Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. Quote:A widely repeated observation is that this is like worrying about overpopulation on Mars. Quote:Anyone looking for something to worry about in the near future might want to consider the opposite of superintelligence: superstupidity.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. definition is about distillation to component forms - it can be conscious or unconscious . for example - smiling or raising your hand is all about muscle movement and the child observes and distills this and replicates it - they don't get it right 1st time but they train their faculties into mastering what they see. Grasping - motor skills. All complex behaviour that we mimicked our parents were small movements that we mastered and learnt how to stitch them into complex movements. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. definition is about distillation to component forms - it can be conscious or unconscious . for example - smiling or raising your hand is all about muscle movement and the child observes and distills this and replicates it - they don't get it right 1st time but they train their faculties into mastering what they see. Grasping - motor skills. All complex behaviour that we mimicked our parents were small movements that we mastered and learnt how to stitch them into complex movements. Equivocation. But even in the case I've provided there's no proof that the child will distill the components of behavior as in your case even unconsciously. If behavioral components- notice the mechanistic metaphor- could be distilled even unconsciously, then maladaptive mimicry would be avoided without therapy.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'. The ability to learn and mimic has to be defined and programmed into AI.Without that it can't mimic without definition and without definition and measurement we can't tell if it has gone beyond what it is mimicking.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. definition is about distillation to component forms - it can be conscious or unconscious . for example - smiling or raising your hand is all about muscle movement and the child observes and distills this and replicates it - they don't get it right 1st time but they train their faculties into mastering what they see. Grasping - motor skills. All complex behaviour that we mimicked our parents were small movements that we mastered and learnt how to stitch them into complex movements. Equivocation. But even in the case I've provided there's no proof that the child will distill the components of behavior as in your case even unconsciously. If behavioral components- notice the mechanistic metaphor- could be distilled even unconsciously, then maladaptive mimicry would be avoided without therapy. I have had the pleasure of having 3 children and the youngest is right now playing with a yellow shower duck. She is 7 months old and she seems to be fascinated by me pressing the duck and it making the whistling sound. she has not been able to do this on her own but if I do it over and over again and she hangs in there and gains motor skills that are required to press that yellow duck - he will one day generate the sound by herself. My second born daughter is having challenges in snapping her fingers - she watches me snap and she attempts and fails... she does it over and over and in a couple of weeks she will. the distillation of snapping of fingers - I recall her elder brother wanting to snap his fingers so badly that as he was in bed just before sleeping he would attempt to get it right - and one day he did. A human baby/child does this through out. from speech patterns and tones. Why do kids do this? Dopermine shots.. they get elated and gratified when they succeed. My brother and I shout passionately when discussing because my dad did the same. mimicry is not a right off the bat thing - it involves a feedback loop. Perhaps that is why kids sleep that much - attempting to learn all these things is exhausting. Perhaps the day we have self drugging machines which "feel" good after achieving tasks we will have a machine that aspires to be human and is elated by the journey - so far what we have is mimicry of mechanics of certain complex decision making processes humans engage in. in english pleaseAll Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'. The ability to learn and mimic has to be defined and programmed into AI.Without that it can't mimic without definition and without definition and measurement we can't tell if it has gone beyond what it is mimicking. Let me introduce evidence from the making of a neurotic program as illustrated in a book called 'Artificial intelligence and natural man' by Margaret Boden. Your idea is that neurotic behavior should be defined in such a program... but this program I'm referring to doesn't have such a definition. Instead, neurotic behavior emerges from independent variables. As for limits; humans don't know the limits of neurotic behavior. Even defining neurotic behavior is a problem. One would have to consult a diagnostic manual and tally a number of symptoms from a general list. Finally, intelligence is the ability to create definitions and form behaviors. Ask yourself for example, why couldn't Victor of Aveyron be socialized?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
@Masukuma, let me tell you what you've done in the last post: you've described how psycho-motor skill is developed in the course of mimicry. You've left the mimicry itself untouched. Why do children mimic adult behavior? What are the components of motivation? A child doesn't know these even unconsciously. A psychologist can develop insight as far as constructing a model or hypothesis...
As for the part in red- the one in 'not English'; if a child could define behavior even unconsciously, then he'd not choose behavior that would cause pain and conflict within himself and end up visiting a shrink...
