How long before computers act on their own? (1 Viewer)

[Dr Oadi]

Mine comes on all the time by itself. That's not supposed to happen?

 

[DrJ]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Pretty sure my three year old laptop is more powerful than DSP's brain.

 

[DSP]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossible

Computers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

 

[DrJ]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossible

Computers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

But they don't need to create art to be acting on their own. Some of this will come down to a philosophical point of view - is a series of machines that can fix and replicate themselves, live in the harshest environments that we couldn't possibly endure, etc superior - or is making art? If you value the human experience you might say the latter, from a survival standpoint it very well might be the former.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

I believe we may already be the result of a computer simulation.

 

[DSP]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossibleComputers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

But they don't need to create art to be acting on their own. Some of this will come down to a philosophical point of view - is a series of machines that can fix and replicate themselves, live in the harshest environments that we couldn't possibly endure, etc superior - or is making art? If you value the human experience you might say the latter, from a survival standpoint it very well might be the former.

I believe artistic experession is the most important trait that makes us human

I dont believe machines can develope on their own to ever need or desire to do such things

 

[DrJ]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossibleComputers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

But they don't need to create art to be acting on their own. Some of this will come down to a philosophical point of view - is a series of machines that can fix and replicate themselves, live in the harshest environments that we couldn't possibly endure, etc superior - or is making art? If you value the human experience you might say the latter, from a survival standpoint it very well might be the former.

I believe artistic experession is the most important trait that makes us humanI dont believe machines can develope on their own to ever need or desire to do such things

Ok, they won't be capable of being human. But what they lack in artistic expression they'll make up for in lack of emotion. Just think how great you would be at making things like biological weapons if you could remove emotion and value for things like life and the human experience from the manufacturing process.

 

[DrJ]

The socialist utopia is within reach if we could program all of society to go along with it rather than simply act in their own best interests like the environment has programmed them to do. Imagine how much better they would be at doing things like managing health care costs. You don't keep aging machines that are no longer optimally productive alive, you scrap them and use their parts to build new machines.

 

[DSP]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossibleComputers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

But they don't need to create art to be acting on their own. Some of this will come down to a philosophical point of view - is a series of machines that can fix and replicate themselves, live in the harshest environments that we couldn't possibly endure, etc superior - or is making art? If you value the human experience you might say the latter, from a survival standpoint it very well might be the former.

I believe artistic experession is the most important trait that makes us humanI dont believe machines can develope on their own to ever need or desire to do such things

Ok, they won't be capable of being human. But what they lack in artistic expression they'll make up for in lack of emotion. Just think how great you would be at making things like biological weapons if you could remove emotion and value for things like life and the human experience from the manufacturing process.

What need would they have for war without emotion?

 

[DrJ]

All the human brain is doing is finding ways for respond to external stimuli. There's absolutely no reason to believe we have been optimally programmed to do so. In fact it seems that plenty of times we do so in ways that are counterproductive to our own best interest. There's no reason to believe our bodies are optimally created to do so, either. We break down easily, get tired. A computer can make a gigantic number of attempts at responding to external stimuli in a given amount of time compared to us. It can store and retrieve the data far more precisely and quickly than we can. There's no reason they can't eventually act on their own in a purely logical capacity. We keep getting closer and it will eventually happen.

To me DSP's argument is more about whether their abilities would be superior to our own abilities to respond to external stimuli. We'll probably get to test that theory in this century.

I dont believe we are sufficiently adapted to our functions either. I dont think man could create a mechsnically equal version of itself until we understand every aspect of human biology.....which I believe to be impossibleComputers will not have the artistic "spark of genius". They work within logical parameters and we dont

But they don't need to create art to be acting on their own. Some of this will come down to a philosophical point of view - is a series of machines that can fix and replicate themselves, live in the harshest environments that we couldn't possibly endure, etc superior - or is making art? If you value the human experience you might say the latter, from a survival standpoint it very well might be the former.

I believe artistic experession is the most important trait that makes us humanI dont believe machines can develope on their own to ever need or desire to do such things

Ok, they won't be capable of being human. But what they lack in artistic expression they'll make up for in lack of emotion. Just think how great you would be at making things like biological weapons if you could remove emotion and value for things like life and the human experience from the manufacturing process.

What need would they have for war without emotion?

It would need to be the optimal solution to whatever problem they are attempting to solve.

 

[Abraham]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

 

[DrJ]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

They'll probably archive that code when they wipe us out. Humans seem to be the only species that wastes a lot of effort communicating like this.

 

[flysack]

Am the first to make the bad 8-29-1997 joke?

I didn't read the thread.

 

[flysack]

August 29th, 1997 was over 16 years ago. Ain't gonna happen.

Damn it!

 

[Rove!]

Computers already do act on their own.

They auto-correct auto-save and a whole host of actions as defined in their instruction set.

The decision-making will become more and more complex as things like self-driving cars are developed....

