A machine knows nothing. It just blindly executes algorithms in the way it was programmed to do so. It cannot deviate from, or add anything to that dumb computation. Everything you ask a voice activated program can be stored on a hard drive, in a database, for later recall (querying). If you want to think of that as memory..

Everything you ask a voice activated program can be stored on a hard drive, in a database, for later recall (querying). If you want to think of that as memory.. — emancipate

Is "everything" stored on a hard drive - or, can flash drives, cloud storage, or other things - be used as storage of information? How does the method of storing information limit whether a machine knows anything or not?

How does the method of storing information limit whether a machine knows anything or not? — Don Wade

So called AI ultimately does comprise the actions of billions of switches. Of course their output is orchestrated by ingenious programming which is indeed awesome. (Hey I was six years old when our country got television.) Now, nobody really knows what 'sentience' or 'mind' is, but I'm of the view that computer networks don't possess it. They can emulate some aspects of it, to great effect - I actually use SIRI a fair bit, and I notice that Google gets more useful all the time, sometimes spookily so. But I agree with the above comment, it doesn't amount to sentience or actual knowledge. It's different in kind, and there's a difference in kind between beings and devices.

But I know it's an interminable argument. There's another forum I used to post to back in 2012-13 and there was a thread on this topic there that had been running for years already, and I bet it still is.

Is "everything" stored on a hard drive - or, can flash drives, cloud storage, or other things - be used as storage of information? How does the method of storing information limit whether a machine knows anything or not? — Don Wade

The type of storage only affects the rate at which data can be accessed (e.g SSD's are faster) and the total size capacity ( flash drives are smaller). Cloud storage is still storage on a HDD, but that HDD is on a remote server.

'AI' is improved by having access to large amounts of data. Which is why big data is so important these days.

is it intelligent. — Don Wade

I think we can interpret those AI are intelligent because they have a very developed algorithm. They learn a lot of us and then keep our data to act more precisely the next time you asked them something.
So with these patterns I guess we can argue they are intelligent.

They can emulate some aspects of it, to great effect - I actually use SIRI a fair bit, and I notice that Google gets more useful all the time, sometimes spookily so. But I agree with the above comment, it doesn't amount to sentience or actual knowledge. It's different in kind, and there's a difference in kind between beings and devices. — Wayfarer

We train our kids to emulate us - and we program our computers to emulate us. Really does't seem to be to be too much difference. We even congratulate our kids for being intelligent. Do we "expect" our computers not to be intelligent because they are machines?

oh yeah, what programming language did you use to engineer your kids? Computers only understand 1s and 0s. Kids have a creativity that isn't reducible to an algorithm.

what programming language did you use to engineer your kids? Computers only understand 1s and 0s. Kids have a creativity that isn't reducible to an algorithm. — emancipate

That's like saying a person doesn't understand "air vibrations" - only sound. A computer converts the 1's and 0's into something it can use - just like we convert air vibrations into something we can use.

That's a false analogy. The cpu merely decodes a constant binary stream according to the specific and hardwired instruction set. There is no deviating from this mechanical process and thus zero creativity, at all. Computers at best can only mimic creativity, or intelligence. They are completely determined. They lack spirit.

Really does't seem to be to be too much difference. We even congratulate our kids for being intelligent. Do we "expect" our computers not to be intelligent because they are machines? — Don Wade

If I dropped my computer into a pool of water and destroyed it, I would have committed no crime.

If I dropped my computer into a pool of water and destroyed it, I would have committed no crime. — Wayfarer

I'm really not sure what "being a crime" has to do with being intelligent. Could you offer more details.

Could you offer more details. — Don Wade

You should be able to figure it out. You're the one who compared computers to children. Children are sentient beings, computers are devices. If that is a distinction that eludes you, there's probably nothing I can say.

You should be able to figure it out. You're the one who compared computers to children. Children are sentient beings, computers are devices. If that is a distinction that eludes you, there's probably nothing I can say. — Wayfarer

In spite of the attitude, I still don't see how that has to do with intelligence?

I suspect that you think 'information processing' and 'intelligence' are the same thing. Whether computers really are intelligent is a contested question, but I am on the 'nay' side, as I believe human intelligence displays characteristics which cannot effectively be captured by digital programing. This is the subject of a lot of commentary, I will leave it at that.

This is the subject of a lot of commentary, I will leave it at that. — Wayfarer

Thanks! Yes, I realize it's a subject with a lot of thought, and commentary. One way to address something that is as complex - is to discuss it - get other opinions. Thanks again for your commentary.

Phrased like this, this question is terminological. We can say that a machine "knows" to recognize our voice the way a calculator "knows" what the answer for 32578+97722 is, as elevators knows which floor we want to go to.

For that matter we can say ants know where the queen in the colony is and bees know how to defend themselves. But these examples of know don't have much to say about knowing in the human case, or so it seems to me. It's analogous to asking whether airplanes really fly as opposed to glide (in Hebrew, apparently, they glide) or if cars fly as opposed to race. You can choose whatever words you'd like to describe such occurrences.

But asking what "knowing" is in the human case is very difficult, it's still very much debated. But I don't think looking at AI helps much at all, it's better to continue studying people for these matters.

But asking what "knowing" is in the human case is very difficult, it's still very much debated. But I don't think looking at AI helps much at all, it's better to continue studying people for these matters. — Manuel

I believe I understand what you are saying. I also believe we should study "both". Both AI, and people.

Sure. Even if AI may not explain human intelligence, who knows what might happen as we continue developing technology? In either case we still discover something new.