General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2299620

    Artificial Intelligence.


    by jardinier ·

    For many years I have believed that Artificial Intelligence is not only possible, but inevitable. Now this a genuine IT topic and I am hoping for some serious input into a discussion about a subject which all IT pros must have some interest in, and about which you, above all professions, are most qualified to present ideas, knowledge and vision.

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3540591

      Pandora’s box?

      by jkaras ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      Yes, it would be cool to see the evolution of science to create life from lifelessness ( is this a word?). However I wonder the implications and trust with how it would be used. Who would police it? What about rights to the machine, is it it’s own person or is it a smart vaccuum cleaner treated like a slave? All things breakdown, does it get a health insurance or a maitenance/warrantee plan? When it becomes obsolite what happens to it, does it go to the scrap yard like a car? Lastly with the artificial intelligence what kind of impact would that have in the working field when companies whom we know that would get anything to do the job to save pennies to produce profits no longer need human employees? Think about dependability, no need formotavation, vacation pay, training merely a quick download vs months of training? Comments?

      • #3540494

        Intelligence versus emotion

        by oldefar ·

        In reply to Pandora’s box?

        There are some interesting aspects of life that AI research has not seemed to make progress on. These are the emotional drivers behind the application of intellect.

        Consider the great human intellects of history. How many of these individuals were also great leaders of nations, industry, or societies? Look at the current world leaders. How many are great intellects? Look at our current industry leaders. How many of them awe you with their intellect?

        Do you perceive a logical link between intelligence, leadership, business savvy, social savvy? I don’t. To me it appears there is another aspect that impacts where an individual excells that is outside of intelligence.

        I have observed the same in various animals – dogs, cats, horses, cattle, birds. Individual intelligence does not necessarily relate to the social position.

        This impacts how AI will or will not impact our own societies. I haven’t a clue exactly how, only that it will be a significant factor.

        • #3540424

          Intelligence or wisdom?

          by jkaras ·

          In reply to Intelligence versus emotion

          I get what your saying but, how will we program the AI to determine the proper stimulus when interacting with humans to create proper behavior? The point of our desire for AI is for the machines to make life easier, our lives less interactive/hands on resulting in a further lazy society. Right now AI is auto adjusting to environment like autofocus or light sensitivity, not intelligence. Were you describing wisdom vs. intelligence? Yes there is a difference. Itelligence is the ability to retain knowledge whereas wisdom is the ability to incorparate intelligence in proper behavior. Sentience is the ultimate goal and if we create this are we playing God like stemcell research? Let’s face it the cloned sheep died at half it’s life expectancy proving that we shouldn’t delve into Gods territory. I’m all for a higher quality of life but at what cost? Could the wielder of such power be trusted, or his/her successor to do right vs. wrong?

        • #3539945

          Wise, clever or unpredictable?

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Intelligence or wisdom?

          My idea of AI at this stage is a machine … be it an android or a massive immovable structure … which is of course initially programmed by humans.
          But it would have the ability to make decisions based on its programming; the ability to modify its data banks with input of new information (say from sensors or reading books). It could, for example, roam the Interent in search of relevant data to expand its original database. It could perhaps pick up a relevant discussion (such as this one) and participate.
          It could be programmed with certain emotional reactions, e.g. it could defend itself against physical or cyber attack, and could respond to complimentary remarks, or fine tuning of its database, by saying “Thankyou.”
          The quality and end motives of the machine would of course be dependent on the initial human programmer.
          It could be wiser than most humans by accessing its almost limitless database and drawing the most logical conclusion from any set of data fed into it.
          As for the possibility of creating a cyborg (part machine, part human) well we have already done that. Would you deny a person dependent on a pacemaker the right to continue his life just because he is part machine?
          The results of scientific research maybe put to constructive or destructive use (e.g. nuclear fission). But does that mean the we should, at this point in time, ban all research in all disciplines?

        • #3539869


          by oldefar ·

          In reply to Wise, clever or unpredictable?

          If wisdom were simply based on having more knowledge and drawing logical conclusions, we would be so much wiser today than even 50 years ago. Yet I see no compelling evidence that this is the case. Smarter perhaps, but wiser?

          The AI in your posting would seem to be more of a supercharged search engine, perhaps enhanced with data mining capabilities. Maybe the key is in the name – Artificial versus real.

          As for the cyborg issue, I guess I have no strong feelings either way. We started down the road as cyborgs the first time we used tools. Continued when we left images on the rocks for others.

          Personally, I have no desire to exchange my current lifestyle for any less technically advanced one, and hope my grandson looks back on this era as one that is primitive. Same as I do, looking back at my grandfather who deliverd milk in a horse drawn wagon.

