68 replies to this topic

[anubis]

Quote

and i still don't want robots to take our job on being "the dump-ass of the world"

nah, we do a pretty good job at that.

i guess it doesn't make much sense to debate believes here... so let's stick to the original topic. ..
robocop : did you ever take a course in cognitive ai ?

[davepermen]

actually, i'm not talking much about believes. but i have no links, as i learned that with proof, and books, and such. yeah, i was quite a bit into biology, and the big "what's life?" issue.

[anubis]

Quote

i was quite a bit into biology, and the big "what's life?" issue

you can't take science(here biology) as a proof that science(here biology) is valid... science explains only our percieved reality and forms it into thought modells we can understand. this however is no proof at all that there isn't more to reality than the part we can percieve, neither does it proof that we are able to understand all parts of nature as soon as our scientific aproach to nature reaches a certain level of complexity

[robocop]

anubis: though i have not taken a course in cognitive ai , i have read about it

I dont understand how has the discussion moved to biology and stuff. anyway taliking about a capacity of a child to explore the world; the same yearning to learn from the surrounding can be developed into a robot.A baby might not be born with the ability to do particular function but it learns from various actions in the surroundings.Say none of the senses are there; then there wont be any learning;similarly in a robot it will be our job to c that there are openings and there is a programming that takes input and learns.

Quote

all structures are well understood and simple. it's just, they all work together, and influence each other.

all structures are being understood they are not yet known. Them working together isnt a problem. Its just about first creating or replicating various actions carried out by a human as simple multiple programs.

Human body is a complicated machine agreed, but it is a Machine. From my point of view creating replicas of all different functions- mechanism like may be tough and also joining them may not be that simple but we could definately have it happen. May be something like triggering a reaction and it continues on its own

[anubis]

Quote

Human body is a complicated machine agreed, but it is a Machine

what makes you think so ?

[davepermen]

the simple rule of math, sience, and logic: until you can prove wrong, and everything hints its right, it is right.

i can be wrong. then again, we can be wrong in EVERYTHING. but in the reality we life, given the 'facts' that we can see on our own, and live with, the human body is a machine.

actually, no, it isn't :D it is a complex reaction. thats all it is. a machine is a "tool that helps to solve a certain task faster, where physically, you, as a human (or other lifeform), are inable to do it. it is built by you".

well.. a human is only a machine in the form that it is produced by you (hehe.. it requires two to produce one human:D), and it will help you to survive longer in the future, do to it's payments in your age. well, it happened to be like that :D but the 'machines' got outa control!

[anubis]

Quote

the simple rule of math, sience, and logic: until you can prove wrong, and everything hints its right, it is right.

if humans worked that way, religions would have never existed... face it the world is always only what we believe it to be.

Quote

i can be wrong. then again, we can be wrong in EVERYTHING. but in the reality we life, given the 'facts' that we can see on our own

i'm not saying that what science knows about the human body is wrong. probably we are assuming wrong things that might get corrected in the future. so i'm not on the what if science was wrong line. most of the things we invent seem to at least work :) i'm just pointing out that science acts as if it had a wholesome theory about the universe and that everything can get epxressed in a mathematic context, which is not the case. science is just another set of believes we choose to obey and devote our lives to. it's really not that different. the priests of the old days were just replaced by scientists who preach the new religion

every human quest to unriddle the the mysteries of the universe reminds me of the story about that guy who lost his keys and searches them under a light at the side of the street allthough he lost them somewhere completely else. finally someone asks him why he's doing that and he responds : why ? i can see better under the light.

sure we'll find a lot of interesting and absolutely true things under the light. the question is. will we find our keys ?

[davepermen]

i don't care about the way sience behaves. i care about how sience works. it works the same way every human explores his life (at least, in child age), and how every human defines his own right and wrong. science only tries to define a global true and false, based on common local impressions on true and false.

if they do this with stupid marketing, and hyping, today, then i can say, who doesn't? nvidia does, intel does, even politics do.

centuries ago, they all hyped in form of being the religious thing itself.. today we try to "sell ideas".

thats just the way of life.

but that doesn't affect what science does. and real scientists are well avare that all rules that science has written down can by tomorrow be defined false. with just one proof.

[davepermen]

science never will find a "why". nor will we ever.

it can only detect some normally happening rules, and explain some behaviour based on it.

but the general why will never be answered. well, not by humans by theselfes, at least. possibly one day one will explain that whole to us. but we will not be able to do it ourselfes.

i guess..

[robocop]

Machine is defined as an intricate organization that accomplishes its goals efficiently. Hence a Human being is a machine.
Science is best studied with experience, it is not rigid it changes from time to time. Its like we discover new things about ourselves everyday.Similarly if we are creating a robot that has various replicated processes of a human then it would also learn new things about the world and itself everyday. Machine learning things about itself might not be possible, if v are the creators of machine then we can keep updating the robot everyday.
I agree it might be possible that everything we know today is wrong.But the fact is it might be wrong if the frame of reference is tomorrow or even attimes yesterday. But when the frame of reference is consideed to be today then it is right.

Getting back to the original topic....of humans and robots. Emotions might be easier to replicate rather than other basic processess; there are studies being done that emotions are directectly related to intelligence. So it is more likely a robot will cry than he probably going around talking to people

[davepermen]

robocop said:

Machine is defined as an intricate organization that accomplishes its goals efficiently. Hence a Human being is a machine.

I don't get this logic.. :D

[anubis]

Quote

Machine is defined as an intricate organization that accomplishes its goals efficiently. Hence a Human being is a machine

we are not speaking here about the definition of machine. you gave human's the attribute "reproducable" (yeah, i know about the naughty way...) in terms of engeneering and i think that's what's being discussed here

[robocop]

Quote

I don't get this logic..

I dont see why you dont get the logic. This might help, here we are sticking to basics of science and technology! :)

[robocop]

Have you ever had a look at www.ai-forum.org. If not, have a look some of the topics and stuff are really interesting!

[davepermen]

well.. humans are not made to accomplish a task efficiently. thats what they created robots for:D

i don't know of any task humans are made for. we just exist. and thats the onyl purpose of us

[anubis]

ok, let's just assume it was possible. i don't think anybody would want to build a robot that features actual emotions. maybe one that mimics them so that we feel comfortable talking to it. think about a robot that has emotions, including greed, that decides to get power hungry

[Ed Mack]

I think that it is hard to define Science as a religion. Yes, people some put more faith into it than others, but the core principle of science differs from that of say Christianity.

Science is purely created by the itch man has to understand things, and the facts it puts forward are validated in clear, logical fashion - one would not argue that most plants do not contain chlorophyll. Whereas religions are often the reminants of a once much more powerful control tool eg the great crusades, egyption slavery ect. They often provide 'facts' that do not have any hard evidence and require faith in the true sense of the word.

I think it's not Science's aim to give the answer to the 'why' as that's more in the realm of philosophy than hard facts.

Quote

you gave human's the attribute "reproducable" (yeah, i know about the naughty way...) in terms of engeneering and i think that's what's being discussed here

Taking that argument further, from the perspective of early man, a watch wouldn't be reproducable therefore not a machine. If you look at the bigger picture, we will eventually be producable.

I think my main problem with [mainstream] religions is the concept and practical implications of Souls.

[anubis]

Quote

Taking that argument further, from the perspective of early man, a watch wouldn't be reproducable therefore not a machine

but it is nevertheless possible to produce a watch by technical means. it's worth a discussion if that applys to humans as well.

Quote

I think my main problem with [mainstream] religions is the concept and practical implications of Souls.

what bothers you about it ? the idea that there might be a soul makes my death the most interesting moment in my life :D

[Ed Mack]

Quote

but it is nevertheless possible to produce a watch by technical means. it's worth a discussion if that applys to humans as well.

I hate to resort to what really amounts up to a buzzword right now, but the world of nano will hopefully change this :)

Quote

what bothers you about it?

It's where it all fits in. Neuroscientiists can open you up, monitor with electrodes and watch stimuli pass between different areas, in the better studied areas they could give us a good idea of where it will go, what is happening. It looks to me as if our decisions are made by our brains - weighing up past knowledge, current stimuli - and then we take action upon the outcome. In my model, there just isn't need nor room for a soul.

Other things that get me is how they come into being? Where does it interface to the brain. Where do they reside (4th spatial dimension). How can a dog or chimp exhibit all the same qualities as us, yet not have a soul? Is god just specist ;) (question mountain today). The notion of a brain being a behemoth of a hardwired neuron soup makes a lot more sense, and doesn't bring up questions that verge on the supernatural. IMHO, Religion has had a long history of opressing and forcing Science (book burning, geocentric universe model, joining brain to testes to transport soul during sex), and this is just one more extravagence.

On the subject of free will, I'm undecided. People's actions never do seem of true free will - if it was so, it'd be very hard to predict anything. I suppose if quantum physics amounts to anything that can give the facility for true randomness in rinteractions inside our brains, but otherwise it's pretty pre-determined.

[robocop]

Quote

think about a robot that has emotions, including greed, that decides to get power hungry

Ya when talking of a robot being at par with a human this might also happen. And just the way you deal with people; u deal with a robot in the same way.You are talking of greed and emotions that might make us feel harmed.......i would on the otherhand go to the extent and say that you might even have to console a robot and further u might c a robot consoling another robot. Why dont we feel harmed if a dog wants its own territory, similarly why should it harm us if a robot does become greedy ......u just gat to tackle it in a natural way.

Quote

well.. humans are not made to accomplish a task efficiently

okey for your better understanding, A human being an actual machine in the mind (like ordinary machinery), constructed out of mental mass and energy, that has been made by the individual to do work for him, usually having been set up so as to come into operation automatically under certain predetermined circumstances. Also a machine is something that uses mechanical energy to do any task.......we always do specific things is we eat or run or whatever ......in the case of a human being the range of tasks it can do is very big