Could a more sophisticated being follow humans?

Page 2 of 5 [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

BlackLiger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,525
Location: My Posh Leather Chair. England.

15 May 2005, 8:45 am

Not true. An AI could be made using a quantum Computer. Therefore it would not just have Boolian answers. Instead it would have an exponential choice system, just like we do :D


_________________
"Where are we going and why are we in this handbasket?"


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

15 May 2005, 2:51 pm

It would give the illusion of AI, but it still wouldn't really be AI. In fact I'd say that it would be about as smart as the smartest 'bots' in a first person shooter.

http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~westside/quantum-intro.html



Morlock
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 372
Location: Albany, OR

15 May 2005, 2:58 pm

Sure, it may be AI wont be possible in near future, but at some point enough processing capacity will be available to emulate the function of that few kilos of grey matter in our head.

Of course, its not the sheer processing power, but how its wired.



Prometheus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,506
Location: Through the plexiglass

15 May 2005, 3:02 pm

Quote:
Also, AI wouldn't be able to do much more then add in to it's coding which would make it slower and slower thus defeating the purpose of modifying it's own coding...I dont' want to go in depth on it, I'm tired. =\


I doubt that AI will ever be praticall until they are able to eliminate coding that is not essentail to survival or to group like coding together and derive a single generalistic code from it. . .

In humans it is called forgetting and sterotyping. . .

prejudging is a good thing in that it gives a template to humans when they come into contact with something they cannot understand. . .of course it can lead to some pretty lousy end results, so this AI will also need to find a way to accept that their generalized code will have exceptions. . .

See where I am going? I think AI is pretty far off, if ever.


_________________
All your bass are belong to us.


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

15 May 2005, 3:02 pm

I don't think technology is going to be able to emulate a human mind in it's full form. We only use 10% of our brains, or so I'm told, and as of yet processors that can do thousands of calculations a second can't emulate an infant.



Prometheus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,506
Location: Through the plexiglass

15 May 2005, 3:14 pm

Quote:
I don't think technology is going to be able to emulate a human mind in it's full form. We only use 10% of our brains, or so I'm told, and as of yet processors that can do thousands of calculations a second can't emulate an infant.


I agree. I do think technology will allow a AI program to make choices based on the information it has, in a human manner, but that is only a small part of the human mind.


_________________
All your bass are belong to us.


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

16 May 2005, 2:45 pm

Quantum computing *IS* kind of cool though...I need another year of math before I can really get into it though. :oops:



Morlock
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 372
Location: Albany, OR

17 May 2005, 12:18 pm

Kitsune wrote:
I don't think technology is going to be able to emulate a human mind in it's full form. We only use 10% of our brains, or so I'm told, and as of yet processors that can do thousands of calculations a second can't emulate an infant.

its not teh sheer processing capacity, its how the things wired and coded. Nanotech will change everything!! !



Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

17 May 2005, 3:39 pm

There are two theories out that apply strongly to nanotechnology. I'll try to simplify them.

1.The universe is like a bunch of legos, there are large parts that are made out of smaller parts glued together but eventually you will hit the smallest possible part.

2.The universe has no 'smallest possible' lego and can always become smaller.

If theory one is true, then we're nearing our technological cap.

If theory two is true, then we're no where near a quarter of a hundredth done with our technological advancements.

Unfortunately it seems that theory one, with modern science, is more likely to prevail then theory two. And even if theory two is true we have no way to measure anything smaller then an atom, as how the most precise measurements on small objects are conducted is by running an electrical current across the object, and this can only give an educated guess.

Soooooooo...while both are still theories nanotechnology is an achievable dream, when one becomes known fact nanotechnology becomes either science fiction, or soon to come.



BlackLiger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,525
Location: My Posh Leather Chair. England.

17 May 2005, 4:13 pm

Scuze me, Nano tech can be applied to machines the size of viruses or the size of bacteria........ When they can be say 100 atoms at the most, we can conduct true atom manipulation :D


_________________
"Where are we going and why are we in this handbasket?"


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

17 May 2005, 5:05 pm

*Sigh.*

You don't seem to understand me, nor technology. Look up the transister count in one of today's CPUs.



TAFKASH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,100
Location: UK

17 May 2005, 7:07 pm

Kitsune wrote:
There are two theories out that apply strongly to nanotechnology. I'll try to simplify them.

1.The universe is like a bunch of legos, there are large parts that are made out of smaller parts glued together but eventually you will hit the smallest possible part.

2.The universe has no 'smallest possible' lego and can always become smaller.

If theory one is true, then we're nearing our technological cap.

If theory two is true, then we're no where near a quarter of a hundredth done with our technological advancements.

Unfortunately it seems that theory one, with modern science, is more likely to prevail then theory two. And even if theory two is true we have no way to measure anything smaller then an atom, as how the most precise measurements on small objects are conducted is by running an electrical current across the object, and this can only give an educated guess.

Soooooooo...while both are still theories nanotechnology is an achievable dream, when one becomes known fact nanotechnology becomes either science fiction, or soon to come.


Fascinating stuff indeed. I'd be interested to know which one the Bible predicts as being true.


_________________
"Heeeeeeeeeeeeere's Johnny!"


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

17 May 2005, 8:23 pm

Are you stalking me or something?

I haven't looked into the bible on this one, I'm not even sure if it predicts either. You can use it to support either theory, indirectly.

1.God is an infinite being thus his creation has infinite complexity and can always be broken into smaller pieces, or

2.God's creation is made up of building blocks-once more like legos, and there is a smallest possible block.



ElfMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 557
Location: Australia

17 May 2005, 11:27 pm

Fascintating.

Have you heard of the Golden Means Spiral. Mathematically it is perfect and never reaches a begining or end. In nature however, as demonstrated in a snail shell and such etc. it has a slight inperfection creating a beginning and allowing room for change and growth.


_________________
ElfMan
_________________________________________

Elfman's daily 'poor me' message, brought to you by "It's All About Me" free to air frequency.
Thankyou for you subscription!


Kitsune
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 180

17 May 2005, 11:37 pm

No, sounds interesting though!



TAFKASH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,100
Location: UK

18 May 2005, 3:47 am

Kitsune wrote:
I haven't looked into the bible on this one, I'm not even sure if it predicts either. You can use it to support either theory, indirectly.


Funny - that's pretty much what I thought...... :lol:


_________________
"Heeeeeeeeeeeeere's Johnny!"