On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:50 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/4/2013 3:35 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:44 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