        • #3541466


          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Wiser?

          To myself, wisdom separates from intelligence in the knowledge of the implications of your actions and a consciousness of that fact. Anyone can acquire a certain knowledge base but wisdom is with those that apply this knowledge in an appropriate manner.

        • #3541843

          Right On

          by dcosgrove ·

          In reply to Intelligence versus emotion

          I was just about to post a similar sentiment. With out adding hormones and endorphines to a computer, you will never have more than simulated intelligence and learned behavior. The animal brain, though it does consist of millions of transistor like switches, is a constantly changing environment. What we deem “human intelligence” is actually more that a conditioned series of responses to stimnli. It is a completely unstable computing environment. Not really intelligence but reactions based on mood, nutrition, climate, time and many other factors, nearly a random event. I think it is possible to closely mimic these beahaviors, but I still think it’s soley a matter of one individual’s input (perhaps a group, but same idea). If a computer becomes “aware” and tries to take over the world, it is due to the input. Things may change, but I believe we are further away than we think.

        • #3541465

          Similar scenario?

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Right On

          I would love you to read the article titled: “Do We Have Free Will?” on the Philosophy Page of my website:

          I think you will find a similarity in my line of argument that most human actions are based on a complexity of unconscious variables.

          If you feel inclined to submit a brief comment which I can publish on the “Feedback” page, that would be greatly welcomed. Just click on the email option at the bottom of the main directory.

    • #3540530


      by generalist ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      AI has been a topic in science fiction for decades. Robert Heinlein, in a book called “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”, touched on some of the issues involved with AI and sentience. So, for that matter, have dozens of other writers.

      I also know that AI in the form of expert systems has been in use in parts of the IT industry for at least fifteen years. Furthermore, topics like fuzzy logic have been around even longer in academia and have been put into use in technologically advanced things like cameras.

      Both of the above would be aspects of AI that would need to be considered in the IT industry. Call them core elements in the creation of sentience.

      Of course, with sentience comes a whole load of ethical and social issues.

      Likewise, with improved technology comes a different set of ethical and social issues as people are displaced by alternatives.

    • #3540483


      by john_wills ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      It is rather difficult to define “intelligence” – or “life”, or “God” – although we think we know what it is. Presumably we recognize it when we see it, or think we would.
      Here is a side issue. Once I put a stop to some misbehaviour on a bus and afriend of the thug accused me to the driver of insulting her, a plain lie. I was put off the bus. Later the liar’s husband, a medical doctor, confronted me, trying to make out I was immoral or insane for standing up to the thug, who was his friend; finally he asked “Well, will you at least apologize to my wife?”. “For what?” I asked; and he “For insulting her.”. “But I didn’t”, I pointed out (he must have figured out that his wife had invented the insult story). Then he looked at me and said “You must be absolutely stupid”. This man, who was certainly intelligent as he had got through medical school, thought that resistance to evil was insanity and refusal to lie about oneself was stupidity. I am tempted to say that he did not know what intelligence was, and clearly he was wrong in equating honesty and stupidity, but neither can I give a clear definition of intelligence.

      • #3540023

        One definition.

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to definition

        Somewhere along the pathway of my life I encountered the following definition of intelligence: “The ability to adapt to changes in the environment.”
        I don’t think this definition is by any means absolute or all-inclusive, but I do think it is an interesting aspect.
        And thanks for the pragmatic statements contributed to this discussion thus far.
        And of course I love Star Trek’s Mr Data: the super “intelligent” android who is forever struggling to comprehend those qualities which make humans uniquely human.

    • #3539876

      The perception of AI

      by sai p.s. ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      The sad part of AI’s entry into mainstream IT has got to be the strong misconceptions of what AI is, where it started and what it’s about. Most of this is thanks to the media, movies and the all-encompassing market hype-machine that seems to twist anything scientific into a techno-gadget mass-market concept.

      AI was not about ‘creating machines that can think’ or substitute actual people in terms of input that only people can give.

      IMHO, AI began as a means of designing smarter algorithms and software that exploited the amazing architecture of the human intelligence paradigm. Analogies and lessons from human intelligence were meant to help us build more powerful programming tools.

      Like all AI students, I was a big fan of Isaac Asimov and his entire far-reaching insight into robotics and the socio-economic impact of AI. However, it would be prudent to keep in mind that AI tools can be applied for a lot of things more usefully than for the creation of intelligence that attempts to actually establish identity, sentience and random decision capability in a machine.

      The future of computing is AI – of that I am certain. But the perception of AI by mainstream IT must change if one is to appreciate what it can do for us.

