Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I for one, don't welcome our Robotic overlords (Artificial Intelligence).

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    How do you know this?

    Have you a proof?

    Anyhow it's possible to have self modifying code. One way of implementing it nearly safely is Virtual functions (Easily done in C, C++ and Modula-2, a bit harder in VB, Java and C#).

    Current HW is only inadequate if "thinking" is many thousands of time slower than Human. For a Demo, no-one will care if it takes a week or too for something we do instantly, for the "proof of concept". Then work can be done on improving speed and efficiency.

    Assuming that there is any problem. Know one knows. Maybe a 16MHz 486 Is fast enough (though it would seem unlikely). Since we currently have no spec. to work with, any projection of performance is fiction, just guessing.

    Before the time Doom and similar engines were written, it was thought FPUs and CPUs 100s and 1000s faster were needed. But the original FPS 3D used a trick and Integer maths thus work on 386 with no FPU or 486SX.


  • Options
    #33
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    I've thought about it for 5 minutes and that's the conclusion I came to.
    What's in charge of the self modifying code while it's running?
    What limits do you think will be put on your implementation of AI if you use a x86 cpu and a system that is based on Digital Logic.


  • Options
    #34
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    The only possible one I can think of is speed.

    Turing test, anyone?


  • Options
    #35
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    I've thought about it for 5 minutes and that's the conclusion I came to.

    Well, some people have been thinking about this for the last 30 years. :)


    It's a fascinating Problem.

    Given the Level of Soaps, Reality Tv and Big Brother, any one think there are people out there that can't pass the Turing test?

    Alan Turing was smart. But the "Touring test" was an off the cuff idea. It's not currently regarded as a test of AI, as there are ways of passing it without AI, if the Questioner is not specially trained. Just like Chess computers use Brute force and a database of all the openings and matches rather than AI.


  • Options
    #36
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    How do you know that the human mind doesn't approach chess the exact same way a computer does?

    You say there's no spec for AI, and then use the phrase "rather than AI", this makes no sense.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    x86 cpu and a system that is based on Digital Logic.

    If it's not Digital Logic, it's not a computer. We were considering if a Program could be written that is Intelligent in the sense we are.

    ALL computers just are collections of digital Logic.

    Add, complement, Test & Branch and Store are the only 4 operations needed to simulate any CPU HW in existence and to run any program written in any language. Some while ago I wrote a 16bit /32 bit math library with multiply, divide, and trig functions on an MPU with only 8 bit add and 8 bit complement as the only arithmetic instructions.

    There is C for 16F PIC micro family. It's a Stack orientated language using the stack for passing parameters to functions, return address and function result all on the stack. The PIC has no HW stack that can be used that way like an x86 (it has a fixed small stack only for parameterless HW Interrupt returns :) )


  • Options
    #38
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    JC 2K3 wrote: »
    You say there's no spec for AI, and then use the phrase "rather than AI", this makes no sense.

    It's very logical.

    Since we have no spec for AI, then no programs can be doing it. Chess was only thought of as something that might need AI till successful Chess software was written. Chess software uses Brute force. I can beat loads of people at chess. Almost any Chess program (even one on an 8bit MPU) can beat me. Grandmasters maybe have all the openings memorised, but beyond that they don't play like a Computer plays. Nor do they play like I do either.

    We don't know do build a successful Fusion Powerstation, thus logically any arbitrary Commercial Power station is not a Fusion one. We don't need the missing spec for a Fusion Power Station to prove it, but it's proved because we don't have the spec.

    But we can go further. You can examine the source for a Chess Program and you will also conclude that while that have got good enough to beat anyone (and this was true for simple PC programs 20 years ago against non-Masters) they are not using anything that even remotely resembles creativity or Intelligence or cognition or self awareness. This is clear even though we have not figured how to program any of these.

    Like when you look inside a real Power station, even though you don't know how to build a Fusion Model, you recognise the plain simple burning fuel, making steam, spinning a turbine models. Though the parts are very large.

    Same with Starships. We hope someday we figure how to build one. But if you look at all the current HW we have for space, it's mostly big fireworks. Definitely nothing that can do Warp drive or FTL travel. We have some ideas, but basically no good ones whe can start building. All of our current Technology is Reaction drive (Burn fuel in a rocket motor, Reflect solar wind, accelerate Plasma or fire lasers). It's all useless for Interstellar travel except in a "Generation" Ship.


