On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:39 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > On 10/25/2013 2:28 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:46 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/25/2013 3:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>>> >>>> My high-level objection is very simple: chess was an excuse to pursue >>>> AI. In an era of much lower computational power, people figured that >>>> for a computer to beat a GM at chess, some meaningful AI would have to >>>> be developed along the way. I don' thing that Deep Blue is what they >>>> had in mind. IBM cheated in a way. I do think that Deep Blue is an >>>> accomplishment, but not_the_ accomplishment we hoped for. >>> >>> >>> Tree search and alpha-beta pruning have very general application so I >>> have >>> no doubt they are among the many techniques that human brains use. >> >> Agreed, but the word "among" is crucial here. I don't think you will >> find a part of the brain dedicated to searching min-max trees and >> doing heuristic pruning. I do believe that if we could reverse >> engineer the algorithms, we would find that they can operate as search >> trees in some fuzzy sense. I think this distinction is important. >> >>> Also >>> having a very extensive 'book' memory is something humans use. >> >> Sure, but our book appears to be highly associative in a way that we >> can't really replicate yet on digital computers. And our database is >> wonderfully unstructured -- smells, phone numbers, distant memories, >> foreign languages, all meshed together and linked by endless >> connections. >> >>> But the >>> memorized games and position evaluation are both very specific to chess >>> and >>> are hard to duplicate in general problem solving. So I think chess >>> programs >>> did contribute a little to AI. The Mars Rover probably uses decision tree >>> searches sometimes. >> >> Fair enough, in that sense. Notice that I have nothing against >> decision trees per se. >> >>>> I believe there will be an AI renaissance and I hope to be alive to >>>> witness it. >>> >>> >>> You may be disappointed, or even dismayed. I don't think there's much >>> reason to expect or even want to create human-like AI. >> >> Companions for lonely people. Sex robots. Artificial teachers. >> Artificial nannies. Who know what else. >> >>> That's like the old >>> idea of achieving flight by attaching wings to people and make them like >>> birds. Airplanes don't fly like birds. >> >> Ok but we want to fly mainly because we want to travel fast. For that >> it turns out that the best solution is some metal tube with wings and >> jet engines. For fun, people attach wings to themselves and do it more >> like birds. >> >> Unlike artificial birds, there is probably huge market demand for >> artificial humans. We can have the ethics debate, but that's another >> issue. >> >>> It may turn out that "real" AI, >>> intelligence that far exceeds human capabilities, will be more like Deep >>> Blue than Kasparov. >> >> Or, more likely, there is a huge spectrum of possibilities. Your >> binary suggestion hints at an ideological preference on your part -- I >> hope you don't mind me saying. > > > I don't mind you saying. But it's just that I don't think humans are > *defined* by intelligence. Hume wrote that reason can only be the servant > of passions. Humans are defined as much or more by their passions than by > their intelligence. So we may create super-intelligent AI's, but not ones > driven by lust, loyalty, fear, adventure,... A real question is whether we > will give them a drive to creativity? > > As for your idea of robotic companions, I expect that dogs are already close > to optimum - maybe a little genetic engineering for speech...
Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWAK0J8Uhzk :) > 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. > 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