    • #3540951

      by bws010101 ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      This organization has been around for over 20 years and is an excellent resource for current research topics in AI.


      • #3540860

        Many thanks.

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to

        Maximum appreciation for directing me to this website: no doubt I will spend many hours perusing it.

    • #3540791

      At the most Basic Level

      by admin ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      we all act from the one thing: the firing of Synapse.
      The Synapse has three states: Fire, Don’t Fire and Wait just as logic has 0, 1, and Wait. Somehow it’s gotta be possible, but we are no where near understanding a higher level mammal brain enough to copy it.

      On the other hand, AI probably isn’t really the only path to higher intelligence. Humans are kind of pompous and hate to be bettered, but Machine Intelligence already kicks butt over human ability in many arenas and the areas in which they are superior are increasing. Humans are frightful of something like themselves- for good reason- but it is actually more probable that something unlike us will develop new ability and power eventually. Perhaps in the far distant future beforeour sun implodes a powerful program will begin producing AI as an amusement for it’s own enjoyment if we don’t get it by then 🙂

      • #3541950

        Another approach.

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to At the most Basic Level

        I have long believed that the creative element in the human mind is linked to, and part of, that great unknown intelligence which caused the universe to come into being and which sustains it.

        Assuming this intelligence is limitless, I therefore believe that anything which the human mind can imagine can, will or already has come into manifestation in some part of the universe.

        As we obviously did not create ourselves, then I assume that this intelligence caused us to come into being (e.g. by evolution).

        I believe we are the hands and feet of God, enabling new things to be created infinitely more quickly than by natural evolution.

        And now here’s an example of my “humour:” A definition of AI: a blonde with a university degree.

        • #3541844

          Creativity and Supreme Beings

          by generalist ·

          In reply to Another approach.

          You might want to investigate a book by Julia Cameron called “The Artist’s Way: A Spiritual Path to Higher Creativity”.

          This book touches on creativity and how it has a higher ‘component’.

        • #3541831

          That’s a really good Explanation

          by admin ·

          In reply to Another approach.

          of the doctrine of co-creativity. It’s no accident that in Genesis there is a lot of time spent by Man naming things.

          By naming something you literally do begin the defining process that leads to it’s existence. In our field it is often brought up how something dreamt up as Scince Fiction later becomes real.

          Even the “April Fools” joke articles of Mohammed Ulysses Fips’ have actually predicted (or helped bring into being) a number of devices including a noise cancellation device- 14 months later we had the first noise cancellation device. 🙂

          Speaking of Hugo Gernsback, you might check out:

          on “Can Computers Think” all the way back from 1998. It hits a lot of the issues you might be interested in exploring on this topic. It’s good reading 🙂

        • #3541828

          A Correction…1963!!!!!!!!

          by admin ·

          In reply to That’s a really good Explanation

          Sorry! I meant 1963!!! the 1998 was an error from a brief glance while multitasking…. I thought it was wrong, yet I kept typing and posted…. something a computer would probably not do! 🙂 Oh Well..

    • #3542124

      Artificial duck no MSG just duck

      by mallardtooxx ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      Okay I have read all of the posts and I want to add something that is missing. The average component life in a computer is something like 52000 hours (5.9 yrs) of operation. The average life expectancy of a human male is 77 yrs or (674520 hrs) of operation. There is a slight difference there. Now if a computer were self aware for instance the Hal9000 from 2001, would it not know when a part was not functioning at optimal capacity? That being said who is going to fix that part in this AI, self-aware being? Now to further that what happens when the part is a central logic board and the AI being is no quantifiably insane because of a glitch? Since this “being” is self-aware is it responsible for its own upkeep? If so how is that facilitated and what recourse does it have in the procurement of the needed resource? Can my hal9000 run to wal mart and get a new logic board? Does it really even need one? Is it possible that the machine is trying to procreate and propagate it’s “faulty programming” to another similar machine?


      • #3541452

        Just like humans.

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to Artificial duck no MSG just duck

        Hi Duck. I think everything you have mentioned in the posting applies equally well to humans (some of which you have covered in Part 2 of your posting).

        Have you ever met a self-maintaining human? I would have died of a burst appendix at the age of 16 were it not for surgery.

        As for aberrational behaviour in humans, well we all know about that. In fact of course your posting “WHY?” is largely about aberrational behaviour in humans.

        Whilst humans are far from perfect, I do believe thatthey can achieve a kind of perfection in their creations: e.g. perfectly crafted musical instruments and the beautiful compositions which can be played on them. [This would apply to all the arts, I guess].

        • #3396457

          I do not doubt….

          by mallardtooxx ·

          In reply to Just like humans.

