|
Sooo many problems with creating an AI. And once you unleash a "real" AI into the world, you're more or less completely at its mercy.
What I think is a much more interesting approach is figuring out how to create direct electrical interfaces with our brain and amending it's capabilities and slowly merging humans with technology. For example, when you think about 2358734 x 891723912, the answer is computed by a chip and the answer just pops into your head. Same with facts on the internet, pictures, videos, etc.
You keep advancing this technology and eventually *we" become the AI. You get the advantages of AI with the advantages of humans controlling the process. By the end, organic brains will likely be left behind and disconnected, replaced piece by piece until they are no longer needed, but the resulting AI computer will truly be an evolved form of humanity.
|
|
|
|
|
Brings a whole new meaning to the "beam me up, Scotty..." saying.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft need to watch out for that comma 
The whole thing's rigged to blow, touch those tanks and "boooom"!
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I think (?) the real problem is "artificial".
|
|
|
|
|
There is absolutely no reason to think that artificial intelligence, when it becomes sufficiently powerful to impress/scare us, will resemble human intelligence in any way. Machine intelligence may be an idiot-savant, able to solve problems or recall facts, but without motivation or emotion. It may be able to drive a car, but not to recognize a face. It may go from cat-like to human-like skills in a matter of hours, or never.
Machines will become gradually more and more capable, until suddenly they are smart enough to exhibit emergent properties we did not anticipate. They will be as smart as a worm, then as smart as an ant, then as smart as a mouse. A machine as smart as a mouse might be able to drive or fetch you a beer. We don't know enough about the human brain to say to what extent it is just a really big rat-brain, or something else.
I think AI is inevitable, because we will keep poking at AI until we get it. Ultimately, thinking machines may be the next evolutionary step, unless we decide instead to enhance our own biological machinery. Self-driving cars in 4 years. Self-programming machines in 10-15. After that, it's a short step to the Singularity, only we won't be on top.
I like to imagine a neandertal, dimly contemplating the gracile, erect-walking homo erectus. Will we be proud of our descendants? Jealous? Hard to say.
|
|
|
|
|
There is absolutely no reason to think that artificial intelligence, when it becomes sufficiently powerful to impress/scare us, will resemble human intelligence in any way.
Ego. If it doesn't think and behave like us, or express the same values and morals as us, very few people will accept it as being intelligent.
As far as most people are concerned, people are the "gold standard" in intelligence.
The whole thing's rigged to blow, touch those tanks and "boooom"!
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Bert Appermont - Colors[^]
This might surprise some of you, but I've been in a fanfare orchestra for a while (from 2006 to 2010 or something). I played percussion.
I joined right before the orchestra's 110th anniversary and this song was one of the pieces we played to celebrate. To this day one of my musical pieces 
Bert Appermont is a Belgian composer and well known in the fanfare scene.
For those of you who think fanfare is "just marching music", you're really very wrong. I guess the music speaks for itself
Thought of it this week, listened, then listened some more, and now it's song of the week! 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I joined right before the orchestra's 110th anniversary and this song was one of the pieces we played to celebrate.
Well, someone thinks the sun comes up just to hear him crow!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
I had to think really hard on what you meant by that... 
You're not complaining about the music though, so I'll call that progression
|
|
|
|
|
And there's also this[^] remembered by old-timers such as myself.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Nice one, although ELP's version is anything but fanfare
|
|
|
|
|
You may never have seen Blake's 7, but if you have, you'll remember the cheesy sets and dodgy props and I bet you loved it. Partly due to the actor Gareth Thomas as Roj Blake. Sadly passed away today, aged 71. RIP[^]
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
I saw him the other day in a trailer for something ... how strange. I used to watched Blake's Seven just to see Servelan[^].
|
|
|
|
|
Going to see her at Comic Con in October. Well, her and Nicola Bryant
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif) - Blake's 7 was fantastic.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
I always liked Blake's 7, but I'm sure that if I were to review it today, it would seem pretty lame, just like my other childhood favourites, Space 1999 and Buck Rogers in the 25th Century... 
RIP Blake!
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
|
That one wasn't shown in Denmark. Doctor Who was, but only very shortly, so I only saw a few episodes from the time when Tom Baker was the Doctor...
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
The head of drama at my 6th Form college was also called Gareth Thomas (and a brilliant actor) so I always had to check which one was appearing whenever the name came up. Surprised that he was only 71 as it feels like he's been the mature lead, shall we say, all my life.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
I think I need to re-watch Blake's 7, the last time I do remember being able to identify most of Orac (the weird plastic box) guts...Ah fun times...also hairy house mate also has the complete thing on DVD.
|
|
|
|
|
I recall it being AMAZING! Probably pretty cheesy and poorly produced if I were to watch it now. Maybe they should remake it.
|
|
|
|
|
No, remakes never match the originals. And they would replace every potentially sexist or non-PC bit of dialogue with some pathetic piece of mealy-mouthed drivel.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: No, remakes never match the originals
Not sure I agree with that 100%.
Richard MacCutchan wrote: And they would replace every potentially sexist or non-PC bit of dialogue with some pathetic piece of mealy-mouthed drivel.
Sure I agree with that 100%.
|
|
|
|
|
It would be impossible for an original to match anything that was not in and of itself, the original; whether it was a movie, book, song, etc. Just saying.
So Richard's comment holds true in fact, not opinion. Remakes "never" match the original, and can never match the original, because it is not the original.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: It would be impossible for an original to match anything that was not in and of itself, the original; whether it was a movie, book, song, etc. Just saying.
Just refuting. e.g. The new Star Trek franchise is orders of magnitude better than what came before. The new Superman (Henry) is by far and away the best Superman. Daniel Craig is by far the best Bond.
An original can always be improved upon. Look at Windows.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
