---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 11:51:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [BCPolitics] The Politics of Everyday Robots. What I am struggling with here is a way to facilitate communications between politicians and technical people who come from a variety of disciplines. First, let's try an exercise in imagination. Imagine an era in which humanoid robots like Honda's P2 and P3 can communicate better than a typical human and can learn better than any human. They can replicate themselves in a fraction of the time it takes to reproduce an educated, adult human. When it comes to learning they can also learn to self-improve or evolve if you will. Imagine the Honda humanoids with "general conversational programming" as well as "general learning ability" programs installed. With their conversational ability it is easier for them to interact with humans and obtain whatever humans can provide towards that robot evolution. Since they can build other robots (replicate themselves or reproduce) they can also work as interactive, co-operating robot teams on robot evolution. The P3 robots for example could use these two programs to develop their own hardware and overcome their present physical shortcomings relative to humans. P3's can walk and climb stairs but they cannot run well. Thus they would work on improving their own bipedal locomotion. They lack the whole body flexibility of humans and that is another area of self-improvement for robot evolution. But my main point is that these two pieces of software (general learning program and general conversational program) would allow PRESENT robots to evolve or improve themselves almost without limit. The question all politicians must be asking themselves is, "How close are we to those two pieces of software?" No-one would disagree that at least parts of this software can be written now. In fact they already exist. What is stopping them from attaining "human equivalency"? That is the question politicians must ask the technical experts. What is stopping robot conversational ability and general learning ability from surpassing that of the human? Skinner's dictum is valid. "If it can be verbalized, it can be programmed". Thus the politicians could ask the technical experts to set out examples of conversation and learning in which humans are still unable to verbalize WHAT is taking place. HOW it is taking place is secondary for the roboticist's task of inventing an electro-mechanical system which will "do the job" or take care of the "what" part. For example, by verbalizing WHAT is taking place when mice, men or machines run a maze we can create an electro-mechanical system which will run mazes with perfection. But HOW they do it is very different from how mice and men run mazes. As long as machines do what men do when they converse or learn, then the machines have met the criterion of "human equivalency". It changes this world enormously when a nation is able to develop these two programs. And obviously the national security implications are also enormous. Ask the technical experts then, for specific examples of the kind of conversational exerpts and learning categories (categories, not processes) which stand in the way of the general conversational program and general learning program. Some experts may even say there are no such obstacles. In any case, that will indicate how close humankind is to robots with human equivalency in conversation and learning. They may even exist now in the secret projects of some countries. Others may be very close. At that stage, present or near future, all practical work can then be done by robots. Robots could even be expected to do the work of Presidents and Premiers better than humans. FWP. http://users.uniserve.com/~culturex/Machine-Psychology.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY Committee on Government Reform Chairman of the Subcommittee: Congressman Stephen Horn* http://www.house.gov/reform/gmit/index.htm ****************************** Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo http://www.house.gov/eshoo/ Palo Alto Office D.C. Office 698 Emerson Street 205 Cannon Building Palo Alto, California 94301 Washington, D.C. 20515 Telephone: (650) 323-2984 Telephone: (202) 225-8104 Fax: (650) 323-3498 Fax: (202) 225-8890 ****************************** * Congressman Stephen Horn http://www.house.gov/horn/ Lakewood Office D.C. Office Suite 160 2331 Rayburn House Office Bldg 4010 Watson Plaza Drive Washington, D.C. 20515 Lakewood, California 90712 Telephone: (202) 225-6676 Telephone: (562) 425-1336 Fax: (202) 226-1012 Fax: (562) 425-4591 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****************************** Congressman Doug Ose http://www.house.gov/ose/ Woodlamd Office D.C. Office 722-B Main Street 1508 Longworth HOB Woodland, CA 95695 Washington, DC 20515 Telephone: (530) 669-3540 Telephone: (202) 225-5716 Telephone: (916) 489-3684 Telephone: (202) 225-5716 Fax: (530) 669-1395 Fax (202) 226-1298 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****************************** Franklin Wayne Poley wrote: > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 15:01:02 -0700 (PDT) > From: Franklin Wayne Poley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Robot-for-President] Robot-for-President/Robot-for-Premier. > > Dear Rep: Could you please forward to the House Committee on Government > Management, Information and Technology as I do not have their address? > Recently we have discussed on Robot-for-President, the technological lag > between the 'state of the art' in Robotics/AI/Automation and what the > public knows. I hope your Committee will serve to establish what the > 'state of the art' is and therefore to advance public education. > > Here are some questions I would like to see asked of expert witnesses: > > -How many worker-years of labor would it take to spell out the 'rules of > syntax' to enable a robot to carry on a conversation better than a typical > human? > -If there are examples of conversation deemed to be beyond 'spelling out', > what are they? > -Can you set out a 'taxonomy of learning' which will similarly spell out > all of the categories of human learning? Can you do so 'in plain English'? > -If there are examples among these categories of learning deemed to be > beyond human capacity when it comes to 'spelling them out', what are they? > > The dictum of the late BF Skinner was, "If it can be verbalized, it can be > programmed." Thus these questions (and others) would find out whether a > general conversational ability program can now be verbalized or spelled > out and likewise a general learning program. Both programs would have to > meet Professor Moravec's criterion of "human equivalency". > > -If the expert witnesses say, Yes we can verbalize these phenomena, the > next question is, "What would it take in person-years of labor to write > the programs for them?" > > -And, "What kind of computer would be required to run the programs?" > > Needless to say, if a Robot can surpass human equivalency in > conversational ability and general learning ability, Robot-for-President > or Robot-for-Premier cannot be far away. And you can find out how far, > 'far away' is. > > But let the experts speak for themselves. > > Sincerely-FWP. > > http://users.uniserve.com/~culturex/Machine-Psychology.htm > > cc-Industry Minister Manley. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 16:09:28 -0800 > From: "NASANEWS@Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: AMES T0 WEB-CAST CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ON TECHNOLOGY > Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 16:09:12 -0700 (PDT) > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Laura Lewis April 21, 2000 > NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA > Phone: 650/604-2162, 650/604-9000 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > RELEASE: 00-32AR > AMES T0 WEB-CAST CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ON TECHNOLOGY > > NASA Ames Research Center will provide a live web-cast of "Emerging > Technologies: Where is the Federal Government on the High-Tech > Curve?" discussions held during a public hearing before members of the > U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Government Management, > Information and Technology. The web-cast can be found from 11:30 a.m. to > 2:30 p.m. PDT on Monday, April 24 at: > > http://learn.arc.nasa.gov/congress > > The purpose of the hearing is to explore the emerging technologies being > developed in the public -- and private -- sectors, and how these > technologies could benefit government operations. The subcommittee will > also examine the government's role in encouraging this scientific > development. > > Participating in the hearing will be Rep. Steve Horn, R-California, > chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Management, Information > and Technology, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-California, and Rep. Doug Ose, > R-California. > > Members of the public and the media are invited to attend the hearing, > which will be held in the Moffett Training and Conference Center, Bldg. 3, > at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. To get to Ames, take the > Moffett Field exit off Highway 101. At the Moffett Federal Airfield main > gate, proceed to the Visitor Badging Office to obtain entry badges and maps > to the Moffett Training and Conference Center. Bring photo ID to gain > admittance. > > - end - > > To receive Ames press releases via email, send an email with the word > "subscribe" in subject line to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe" in subject line. Also, the NASA Ames Public Affairs > Home Page at URL, http://ccf.arc.nasa.gov/dx includes press releases and > JPEG images in AP Leaf Desk format minus embedded captions. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get paid for the stuff you know! > Get answers for the stuff you don�t. And get $10 to spend on the site! > http://click.egroups.com/1/2200/5/_/433155/_/956440885/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *** The Era of Total Automation is Now *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget. Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here: http://click.egroups.com/1/2885/2/_/103697/_/956515903/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
