On 8/30/2014 5:54 PM, LizR wrote:
On 31 August 2014 12:27, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 8/30/2014 4:04 PM, LizR wrote:To be absolutely clear - the "Artificial" in AI refers to the machine which hosts the intelligence, not to the intelligence itself. The problem with machines defeating "Jeopardy" players (I assume this refers to this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeopardy_%28TV_series%29 ?) is that the machines concerned almost certainly have no concepts of what the answers were about.How do you have a concept of what "Who was Charlamagne?" about? Isn't a lot of of it verbal and relational; stuff Winston does know. Of course Winston is ignorant about a lot of basic things about being a person because it doesn't have perceptive sensors and the ability to move and manipulate things.That's the point. Winston or whatever isn't immersed in an environment, or its environment only involves abstract relations. So I do have a better idea of who charlemagne was, even if I'd never heard of him before.
Sure, you have a better idea. But I don't think that shows that Winston has "no concept of what the answers are about." His concepts are limited to verbal relations, but he probably has more of those related to Charlemagne than I do.
Hence they aren't in fact "doing what humans do" (or at least not most humans do, apart from perhaps /idiots savant/). Likewise, Deep Junior almost certainly has no concept of what it's doing when it scores a 3-3 tie aganst Kasparov. It has no concept of itself or its opponent, or very limited "concepts" embedded in relatively small* data structures - and it experiences no emotions on winning or losing.Isn't the reason you think that is because its input/output is so limited? It wouldn't be at all difficult to add to Deep Blue's program so that on winning it composed a poem of celebration and displayed fireworks on a screen - or even set off real fireworks - and on losing it shut down and refused to do anything for three days.No, I think that because there's no evidence whatsoever that Deep Blue etc have feelings, at least none that I've come across. I'd be happy to be proved wrong (which would be a boost for comp, I suppose).
I'm asking what would constitute evidence for Deep Blue's having feelings? Fireworks and sulking aren't enough?
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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