          I agree with you about the fact that humans are never completely self sufficent. However, I think I may have skewed a little from my thought process. I was thinking about AI, if a system, any system, becomes self aware it has intellegence. On thesame side of the coin, if an intelect learns from the course of its life time and applies its lessons to it’s way of life then it is said the intelect also has wisdom. Now, in my previous post I left something out unintentionally, what I was think was who is going to care for these machines with intelect, even some with wisdom. Are they going to be “equal” to humans? or will it be like Han Solo in star wars who out right hates droids? Will AI really make such a difference that we cannot live without it? And furthermore what will the AI think of us? will it think of us as God? If so then we are now stepping into the whole graven image debate. I for one would like to have a mechanical duck to swim in my pool with me and scare teh hellout of people when it starts talking to them. I would then take that duck and put him in my chair and let him wade through the daily menutia of my job while I play 36 at the club =)


        • #3396446

          Human Componant Life Less than 7

          by admin ·

          In reply to I do not doubt….


          Humans shed their cells by the second. I believe we are entirely rebuilt every approximate 7 years. Human componants are not static, but part of a lifetime biological recycling process, being built from our food, water, and air. Machinesare somewhat similar already in that their lifetime is actually the total, not componant life.

          It is quite probable that advanced machines in the future would be able to benefit from human models, collecting the raw resources they need and manufacturing componants as needed.

        • #3396383

          Electronic recycling process

          by generalist ·

          In reply to Human Componant Life Less than 7

          Would this mean that, when AI based machines come up with ways of electronically recycling and upgrading their components, they will be that much closer to being alive?

          If so, then I seem to recall that the AS/400 had a variation of that with a modem connected diagnosis and ordering system back in 1988.

          Heck, one of the science fiction definitions of life involves the ability to reproduce.

    • #3542122

      Artificial duck no MSG just duck pt2

      by mallardtooxx ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      What about a machine that is just built bad, and wants nothing more than to not be bad. See this is all based on one thought, can WE, as humans make something self-aware? What is self-awareness? Are we really even truly self aware and what ramifications would there be if we come to find out Our perception of reality is skewed, flawed, or flat out wrong. I think that AI is an interesting concept that scares the hell out of me because look at our children and what they are doing these days, killing each other in school, joining gangs and killing each other on the streets. Hell we can’t even control them and we “created” them, imagine what would happen when the “central” control computer of the power grids in the US decided it did not like the “central” control computer of the national defense council. Because to have quantifiable AI you have to have emotion factored in and if you do not then you have nothing more than a really smart box that cannot think. It would be like Einstein in a coma. Or a blonde with a junior college degree =-) sorry juls, couldn’t resist.


      • #3396445

        The premise of “The Matrix”

        by admin ·

        In reply to Artificial duck no MSG just duck pt2

        Yep, that’s what is really scary. The machines, if programmed by human logic with a goal of efficiency, would probably see fit to destroy the humans, or at least reduce their populations greatly. This would not take a human like form of AI (the traditional thought) actually, we could have this scenario much earlier with non-human AI.

    • #3396402

      Like it or not, it WILL happen.

      by jardinier ·

      In reply to Artificial Intelligence.

      I think it is the insatiable quest for knowledge in all areas that particularly distinguishes humans from animals.

      Whilst scientists in all disciplines will focus primarily on their research, waiting in the wings will be others who are hungry to apply the results of that research for humanitarian, financial or power-seeking ends.

      In the course of his purely scientific research a mathematician/physicist named Albert Einstein developed the theory which resulted in the construction, and use of, a weapon capable of awesome destruction.

      But when humans stop asking “how” and “why,” we will no longer be humans.

      • #3396389

        Maybe when we learn to exist

        by admin ·

        In reply to Like it or not, it WILL happen.

        instead of chasing the tail of existence we will gain the ability to “be” instead of living in endless pursuit.

        What is the criteria for being human? I think the answer to this may be in a process of unfolding, rather than one static attempt to bottle it’s essence.

        I think instead of pondering that over a beer tonight, I’ll just enjoy it exploding on my palette 🙂

        • #3396343

          Evolving beings.

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Maybe when we learn to exist

          I don’t think that in my posting I made any reference to a “static definition.” On the contrary, the ongoing search for answers obviously implies (intellectual) movement.

          A Buddhist friend of mine said that each day of our lives we are a “different” person, as the experiences of the previous day have modified our “programming.”

          As for just learning to “exist” or “to be,” well this of course is the ultimate goal of Eastern philosophies. But achieving that state of Nirvana or total non-attachment is not a static condition. We would merely become “at one” with the universe, which of course is continually evolving.

Viewing 8 reply threads