  • Options
    #39
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    watty wrote: »
    Grandmasters maybe have all the openings memorised, but beyond that they don't play like a Computer plays. Nor do they play like I do either.
    Can you expand on this?

    When I'm playing chess, I think, "If I move my knight to X then I can take their bishop, but my queen will be unguarded, however if I move my castle to Y then I'll have their king in check, but then their knight will take me, alternatively, I could move my pawn...." etc.

    Now, that sounds like my brain is performing a brute force algorithm, going through all the possibilities, to determine my next move. I don't think a computer plays chess all that differently, just more efficiently and less error prone.


  • Options
    #40
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    If it's not Digital Logic, it's not a computer.
    ALL computers just are collections of digital Logic.
    No that's not true. Analogue computers have been around for decades.

    We were considering if a Program could be written that is Intelligent in the sense we are.

    Think of the Intelligent required for something such as going to make a cup of tea.The easiest way to get to where your going would be 4 wheels and a battery powered motor.But when you get there, how will you know where the tea bags are located?

    And say if it could do the above.Would you call it intelligent?What happens if the house went on fire?Would it still go and make the cup of tea?


  • Options
    #41
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    No that's not true. Analogue computers have been around for decades.




    Think of the Intelligent required for something such as going to make a cup of tea.The easiest way to get to where your going would be 4 wheels and a battery powered motor.But when you get there, how will you know where the tea bags are located?

    And say if it could do the above.Would you call it intelligent?What happens if the house went on fire?Would it still go and make the cup of tea?

    Analogue Computers are an "analogue" of the problem. In the sense we are talking about they are not computers at all. I've designed and built both kinds.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    Computers are analogue or digital or chemical the list goes on. But your talking about personal digital computers and writing a program in c++ that will have some sort of intelligence.

    I don't think it's possible to do such a thing in the languages that are available now.I know you can do whatever you like with a few nand gates but that's not the point.


  • Options
    #43
    Bugbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10 ✭Bugbear


    Very interesting discussion

    I'd like to give my small contribution: www.singinst.org


  • Options
    #44
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball




    This is the future!


  • Options
    #45
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    Computers are analogue or digital or chemical the list goes on. But your talking about personal digital computers and writing a program in c++ that will have some sort of intelligence.

    I don't think it's possible to do such a thing in the languages that are available now.I know you can do whatever you like with a few nand gates but that's not the point.

    No, we are talking about Stored Program computers. Like Turing or Neuman Machines. The programming language doesn't affect what is possible, just the ease of implementation. That's the only kind of thing people are using.

    It makes no difference if it's a PC, embedded controller or supercomputer other than speed. An "Analogue Computer" is a different concept altogether. It's not running a program in a Turing, Babbage/Ada, Neumann or Konrad Zuse's sense.

    The computing engine can be implemented using Digital Logic, Qubit Quantum Devices, clockwork & gear wheels, relays or valves(vacuum tubes). The design of the ALU, code execution unit etc can be the same.

    Strictly speaking an "Analogue computer" is not a computer at all in this sense. It has no ALU, no stored program, no branch logic.


  • Options
    #46
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    So far, the silver screen has been quite accurate, except when it comes to robots, says Dr Kaku.

    In fact, he says Hollywood has misled us into thinking that smart robots are just around the corner.

    Fans of the emotional Sonny from I-Robot, or the depressed and bored Marvin from The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, may be disappointed to hear that they are more likely to find a cockroach composing a symphony or writing a poem than a robot.

    "Stupid cockroaches are smarter than our robots,"     says Dr Kaku.

    "Robots are nothing but tape-recorders, pre-scripted moves ahead of time.

    "Digital computers have a hard time learning and that's the fundamental problem. They don't learn new skills."
    Renowned physicist Dr Michio Kaku says that the world of science fiction may be closer to reality than fantasy.

    So if you thought that invisibility cloaks, time travel and teleportation were for the silver screen only, think again.

    Dr Kaku is a theoretical physicist and the co-founder of string field theory, a branch of string theory, often referred to as "the theory of everything".


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8221009.stm


  • Options
    #47
    Vgamer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7 ✭Vgamer1


    If you guys are really interested in this topic, come check out www.imminst.org

    We talk about this stuff all the time. Here's a video of Ray Kurzweil talking about some of these topics:

    http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ray_kurzweil_on_how_technology_will_transform_us.html


Advertisement