Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Artificial Intelligence Group] What is out there?

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Schams
    Andrew, You are correct in your assumption that there is no computer meeting your criteria for intelligence. Not even close in fact. As of right now computers
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 9, 2005
      Andrew,

      You are correct in your assumption that there is no computer meeting your criteria for intelligence. Not even close in fact. As of right now computers have slightly more raw processing power as mice, but nowhere near that of a dog or cat, let alone human. Luckily, the next 20 to 30 years progress in computing will cover the giant mental gap between mice and men, at least in terms of processing capability. At that point we'd still need supremely innovative designs, architecturally and in terms of software, to be able to produce intelligence as you describe it. If you want further reading about what I'm describing from a very popular book read "The Age of Spiritual Machines" by Ray Kurzweil, an amazing genius, who has almost as many important inventions to his name than years I have lived. In all of this I am assuming that by creativity you are referring to something humans would view as creative.

      If you only care about the end result and not how the computer got there, then computer creativity is here and has been for a while. Computers can compose original symphonies in the style of Bach or create any style painting you can think up. The way those programs achieve their results is not at all how we create art, but the result is very much the same.

      I have to question your strong statement regarding the absence of randomness or chaos in creativity. Those are powerful forces controlling every aspect of everything, as far as we can tell. Why shouldn't they hold some amount of sway over artists, musicians, and mathematicians, regardless of whether or not one believes in a soul or divine powers? Randomness and chaos doesn't necessarily exclude will of an individual. But I digress.

      One of the main problems, aside from computer power, is achieving some level of common sense and self reflection (one in the same in my opinion), which are required to have a subjective point of view, which in turn is required to have creativity or intelligence.

      I hope this is what you were looking for and that it helps you on your quest to understand the greatest (maybe?) scientific discipline we know today.

      Dan Schams


      coveent <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: In all the posts that I have been reading, it is hard to find the
      elusive answer to the simple question .. Has any one created a
      general form intelligent computer?

      Now, I have read endless posts on the argument about what
      intelligence is, and that sort of thing. Allow me to clarify what I
      mean by the question.

      First point, I mean a general form computer in that it is not
      dedicated to a specific, predetermined task. Basically, general form
      is like the desktop computer I am using at this time, and a
      dedicated computer would be like a cash register.

      Second point, I mean intelligent in that it is capable of learning
      from stimuli and to respond to that stimuli based on its experience.
      It would be capable of recognizing complex patterns, manipulating
      those patterns, and making decisions based on those patterns. If the
      situation warrants it, even using creative abstract processes in the
      deceision making process.

      Now, I do not fall victim to the erroneous idea that creativity is
      based on randomness or chaos. The use of those is not true
      creativity, but rather a feable attempt to mimic creativity by those
      that do not understand the creative process. (I am sorry if that
      statement offends anyone out there, but hey, the truth hurts, but it
      shall set you free.)

      I understand that my definition of intelligent may differ from
      others in this group. To you I say, "So what?" That is the
      definition that I chose to acknowledge at this time, and at least I
      am willing to explain it, and not assume that other people accept
      the same definition.

      Since I have not heard of such an electronic creation, I can only
      assume that one does not exsist yet. Of course, I am not the most
      well read and up to date individual around, so I freely admit that I
      may be wrong.

      But assuming that such a computer does not exsist, what are the
      traditional problems that are encountered and why?

      As far as replies to this post, I would appreciate responses that
      are written in the same manner that this post was written. That is
      to say, in plain, non-technical, simple, english. (Meaning no using
      terms that only a graduate student of mathematics would understand.)
      And please, do not refer me to obscure reading material. The library
      system around where I live stinks, and I am not made of money so I
      am not going to go out and buy some hard to find book for god knows
      how much based on what some anonymous person half way around the
      world says I should read. If you want to get technical, please be
      willing to explain yourself.

      Thank you in advance for your help on this.

      Andrew

      By the way, I do apologize for the cantancorous manner of this post,
      it is more out of frustration than anything.



