Re: [Artificial Intelligence Group] What is out there?
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.
coveent <email@example.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.
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
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- 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?