Re: Artificial What?

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

>From: "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Artificial What?
 >
 >
 >I just realized how to better verbalize my approach to AI... listen up all
 >you AI enthusiasts out there...
 >
 >You cannot separate True Intelligence(tm) from sentience. And you must
 >develop sentience first!!! The whole AI industry is trying to develop an
 >AI=
 >
 >entity backwards by doing the intelligence first, when what we need is,
 >first, a sentient being.
 >
 >Here's dictionary.com's definition of intelligence:
 >
 >in=B7tel=B7li=B7gence    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (n-tl-jns)
 >n.
 >    1. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge.
 >
 >The "capacity to acquire..." You cannot acquire what you cannot perceive.
 >
 >dictionary.com defines sentient thusly:
 >
 >sen=B7tient adj.
 >    1.. Having sense perception; conscious
 >    2.. Experiencing sensation or feeling.
 >
-A computer program  can aquire data easily
-A computer program be aware of its own data and it can be programmed to
know that other data
exists


 >
 >What does this further have to say about AI?
 >
 >Well, developing AI in a computer is going to be interesting. When
 >programming this AI brain, you can't count on any of the standard senses,
 >except maybe vision and hearing. We can't do touch. We can't do smell.
 >Vision can be done via a camera, and hearing via a microphone. The
 >computer=
 >
 >can "sense" what I call a "digital data stream." Humans can't (yet).

-It wouldnt need to smell,taste or feel, all it would do is push pixels and
process data.And thats enough
of a task I'll wager.
 >
 >Then there's the simulation approach... but that is WAY TOO INTENSIVE.
 >Simulating reality is much more difficult than actually putting the AI
 >entity into reality and letting it sense reality. I won't even go there
 >for=
 >
 >now. Reality is already there... why not use it? :)


-Have you ever had a discussion with someone, and though you seemed to be
disagreeing, you really were just rephrasing the other's arguments? Thas how
I classify most ai discussions.
 >
 >The hardest thing to give is motivation. How do you motivate the entity?
 >You've got to give it a reason. The reason we're alive? To experience joy.
 >That's it. God made us so that we could enjoy a relationship with Him and
 >with His creation. How will you motivate a sentient entity of your own
 >making to be nice? to survive (if at all)?

Just program it to be motivated, give it states, timers and a series of
conditions that must be satisfied.
 >
 >So, develop something that can receive input, give it "instincts" (basic,
 >but overridable (as it learns), actions to various stimuli) and let it
 >go..=
 >
 >
 >--
 >Regards,
 >     Rob Craig
 >     Rapid Deployment Software
 >     http://www.RapidEuphoria.com


-Gee I wish I could really hear Rob C's take on ai. But I dont see much
diversion from eu topics with him.Maybe he is a machine himself? Maybe just
some ai? No, just kiddingsmile
 >
 >
 >
 > >
 >
 >
 >
 >TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu