubblyworld 2y ago
    Okay, interesting, but I meant nobody actually ended up sending thousands of little robots to other planets. No doubt the research led to some nice things. Edit: the direct sensory-action coupling idea makes sense from a control perspective (fast interaction loops can compensate for chaotic dynamics in the environment), but we know these days that brains don't work that way, for instance. I wonder how that perspective has changed in robotics since the 90s, do you know?
    - DonHopkins 2y ago
      About four years before Rodney Brooks proposed Subsumption Architecture, some Terrapin Logo hackers from the MIT-AI Lab wrote a proposal for the military to use totally out-of-control Logo Turtles in combat, in this article they published on October 1, 1982 in ACM SIGART Bulletin Issue 82, pp 23–25: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1056602.1056608 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1056602.1056608 https://donhopkins.com/home/TurtlesAndDefense.pdf https://donhopkins.com/home/TurtlesAndDefense.pdf >TURTLES AND DEFENSE >Introduction >At Terrapin, we feel that our two main products, the Terrapin Turtle ®, and the Terrapin Logo Language for the Apple II, bring together the fields of robotics and AI to provide hours of entertainment for the whole family. We are sure that an enlightened application of our products can uniquely impact the electronic battlefield of the future. [...] >Guidance >The Terrapin Turtle ®, like many missile systems in use today, is wire-guided. It has the wire-guided missile's robustness with respect to ECM, and, unlike beam-riding missiles, or most active-homing systems, it has no radar signature to invite enemy missiles to home in on it or its launch platform. However, the Turtle does not suffer from that bugaboo of wire-guided missiles, i.e., the lack of a fire-and-forget capability. >Often ground troops are reluctant to use wire-guided antitank weapons because of the need for line-of-sight contact with the target until interception is accomplished. The Turtle requires no such human guidance; once the computer controlling it has been programmed, the Turtle performs its mission without the need of human intervention. Ground troops are left free to scramble for cover. [...] >Because the Terrapin Turtle ® is computer-controlled, military data processing technicians can write arbitrarily baroque programs that will cause it to do pretty much unpredictable things. Even if an enemy had access to the programs that guided a Turtle Task Team ® , it is quite likely that they would find them impossible to understand, especially if they were written in ADA. In addition, with judicious use of the Turtle's touch sensors, one could, theoretically, program a large group of turtles to simulate Brownian motion. The enemy would hardly attempt to predict the paths of some 10,000 turtles bumping into each other more or less randomly on their way to performing their mission. Furthermore, we believe that the spectacle would have a demoralizing effect on enemy ground troops. [...] >Munitions >The Terrapin Turtle ® does not currently incorporate any munitions, but even civilian versions have a downward-defense capability. The Turtle can be programmed to attempt to run over enemy forces on recognizing them, and by raising and lowering its pen at about 10 cycles per second, puncture them to death. >Turtles can easily be programmed to push objects in a preferred direction. Given this capability, one can easily envision a Turtle discreetly nudging a hand grenade into an enemy camp, and then accelerating quickly away. With the development of ever smaller fission devices, it does not seem unlikely that the Turtle could be used for delivery of tactical nuclear weapons. [...]

oska 2y ago

There will never be, and can never be, "artificial intelligence". (The creation of consciousness is impossible.) It's a fun/interesting device in science fiction, just like the concept of golems (animated beings) are in folk tales. But it's complete nonsense to talk about it as a possibility in the real world so yes, the label of 'machine learning' is a far, far better label to use for this powerful and interesting domain.

QuesnayJr 2y ago
This is a category error, and basically a non-sequitur to the discussion. Whether or not LLMs are conscious is not the topic of discussion (and not a position I've seen anyone seriously advocate).
bubblyworld 2y ago
I'll happily engage in specifics if you provide an argument for your position. Here's mine (which is ironically self-defeating but has a grain of truth): single-sentence theories about reality are probably wrong.
- oska 2y ago
  I just went back and added a parenthetical statement after my first sentence before seeing this reply (on refresh). > The creation of consciousness is impossible. That's where I'd start my argument. Machines can 'learn', given iterative training and some form of memory but they can not think nor understand. That requires consciousness, and the idea that consciousness can be emergent (which it is my understanding that the 'AI' argument rests upon), has never been shown. It is an unproven fantasy.
  - ilaksh 2y ago
    You can start to refine your incorrect thinking on this by decomposing these associated characteristics and terms rather than conflating all of them. Thinking, understanding, self-aware, awake, integrated sensory stream, alive, emotional, visual, sensory, autonomy, adaptiveness, etc.