On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:50 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 4/4/2013 3:35 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:44 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/3/2013 2:44 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You're making the same mistake as John Clark, confusing the physical
>>>> computer with the algorithm. Powerful computers don't help us if we
>>>> don't
>>>> have the right algorithm. The central mystery of AI, in my opinion, is
>>>> why
>>>> on earth haven't we found a general learning algorithm yet. Either it's
>>>> too
>>>> complex for our monkey brains, or you're right that computation is not
>>>> the
>>>> whole story. I believe in the former, but not I'm not sure, of course.
>>>> Notice that I'm talking about generic intelligence, not consciousness,
>>>> which
>>>> I strongly believe to be two distinct phenomena.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then do you think there could be philosophical zombies?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>
> Could it be that some humans are zombies, or do you assume that to be a
> zombie would mean being physically different from a human being?

I don't know.

>>> How would you
>>> operationally test a robot to see whether it was (a) intelligent
>>
>> I don't see intelligence as a binary property, but relative to goals.
>> The classical answer for human-like intelligence is something like the
>> Turing test, but I don't like it. I don't think that a generic AI
>> should be measured by it's ability to fool us into making us think
>> it's human. Instead I'd have to ask you first what do you want the
>> robot for? Personally I would want robots to free Humanity from
>> unwanted labor. This is a high-level goal that requires what I
>> consider to be generic AI. Can it learn all sorts of tasks like
>> driving a car, working in a factory, following fuzzy requirements, etc
>
>
> Yes, I agree with that.  I'd say intelligence is being able to learn to be
> competent at many tasks, but there is no completely general intelligence.

Agreed.

> I think for social beings it includes being able to explain, to give reasons,
> which implies some empathy.

No doubt. But could the ability to model other beings be sufficient
for empathy? A sort of dispassionate empathy? I think so.

>
>> etc?
>>
>>> (b)
>>> conscious?
>>
>> I don't believe that such a test can exist. I don't even think we can
>> know if a glass of water is conscious.
>
>
> Have you ever been unconscious?

I don't know. All I know is that there are periods of my timeline that
I cannot remember. During college, there where a couple of "incidents"
that I cannot remember but my friends would tell you I was conscious.

Telmo.

>
> Brent
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to