 

[DSP]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

Original pieces or mashups of pre programmed data?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

Original pieces or mashups of pre programmed data?

Original pieces.

 

[DSP]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

Original pieces or mashups of pre programmed data?

Original pieces.

When and where has this been done?

How about a computer writing poetry?

 

[flysack]

Computers already do act on their own.

Seriously. Do you know how often my PC sends me links to transsexual BDSM bovine insemination clips? It's like it can read my mind or something.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

Original pieces or mashups of pre programmed data?

Original pieces.

When and where has this been done?

Multiple times in multiple places.

How about a computer writing poetry?

http://books.google.com/books?id=2LB3QgAACAAJ&dq=the+policeman%27s+beard+is+half+constructed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1lnlUs-JKoTgsAT_x4HYDQ&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA

 

[The General]

Mine always seems to be looking at porn. I think it's got a problem some of the stuff it likes is pretty out there.

 

[DSP]

One brain is more complex than all the computers on the planet and has had millions of years to develop.

The earth's top 500 supercomputers combined are 3 times as powerful as a human brain: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/18/earths-supercomputing-power-surpasses-human-brain-three-times-over/

What functions do they perform better than a human brain besides math?Can these supercomputers paint a picture or compose a song?

Yes and yes.

Original pieces or mashups of pre programmed data?

Original pieces.

When and where has this been done?

Multiple times in multiple places.

How about a computer writing poetry?

http://books.google.com/books?id=2LB3QgAACAAJ&dq=the+policeman%27s+beard+is+half+constructed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1lnlUs-JKoTgsAT_x4HYDQ&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA

http://books.google.com/books?id=AcXFfl1pPcgC&pg=PA189&lpg=PA189&dq=the+policemans+beard+is+half+constructed+hoax&source=bl&ots=GblNnsdpNV&sig=EYIe-7UFYkFcXt4Pl8DWw0Nh3gM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7FrlUqWLN_OosQS1tYCgAg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAw

Now how about those songs and paintings?

 

[Aerial Assault]

More likely to build a time machine to go 1000 years ahead to see if computers evolved.

I did that this morning. Evolvotron 8000 v2.2 says hello.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Has a computer ever written "Yesterday" by the Beatles?

Has a computer ever taken a ####?

Has a computer breakdanced in a subway car?

Didn't think so. Case closed.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Mine comes on all the time by itself. That's not supposed to happen?

Ironic. I come on mine by myself all the time.

 

[Fennis]

Has a computer ever written "Yesterday" by the Beatles?

Has a computer ever taken a ####?

Has a computer breakdanced in a subway car?

Didn't think so. Case closed.

#3

case opened

 

[gianmarco]

Has a computer ever written "Yesterday" by the Beatles?

Has a computer ever taken a ####?

Has a computer breakdanced in a subway car?

Didn't think so. Case closed.

#3

case opened

That doesn't look like a subway car. Nice try.

And I'm surprised it didn't do the robot.

 

[Bri]

They do not possess any degree of spatial reasoning.

What do you think that the driver-less car does?

I read of one yesterday that was 250k and drives kids around campus at colleges. It has to follow the same route and it wasn't as advanced as googles. IIRC Google's uses 3D technology to drink in a scene they're driving through and adjust. My concern is jobs and computers. A tech can repair many computers so it's not like a 1:1 ratio where if we replace an employee with a computer, there winds up being a new employee repairing it.

These fancy cars, why pay a taxi driver then?

IIRC each computer operated car is electric. Being how our economy/gov't has so much invested in the oil industry, how will this work out?

That 250k car has to become more affordable for any significant economic impact and we'll have to be able to test that as it wears down and malfunctions it doesn't start running into people and crashing into other cars and such.

ETA link http://vr-zone.com/articles/french-company-selling-driverless-navia-vehicle/70458.html

Of course these are all legitimate points. I was trying to address the factual inaccuracies in his post.

But also consider that in 2003, many were likely wondering about the point of smartphones, questioning their abilities and their prices. 10 years later and there are over 1 billion in use.

I

This car does not possess anywhere near the epatial reasoning of s human. It tollows its route and is cautious of normal obstacles

Csn this car evade the police across highways, fields and woods?

right but like I said, Google's recreates and creates a live 3D environment which it navigates through. In a way it is driving through a 3D world yet the wheels are spinning in ours. I find this fascinating and figure this will be a technology trend that continues.

Many cars have the automatic parallel park thing now which is some spatial maneuvering, but I'm more interested in googles.

As I understand it, their car can stop if a ball rolls in front and understands to follow the cars in front so if a car was going 20 mph in a 40, it wouldn't crash into it. There is some programmed reactions to stimuli-which is what I think is how it develops further.

Evading could be a reaction I suppose and turn N drive N turn til no police behind you.

There's probably 1000 "what ifs" with driving and I'm not sure how they can account for everything and program it as such. I don't in anyway think there's original thought.

 

[Bri]

http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-what-a-google-self-driving-car-sees-at-a-stoplight-2013-4