But that's my point, Artir; where do we draw the line? It's practically completely arbitrary, as is the definition of life.
And it's good that your back, I thought you had run off... -Dante 2011/6/12 José Luis Ricón <[email protected]> > Well, Artificial Intelligence. What makes it special? > In first place: it is commonly assumed that what makes us humans > special is our ability to perform rational thinking. Other animals > live on their instincts and what they learn in their life. We can > create new knowledge, get to really know something. > Compare using a language phrasebook to get around in China to actually > knows chinese, to know every meaning of what you are saying and how > does it relate to other characters, and being able to formulate > sentences outside of the ones you've heard or learnt. That is that > difference. > > So that same difference is what I think applies to AI. Learning and > going further. In the case of a full fledged human mind-level neuronal > AI, this difference is evident, but in a more limited case, our > project (at least for now) we still consider it AI. Where is the > boundary? I think that isn't quite clear and there are degrees of AI > strenght, i.e. from 0 being a dumb printf("Hello World"); to 100 being > something as smart as us. (And that could go over 100 (and 9000) if > the machine can self improve and etc...). > > Wintermute does attempt to understand knowledge via a database and > means to establish relations in content it receives, via Panlingua. > Now "Glass" is not an entry in a table like Glass:"Substance made of > SiO2..." It's now a mutable object that has atributes such as > breakable, can also mean container of liquids and any others you can > think of. So when you say "Is this glass full of water?" Wintermute's > understanding of that is closer to ours than the one of a non AI > program. Relations between meanings. > A spam filter searches for patterns and categorizes that as spam. > Wintermute would also do that, but find more patterns inside the spam > it rejects, and the mails it let go through; being able to understand > relations inside the text gives WM an advantage over a system that > just reads and matches text against said patterns. > > In the case of facial recognition, the problem is far more complex > than bardcodes, just because barcodes are designed to be read by > machines. A standarized format of black and white stripes. Faces the > result of many factors and we have to adapt our detections techniques > to them, while we can adapt barcodes so that they can be easily read. > In fact, as far as I know, face detection currently works by > extracting the most important features of the face ("Eigenface"), the > same way you would get eigenvalues outta of a matrix in Algebra. Is > doing the math, basically. You need quite a large matrix to scan a > face, while if you follow that approach with barcodes, a smaller one > will suffice. And of course, variations in lightning, angle and small > changes in the face can make the whole process even more difficult > versus the simplicity of realatively immutable barcodes. How does a > program knows that this other pic it's me with a beard and that other > one it's not me but looks quite a lot like me?. Training. Learning. > > Not to be able to do something, but to understand why you're doing it, > how could you make it better, what are you doing wrong. That's what a > program should do or emulate to learn as we do. > > BTW, I'm back ;D > > El día 12 de junio de 2011 20:30, SII <[email protected]> escribió: > > Because trying to assemble a psych meeting through IRC has been somewhat > > bad, I thought it best to start a discussion on here. > > Artificial Intelligence: AI. Defined, roughly, by programming computers > to > > perform tasks normally reserved for humans. > > But what of a more in-depth definition? Why is Wintermute so special, yet > a > > spam filter isn't? > > Why is the idea of facial recognition more appetizing then that of > barcode > > recognition? > > Why is it that we can point to any chat-bot; AIML or not, and call that > AI, > > yet so ignore far more complex processes and daemons running in order to > > keep our world turning? > > The problem of defining AI is, it seems, very much like defining life; > you > > can point to yourself, a pet, or anything classed as a microrganism, and > say > > "That's life." > > A set of chemicals, however, isn't. It's just chemicals. When does a bag > of > > adrenaline turn into anger? When does cortisol turn into worry? The > > definition here is as fuzzy as the defintion of system vs. an > intelligent > > system, no? > > Discuss, chaps. > > -Dante > > > > > > > > -- > José Luis Ricón > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~wintermute-psych > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~wintermute-psych > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- -Danté Ashton Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici Sent from Ubuntu
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~wintermute-psych Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~wintermute-psych More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