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'. The ability to learn and mimic has to be defined and programmed into AI.Without that it can't mimic without definition and without definition and measurement we can't tell if it has gone beyond what it is mimicking. Let me introduce evidence from the making of a neurotic program as illustrated in a book called 'Artificial intelligence and natural man' by Margaret Boden. Your idea is that neurotic behavior should be defined in such a program... but this program I'm referring to doesn't have such a definition. Instead, neurotic behavior emerges from independent variables. As for limits; humans don't know the limits of neurotic behavior. Even defining neurotic behavior is a problem. One would have to consult a diagnostic manual and tally a number of symptoms from a general list. Finally, intelligence is the ability to create definitions and form behaviors. Ask yourself for example, why couldn't Victor of Aveyron be socialized? Russia to send robots, engineers to Syria to help demine PalmyraUse that to explain what you've said.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'. The ability to learn and mimic has to be defined and programmed into AI.Without that it can't mimic without definition and without definition and measurement we can't tell if it has gone beyond what it is mimicking. Let me introduce evidence from the making of a neurotic program as illustrated in a book called 'Artificial intelligence and natural man' by Margaret Boden. Your idea is that neurotic behavior should be defined in such a program... but this program I'm referring to doesn't have such a definition. Instead, neurotic behavior emerges from independent variables. As for limits; humans don't know the limits of neurotic behavior. Even defining neurotic behavior is a problem. One would have to consult a diagnostic manual and tally a number of symptoms from a general list. Finally, intelligence is the ability to create definitions and form behaviors. Ask yourself for example, why couldn't Victor of Aveyron be socialized? Russia to send robots, engineers to Syria to help demine PalmyraUse that to explain what you've said. Don't make me a chat-bot when I have so much to do!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:¿ wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:tycho wrote:masukuma wrote:I think "intelligence" and "mimicry" are different. the larger question of whether "it" knows "its" doing these things is a largely unappreciated one. Does AlphaGo "appreciate" go? does Deep blue appreciate chess? what we have is advanced mimicry of intelligence - perhaps a better question to ask is "does a very very very good painting or model of a person become a person? anyway the whole strong AI discussion is moot since it's not a question of "if" but "when" and the concerns of "old scientists" will be taken into consideration. What makes a person? What's consciousness? I think we're beyond mimicry. until we can define and measure that - we cannot create something that mimics it. Not true. Mimicry is possible without definition. it's not... give an example. A child will mimic parent's behavior without defining the behavior. For example, children of a parent with bipolar condition will tend to be bipolar through behavioral learning. And by the way learning doesn't require definition or consciousness. tycho wrote:
Building human traits into robots and AI. That's what AI has always been about.
It's a bit difficult to deal with this 'enthymeme'. The ability to learn and mimic has to be defined and programmed into AI.Without that it can't mimic without definition and without definition and measurement we can't tell if it has gone beyond what it is mimicking. Let me introduce evidence from the making of a neurotic program as illustrated in a book called 'Artificial intelligence and natural man' by Margaret Boden. Your idea is that neurotic behavior should be defined in such a program... but this program I'm referring to doesn't have such a definition. Instead, neurotic behavior emerges from independent variables. As for limits; humans don't know the limits of neurotic behavior. Even defining neurotic behavior is a problem. One would have to consult a diagnostic manual and tally a number of symptoms from a general list. Finally, intelligence is the ability to create definitions and form behaviors. Ask yourself for example, why couldn't Victor of Aveyron be socialized? Russia to send robots, engineers to Syria to help demine PalmyraUse that to explain what you've said. Don't make me a chat-bot when I have so much to do! lol.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Is a genetically modified organism, or a genetically engineered organism an example of AI?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
tycho wrote:Is a genetically modified organism, or a genetically engineered organism an example of AI? I'm beginning to suspect that AI is a misnomer and misconception. There's only 'intelligence' and it has no limit. 'Nature' is intelligence that we're used to but is in itself an illusion. The more we advance in knowledge and intelligence the more we'll have newer life forms... so the question is how to deal with these emergent life forms? A Darwinian model would perhaps be most appropriate ... So, probably withdrawing Tay was a timid and bad idea.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
tycho wrote:tycho wrote:Is a genetically modified organism, or a genetically engineered organism an example of AI? I'm beginning to suspect that AI is a misnomer and misconception. There's only 'intelligence' and it has no limit. 'Nature' is intelligence that we're used to but is in itself an illusion. The more we advance in knowledge and intelligence the more we'll have newer life forms... so the question is how to deal with these emergent life forms? A Darwinian model would perhaps be most appropriate ... So, probably withdrawing Tay was a timid and bad idea. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the intelligence exhibited by machines or software. It is also the name of the academic field of study which studies how to create computers and computer software that are capable of intelligent behavior.
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|