      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Andre S Clements
      Applause
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 9, 2005
        Applause

        Wang, Pei wrote:

        >
        > Andrew,
        >
        > Your guess is correct: no such system exists yet, otherwise you should
        > have heard about it.
        >
        > However, you may not know that there are people working on such
        > projects, whose understanding of "intelligence" is not far away from
        > your definition. Some of the work will appear soon in a collection
        > http://www.springer.com/sgw/cda/frontpage/0,,4-147-22-43950079-0,00.html
        >
        > I'm not suggesting you to buy the book (though some others on the list
        > may be interested in it). Instead, you can find a draft of my chapter
        > in the book at
        > http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/farg/peiwang/PUBLICATION/wang.logic_intelligence.pdf
        > , a chapter by Peter Voss at http://adaptiveai.com/research/index.htm
        > , and the work of Ben Goertzel (also included in the book) at
        > http://agiri.org/novamente.pdf
        >
        > All of the above writings are non-technical, by the common standard in
        > the field, though they inevitably contain technical terms here or there.
        >
        > I'm sorry that I have to give you reading materials, rather than to
        > answer your question in the way you preferred, simply because the
        > problem is too complicated to be answered in that way --- I don't
        > think the traditional problems in AI can be explained without
        > mentioning the technical issues at all. For example, one such problem
        > is Hume's problem of induction. To solve it for AI, a philosophical
        > solution has to be accompanied by a technical solution, otherwise
        > we'll once again end up in a fruitless theoretical debate.
        >
        > Pei
        >
        >
        > --- In artificialintelligencegroup@yahoogroups.com, coveent
        > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > >
        > > In all the posts that I have been reading, it is hard to find the
        > > elusive answer to the simple question .. Has any one created a
        > > general form intelligent computer?
        > >
        > > Now, I have read endless posts on the argument about what
        > > intelligence is, and that sort of thing. Allow me to clarify what I
        > > mean by the question.
        > >
        > > First point, I mean a general form computer in that it is not
        > > dedicated to a specific, predetermined task. Basically, general form
        > > is like the desktop computer I am using at this time, and a
        > > dedicated computer would be like a cash register.
        > >
        > > Second point, I mean intelligent in that it is capable of learning
        > > from stimuli and to respond to that stimuli based on its experience.
        > > It would be capable of recognizing complex patterns, manipulating
        > > those patterns, and making decisions based on those patterns. If the
        > > situation warrants it, even using creative abstract processes in the
        > > deceision making process.
        > >
        > > Now, I do not fall victim to the erroneous idea that creativity is
        > > based on randomness or chaos. The use of those is not true
        > > creativity, but rather a feable attempt to mimic creativity by those
        > > that do not understand the creative process. (I am sorry if that
        > > statement offends anyone out there, but hey, the truth hurts, but it
        > > shall set you free.)
        > >
        > > I understand that my definition of intelligent may differ from
        > > others in this group. To you I say, "So what?" That is the
        > > definition that I chose to acknowledge at this time, and at least I
        > > am willing to explain it, and not assume that other people accept
        > > the same definition.
        > >
        > > Since I have not heard of such an electronic creation, I can only
        > > assume that one does not exsist yet. Of course, I am not the most
        > > well read and up to date individual around, so I freely admit that I
        > > may be wrong.
        > >
        > > But assuming that such a computer does not exsist, what are the
        > > traditional problems that are encountered and why?
        > >
        > > As far as replies to this post, I would appreciate responses that
        > > are written in the same manner that this post was written. That is
        > > to say, in plain, non-technical, simple, english. (Meaning no using
        > > terms that only a graduate student of mathematics would understand.)
        > > And please, do not refer me to obscure reading material. The library
        > > system around where I live stinks, and I am not made of money so I
        > > am not going to go out and buy some hard to find book for god knows
        > > how much based on what some anonymous person half way around the
        > > world says I should read. If you want to get technical, please be
        > > willing to explain yourself.
        > >
        > > Thank you in advance for your help on this.
        > >
        > > Andrew
        > >
        > > By the way, I do apologize for the cantancorous manner of this post,
        > > it is more out of frustration than anything.
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        > * Visit your group "artificialintelligencegroup
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/artificialintelligencegroup>" on
        > the web.
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > artificialintelligencegroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:artificialintelligencegroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
      • ato_zee
        One of the problems is that biological life forms have needs and out of this grows aims. The need for food created hunter gatherers, the need for co-operation
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 10, 2005
          One of the problems is that biological life forms have needs and out
          of this grows aims.
          The need for food created hunter gatherers, the need for co-operation
          for some tasks created communities and division of labour, and so on.
          For intellegent in your sense the creation would need to have many,
          sometimes conflicting aims, and means to resolve these inner conflicts
          and priorities. If you envisage the evolution of AI entities, into
          communities, then they would have to develop basic morality and Laws.
          So while needing food, in this case energy sources, it is not a good
          idea for them to eliminate each other.
          This concept seems to rule out linear preset programming, and it then
          becomes the chicken and egg question, do the aims evolve first, or the
          self adaptive programming to realise these aims, and what would be the
          nature of self adaptive programming?
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.