I've noticed that people who talk about "an AI" are rarely to be taken seriously. It's a computer program.

an AI — Daemon

That "an" seems to be doing something. Care to expand and elaborate.

I've noticed that people who talk about "an AI" in this kind of context overestimate the capabilities of computer programs. Calling it "an AI" makes it sound like it's an entity, like a person, a mind. It isn't any of those things.

People like this also overestimate the significance of the Turing Test. Passing the test doesn't confer personhood.

Passing the test doesn't confer personhood. — Daemon

You would say that, daemon!

overestimate the capabilities of computer programs. — Daemon

How do we know you're not swinging towards the other end of the spectrum, underestimation? I don't wanna argue the point, just making it explicit.

I can remember talking to Eliza at university. It was a computer based verbal respond to questions. Like those answers of lady Google. Like those perfect computer generated voices in youtube documensto ries. With sentence melodies repeated ad nausea. Intelligence and emotion just can't be programmed because our brain is not programmed. We learn by memories of things we see. The world gets engraved in the neural network. Creativity plays with memories.

How do we know you're not swinging towards the other end of the spectrum, underestimation? — Agent Smith

The only thing we should not underestimate is the incredible speed of the computer clock. Pushing instruction in before one hasn't even finished yet. That's all about AI. Speed. Hyperclocking.

How can chaos run free on a straight jackened straight structured computer chip?

Well, I have several ways to show that I'm not underestimating computers, but if you don't want to argue the point...

The Turing test, originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing in 1950,[2] is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human.

(Wiki)

What if we lower the bar a bit and check if AI can mimic a person of low IQ & EQ, almost no GK, and perhaps even a bit cuckoo? — Agent Smith

I see no contradiction.

The false assumption though is that machines can exhibit intelligent behavior. They will always have 0 IQ.

I've noticed that people who talk about "an AI" in this kind of context overestimate the capabilities of computer programs. Calling it "an AI" makes it sound like it's an entity, like a person, a mind. It isn't any of those things. — Daemon

This is correct. Remember Sophia? It was presented in public as an AI that could "think" and interact with you. It can't. The handlers feed it information -- like a song, or answers to questions before the actual encounter. It's very limited. But people think it's the closest we get to an android. But it's really isn't. It's a cringe worthy creation of people.

brain is not programmed — EugeneW

The brain is a memory device and, roughly speaking, an analytical engine rolled into one. The ability to learn can be reduced to pattern recognition and their storage for future reference. All of these abilities, methinks, are programmable.

incredible speed of the computer clock. — EugeneW

Speed, yep! The computer operates at the level of perhaps a worm's "intelligence", but it makes up for that with astonishing speed, made possible by the fact that it works on electricity and not biolelectricity, the latter being much much slower.

Well, I have several ways to show that I'm not underestimating computers — Daemon

I change my mind, out with it.

I see no contradiction. — jgill

Spoken like a true logician.

The false assumption though is that machines can exhibit intelligent behavior. They will always have 0 IQ. — EugeneW

What part of an IQ test assesses memory?

The brain is a memory device and, roughly speaking, an analytical engine rolled into one. The ability to learn can be reduced to pattern recognition and their storage for future reference. All of these abilities, methinks, are programmable — Agent Smith

The brain isn't programmed like a computer. If you learn by repetition there are just strengthenings of neural connections involved. Parallel path processes are engraved in the brain which is never shut off. In constant motion, the neural currents are, finding, creating, and falling into paths of least resistance (patterned connection strengths). A floating thought is not programmed but falls into trails or establishes new ones.

Well, I have several ways to show that I'm not underestimating computers — Daemon


I change my mind, out with it. — Agent Smith

Ok, we will start with what is perhaps the most fundamental reason why computers will never attain personhood. The story begins around 3.5 billion years ago, with the appearance of single celled organisms.

Now for the first time (that we know of, on Earth) there was something with an inside and an outside, the organism itself, and its environment. For the first time there were entities.

Without this "individuation", you don't get human style consciousness (after 3.5 billion years), and personhood. Individuation provides a locus for consciousness. Consciousness always happens to an individual.

Non-living objects are not individuated, there's no (non-arbitrary) boundary between the object and the environment.

This applies to computers. There's no individuated entity there to become a person. No locus for a mind.

Like a (good) doctor who's all out of options, I recommend a wait & watch policy. Death is a blessing, we don't have to live long enough to eat our own words. Aaah morte! Sweet relief!

The future, if you'll notice, is brimming with possibilities (anicca).

That said, are we not, ourselves, meat machines? Our mechanical creations seem to be made in our image (arms, legs, head, etc.) just like Yahweh made us in his image or so the story goes.

It seems you didn't understand what I said.

It seems you didn't understand what I said. — Daemon

Maybe that's not my fault!

If something is unclear I will happily explain it. But I don't really think that's the problem.

The brain isn't programmed like a computer. — EugeneW

I don't quite get the resistance to such a simple and intuitive idea.

Let's meet at the halfway point. Would you agree that one of the things the brain is known for, in fact defines it, namely logic, is programmable (algorithm). Too, isn't it true that AI can recognize patterns? I might've missed a spot or two.

If something is unclear I will happily explain it. But I don't really think that's the problem. — Daemon

What's individuation? Do any AI researchers use this concept to prove that their work towards creating General AI is misguided, finished before it even begins?

I don't quite get the resistance to such a simple and intuitive idea. — Agent Smith

You need to understand the other person's argument before you can counter it.

You need to understand the other person's argument before you can counter it. — Daemon

What's individuation? Do any AI researchers use this concept to prove that their work towards creating General AI is misguided, finished before it even begins? — Agent Smith

Let's meet at the halfway point. Would you agree that one of the things the brain is known for, in fact defines it, namely logic, is programmable (algorithm). Too, isn't it true that AI can recognize patterns? I might've missed a spot or two — Agent Smith

Logic is a way of thinking. If A then B, and if C assumed true together with A the C is B if A and C in the same class of truth. Something like that. Its just a train of thoughts running on your neural network. Unprogrammed. But structured by strengthened connections between neurons, which is how memories form.

I don't quite get the resistance to such a simple and intuitive idea — Agent Smith

What intuitive idea?

Have you ever thought about AS?

Logic is a way of thinking. If A then B, and if C assumed true together with A the C is B if A and C in the same class of truth. Something like that. Its just a train of thoughts running on your neural network. Unprogrammed. But structured by strengthened connections between neurons, which is how memories form — EugeneW

Correction: That is how (we think) memories are formed.

Coming to the main issue of whether a human persona can be mimicked, I'd say Turing set the bar low (deliberately so) for (future) AI.

By the way, can you give me one example of a mind process that you believe is not programmable?

By the way, can you give me one example of a mind process that you believe is not programmable — Agent Smith

All of them.

All of them. — EugeneW

Give me a concrete, particular case.

Thinking 1+1=3. How would you program that thought on a computer?

1+1=3 — EugeneW

It's a mathematical operation, actually a pure logic game.