Artificial intelligence: Our final invention? • Hacker News Board

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#61

Post by alphaBetaGamma » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:24 PM UTC

motters wrote: post #7

Some counter-points on this narrative, with which I'm very familiar. 1. Philosophers and AI theoreticians have a hard time defining what they mean by the term "intelligence". Talking about systems millions of times more intelligent than a human is nonsense unless you can define what it is you're talking about. 2. Whatever intelligence is it only makes any sense within the context of some environment. Environments imp…

To add to your counterpoints:

6. While it is about sure that in the future they will be technology that is for indistinguishable from magic, this does not imply that every magical thing we can think of will be true at some point in the future.

7. The whole premise rests on recursively improving AI. The human race has been making tool to help make them better tools for at least 50,000 years (lower bound to be uncontroversial). We do have amazing tools now, and tools that automatically do other tools, but we have not witnessed an accelerated auto-recursive thingamagig.

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#62

Post by grannyg00se » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:26 PM UTC

seiji wrote: post #26

fumar wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always think of the Grey Goo theory when the subject of nanobots taking over Earth comes up. "a hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all matter on Earth while building more of themselves" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo

We're working on it: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/08/magazine/crazy-ants.html

That has nothing to do with AI or anything we're working on.

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#63

Post by mindcrime » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:35 PM UTC

motters wrote: post #7

Some counter-points on this narrative, with which I'm very familiar. 1. Philosophers and AI theoreticians have a hard time defining what they mean by the term "intelligence". Talking about systems millions of times more intelligent than a human is nonsense unless you can define what it is you're talking about. 2. Whatever intelligence is it only makes any sense within the context of some environment. Environments imp…

3. Be wary of people trying to sell you ideas based on fear. It's usually snake oil, concealing some other agenda - such as trying to obtain or maintain grant money for projects.

That's very true, but I don't think it completely obliterates the relevance of the point being made in TFA. The truth is, we don't know exactly what a trans-human AI will be capable of, and whether or not it would do (or attempt to do) things that would be harmful to humanity. Now I'm certainly not arguing for stopping AI research! But maintaining awareness of this issue and reminding people to keep the unintended consequences in mind, is probably a valuable thing.

Don't get me wrong... I don't put a lot of stock in "fear of AI" (Matrix and Terminator jokes aside), so long as the AIs are locked in "the box" (to use Yudkowsky's term) and one can simply power the machine off and end the AI. Despite the (seeming) fact that Yudkowsky has talked his way out of "the box" a few times, playing the role of the AI, I think that we're a LONG way from an AI that can "go autonomous", talk it's way out of "the box" and become destructive. The scenario strikes me as highly unlikely, but just on the borderline of plausible enough to keep an eye on.

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#64

Post by dmfdmf » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:37 PM UTC

I think there is an unfounded assumption that artificial intelligence implies self-awareness. I don't think that is necessarily the case and all the scary scenarios rest on that assumption.

I can't recall who (and couldn't find it through Google) the quote by the AI researcher who said something like "show me what the brain (or mind) is doing and I can build a machine to do it too". Well, we don't know what the mind or brain is doing and until we identify the epistemological principles we are just groping in the dark. Self-awareness my just be an artifact or consequence of the biological implementation of the epistemological principles behind intelligence and that an AI does not necessarily need to be self-aware.

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#65

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:40 PM UTC

ar7hur wrote: post #22

I was reading, waiting for the mention to IBM Watson... and here it comes! I'm so tired of reading how Watson is a step toward Artificial General Intelligence, self-aware machines, etc. People must really understand that Watson is, like almost any successful AI (not AGI) product today, "just" a huge statistical pattern matching machine. Watson does not feel anything. Watson does not know what soccer is. Watson knows…

[deleted]

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#66

Post by kr4 » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:45 PM UTC

Self-awareness is likely to be a product of quantum-based, or even more lower-level conciousness. However, intelligence, which makes it possible to acquire knowledge and reason, is relatively mmore easy to be built. There is a subtle yet important difference between Intelligence and self-awareness. Intelligence gives a living-being an ability to learn and act but self-awareness personalizes this learning for self and therefore actions are directed by a desire to benifit the self.

This opens up a possibility that once a general intelligence is built, without awareness, it can be miss-used for the benefit of its creator or who eventually controlls it.

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#67

Post by mkingston » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:49 PM UTC

eloff wrote: post #41

People like to laugh, but if we can invent real AI, and there's no reason to suspect that we cannot since nature did it blindly, then it's just a matter of time until the end of the human race. We will likely either become them or be destroyed by them (or maybe some of us kept in zoos or as pets.) You cannot firewall or imprison a god, especially with humans being so divided, short sighted and manipulable. Simply put…

Humans try to keep other more vulnerable species around for our own pleasure/benefit. We don't do a very good job of it; but we do try. What's to say an intelligence greater than us wouldn't?

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#68

Post by pygy_ » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:50 PM UTC

rubinelli wrote: post #37

pygy_ wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All they need is to be smart and strong enough to take control of the dense energy sources (oil, coal, uranium). Then we're toast. No need to be millions of times smarter, whatever that may mean.

We have more-than-human entities controlling our energy resources. They are called corporations, and some even argue they are pretty much already out of our control.

Corporations are still human-oriented.

Another scary thing is the combination of the internet of things that is currently taking shape, and the fact that a lot of computer systems are backdoored by governments.

Nice attack vector for smart software (not counting accidental vulnerabilities).

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#69

Post by eludwig » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:53 PM UTC

User1398 wrote: post #33

baddox wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that most scientists, and certainly most AI researchers, would say that biological intelligence is also just a bunch of math.

Isn't the universe just a bunch of math? This leads me to wonder if we have any control over our lives. Isn't every action I take simply the result of all my senses, my previous knowledge, the environment, and the people around me? For example, if the universe just went 1 hour back in time, why would anything go differently the second time around? Unless you can prove something is truly random in the universe, and no…

As others here have mentioned, Quantum Mechanics confirms that the universe has fundamental randomness. It is baked in.

God does indeed play dice with the universe. Eternity would be too boring without it. Of course, it doesn't hurt that he is both the dice and the one rolling them...

Re: Artificial intelligence: Our final invention?

#70

Post by kr4 » Wed, Dec 18, 2013, 6:55 PM UTC

dmfdmf wrote: post #64

I think there is an unfounded assumption that artificial intelligence implies self-awareness. I don't think that is necessarily the case and all the scary scenarios rest on that assumption. I can't recall who (and couldn't find it through Google) the quote by the AI researcher who said something like "show me what the brain (or mind) is doing and I can build a machine to do it too". Well, we don't know what the mind…

I have a similar opinion [0]. Humans are likely to be troubled by other humans who may eventually get a hold on general-intelligence. Mannah [1] is a good read which seems both likely and scary.

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6929600

1: http://marshallbrain.com/manna4.htm