This is a continuation of “The Rise of the Artilects”
Artilect: Artificial intelligence (also known as machine intelligence and often abbreviated as AI) is intelligence exhibited by any manufactured (i.e. ) system. The term is often applied to general purpose computers and also in the field of scientific investigation into the theory and practical application of AI. Wikipedia
An Article that dropped into my feed reader at the beginning of the week, describes a system devised by Hitatchi which monitors the person haemoglobin levels in the Brain (Optical Typography) The use of this is very limited now but could have a large impact on the way we intereface with technology but also for people who are paralysed, a clear example of converging technologies.
As part of New Scientists’ 50 year aniversary there are a number of comments about what may/likely to happen in the next 50 years assuming we don’t all Kill ourselves first (war or global warming).
Talk of a scientific understanding of consciousness still evokes more sucking in of air than most other subjects. Sceptics are fond of saying that a “factor X” that cannot even be imagined at the moment is required. I would argue the opposite: it is here, and it will be commonplace by 2056[…]
The key for us to fully understand the ramifications of creating an ‘artilect’ (AI) is we first need to understand our own brains and how they work, and also the fact we are imperfect and no doubt what we create will also be imperfect (could this cause a problem? could we become so obsessed with perfection we end up some ‘borg’ like race; I couldn’t resist throwing that in)
Computation is the fire in our modern-day caves. By 2056, the computational revolution will be recognised as a transformation as significant as the industrial revolution. The evolution and widespread diffusion of computation and its analytical fruits will have major impacts on socioeconomics, science and culture.
Within 50 years, lives will be significantly enhanced by automated reasoning systems that people will perceive as “intelligent”.[…]
I personally would go one step further and say the above will happen in the next 20 years, and we will see the first true AI system by 2056. Why? because these prediction always seem like under-estimates, they never anticipate that one person who does a single thing, accelerating the field of research forward.
I also had a Computing Lesson in which the teacher posed the question:
Prove To me that a human is nothing more than a biological operating system
At first I thought we are, then I started to disagree. My Arguments against were based on the fact “Windows/Linux/{Insert Your Favourite OS Here} doesn’t create something new in its likeness, it cannot learn (at the moment anyway), similarly it an OS cannot procreate with another OS (as silly as it sounds)Redhat can’t go to Windows and say lets make a little OS called ‘Widhat’ but this could be possible with Cybernetics could it not?
The main counter argument being, if we can read the brain and interpret its code it is just infact an OS, the controlling of things without physical movement (i.e. Brain Control) would seem to support this theory partly, but I am aren’t entirely convinced.
Am Leaving this post open ended because I aren’t sure were I want to go next and don’t want to come to any conclusion.
Links
Your teacher is asking you to prove the wrong thing. A human consists of many Ideas.
The mind might be the equivalent to an Operating System.
Its me explaining it poorly, he was referring to the brain specifically. But a Human could be seen as a an advanced computer system, we do basically consist of input, output, processing and storage devices.
Ok, than if we are talking about the brain your “can’t reproduce” argument is invalid correct?
I suppose it would, This what makes it interesting for me you can formulate a convincing argument but as you repeat it to somebody else you realize that it doesn’t make that much sense.
Yea I know what you mean.
So how would you argue the mind == OS thing.
I don’t really know, I can only come up with ideas that support the fact the mind is just an advanced operating system; I did once argue that we grow and learn, but a program could be made to do these things (it happens sort of in advanced games) and also emotion which also could be programmed. The fact we can also read what is happening in the brain much like watching the processes on a computer sort of supports the fact that the brain is a biological operating system.
Oh, I absolutely agree with you, are minds to some extent can be compared to a computers operating system. Though to what extent? What defines an operating system? And how is it different from our brains?
I have been working on this subject for a while now. (And I believe I have an answer (?))
The reason I am asking you is, it is great to meet a fresh young mind, who is interested in the subject and has not yet learned the conventional way of thinking about artificial intelligence.
I think that at the moment, we our bound by our perception of the world around us, and can’t see us creating and coexisting with AI, I believe/hope by the time we are capable of creating AI we are more united as a world and don’t see war as something that is acceptable, I believe that at only this point our distrust fear and paranoia will be of no problem, because inevitably we will cause our own problem by over-reacting at some point.
So you don’t think that real AI is going to be created in the near future?
No I think we are very close, but I hope by the time we do we massively change the way we perceive things because it could quite easily destroy us.
How and in what way?
We naturally distrust and fear most things, we have to change the way we approach something that is ‘new’ and if it something we don’t necessarily understand we want to get rid of it. It wont be the AI that tries to destroy the human race it will be us.
We might just as well destroy ourselves anyway how is AI related to our self-destruction?
I am saying that the way we perceive the world and technology now, would have to change drastically because AI would cause panic and mass hysteria when it would have no great impact on the survival of the human race.
We as a race over-react very easily and AI could be a trigger, films such as the Terminator etc don’t help how people generally perceive AI, the thing that will try and take over etc. When this would be never likely to happen.
Based on what do you think that AI will cause mass hysteria?
Films?
Why are people not causing problems today over the development as they do with other futuristic things such as RFID and genetic engineering?
All I see is general acceptance, look at the robot puppies, or any other humanoid machine people encounter, I never heard of contempt towards machines.
Unlike RFID, AI gets massive press when ever it appears, the hysteria comes when we have to leave the AI to do what it will after all it is AI. This is what will cause the hysteria as we will no longer know what our creation may or may not do.