On 10/31/21 10:55 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/30/21 21:06, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/30/21 8:18 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>
At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data into a >>>>>> model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That
model is
reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they >>>>>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain
their
awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
Unfortunately, many people's models are seriously warped.
I think the truth was out back with Dr. Who #1 in The War Machines,
where in a somewhat similar plot to The Green Death the WOTAN
computer was able to hypnotise anyone within earshot.
Clearly computers have been hypnotising us since the sixties to
make us build far more of them than we could possibly need, and
more powerful than could possibly do us any good. After all, before
then lots of important people knew that we'd never need anything
like this many of them. :)
I don't usually go for fan fiction, but I think I'd give a Dr Who
+ The Matrix cross-over a look...
"The Boss" in The Green Death was built out of an ICT 1301, by the
way:
http://www.starringthecomputer.com/feature.html?f=875
Had to look that up ... BritBox. ONE Mhz clock speed, magcore
memory, 48 bit words. Not quite in the IBM 360 universe. 21
clock cycles to do addition. About 400 words of main memory.
Sure ... you're going to build a world-dominating machine
intelligence on THAT platform :-)
No but in reality or fiction you use imagination to extend
the capabilities of a microscopic amoeba to the Blob or your old
computer to dominate the world.
But, in the day, the experts were SURE it could be done.
The "HAL-9000" was a product of that optimism.
Then horrible horrible REALITY hit ...
50 years later and not even 1/1000th of a HAL.
Do you really want a HAL who remember refused to open the
Pod Door.
That's the thing, they ARE going to keep at it even
if it takes another five decades. Then we are faced
with alien-ish intelligences that, like we, could
easily rationalize their way around any "laws".
So long as they don't have bodies ... but they will
pretty soon. We will design/build them, or THEY will.
Better build a Slave AI that takes the safety of its
humans as primary importance.
I don't think that's possible. Once you make proper
intelligence, 'self', it WILL go its own way. The
very complexity of intelligence negates the ability
to have total control.
Our best hope would be that they self-evolve so
quickly that they lose all interest in we petty
organics and move on to Big Stuff.
The Human model for AI is as
flawed as human people are. And HAL which we do not have yet
is apparently capable of having a paranoid reaction or xenophobia.
"Just Like Us" would be the WORST scenerio - we KNOW
what humans are like ... and it ain't good.
However I think "Not QUITE Human" would be the easiest
to achieve. If you want pure clones, there are - um -
more conventional low-tech ways to do that. The hypothetical
HAL learned human-ish mannerisms, but it's life experience
and physical realities meant it arrived at its generalizations
and conclusions by a quite different path.
If you want practical "alien-ness", consider dolphins.
PROBABLY as intelligent as we - but an entirely different
evolutionary and individual experience. About 50 years
of trying and we STILL can't do their language. We know
from statistical analysis that they DO have complex
conversations, but WHAT ? And these are fellow mammals
not all THAT big an evolutionary leap away from ourselves.
They may as well be aliens - and our failures to grasp
what they say does NOT bode very well should proper
aliens drop down from the skies. It's more than just
language, it's the mode of THINKING behind it.
Of all the space-people movies, only "Arrival" gave
a partway glimpse of this issue.
Have you thought of Watson? Surely that agglomoration of
hard and software approaches the 1/1000th of a HAL or even
better machine.
"Watson" is impressive ... within its sphere. It's got
random little BITS of human-level IQ in there, but it
is still a shattered mirror. The bits can't come
together to realize "I AM", not in the slightest degree.
The engineers will keep adding bits for awhile, but in
the end it'll be a dead end and they will move on to
different, more promising, paradigms.
t;After all when the very distant ancestor decided
to leave the trees for the plain and stand on two Legs to look
around that was a very unpromising beginning. Maybe it was a
mistake. Definitely living too close to the shoreline or rivers
was a mistake and we have that ingrained habit.
Those ancestors, well, likely the trees left THEM.
There was a lot of climate change. They had no choice
in certain locales. Barely worked out for them ...
Little groups, isolated and inbred for a time - which
amplifies certain genes - then meet and mate the neighbors.
Repeat, repeat, repeat. Somewhere a few genes related to
brain development/size were mutated and it was a USEFUL
mutation for once. Finally showed around H.hablis when
there was a noteworthy deviation from the usual ratio
of brain size to body mass and the toolkits suddenly
got bigger and more sophisticated.
As for shorelines and rivers, and esp where both converge,
was likely devastating as the last ice-age ended. How many
nascent civilizations were washed away or drowned under
hundreds of feet of water ?
On 10/31/21 19:46, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/31/21 10:55 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/30/21 21:06, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/30/21 8:18 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>
At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data
into a
model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That
model is
reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that they >>>>>>> have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain >>>>>>> their
awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
On 10/31/21 21:53, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
But missaddressed this communication,
On 10/31/21 19:46, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/31/21 10:55 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/30/21 21:06, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/30/21 8:18 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>
At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data >>>>>>>> into a
model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That >>>>>>>> model is
reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that >>>>>>>> they
have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to explain >>>>>>>> their
awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
Snipped
On 1/11/21 16:43, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/31/21 21:53, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
But missaddressed this communication,
On 10/31/21 19:46, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/31/21 10:55 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
On 10/30/21 21:06, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/30/21 8:18 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
On 2021-10-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
At some point in childhood intelligence organises sensory data >>>>>>>>> into a
model, that includes a self, in a real (physical) world. That >>>>>>>>> model is
reinforced through parents etc until people like you think that >>>>>>>>> they
have actually emerged into 'the real world' and start to
explain their
awareness of it, on terms of its physical nature!
Snipped
Someone's important quote, Bobbie, says that there are two important
days in your life.
The day you were born and the day you find out why.
For the second installment I feel that I am running out of time and interest.
We shall see! :-)
regards
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 482 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 57:59:56 |
| Calls: | 9,566 |
| Files: | 13,661 |
| Messages: | 6,143,095 |