https://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland    Contact            Users: 328 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 12:53

Robotic surgical system "da Vinci" - the future?

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
Forum Index > General
  First 
  < 
  1 
 2 
  All 
Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 19 2015 08:53. Posts 5290


  On May 12 2015 19:44 MyAnacondaDont wrote:
Have you ever thought that humans aren't the final evolution of life but maybe artificial intelligence is?



machines cannot think. They compute, and do a set of instructions. Computers are not creative, they cannot come up with proofs, theories or fall in love. They very clearly operate differently from biological systems.

computers are probably the most simple minded concepts in science behind mathematics, where as concepts like free will are infinitely complex, almost no progress has been made on those concepts since ancient Greece. AI has similar complexity, and many scientists/philosophers in that field have had embarrassingly bad predictions.

And there are some computers that can beat anyone at chess, that means very little, like all they do is follow a series of algorithms and combinatorial mathematics probably. Humans who play chess don't follow algorithms.

And there is another thing. The vast array of things that a human has to react to, a computer the size of the universe that was turned on for trillions of years could not have the computing power to mimic another human being. There is a problem in mathematics called NP=P which is an unsolved problem that deals with what can and can't be computed by computers the size of the universe. Until mathematicians give a proof for that, computers will not be very impressive in the field of AI or even mimicking human behavior.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beingsLast edit: 19/05/2015 09:33

dnagardi   Hungary. May 19 2015 13:11. Posts 1776


  On May 19 2015 07:07 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



That is almost a certainty


considering they lack the "soul, consciousness and feelings I would say thats unlikely

it depends on what you measure it, yes they can reproduce, yes they can make billion times more tasks than a human but without the ones mentioned above, its just emptiness, not evolution


Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 19 2015 14:14. Posts 5290


  On May 19 2015 07:07 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



That is almost a certainty


yeah also, its pretty bold to claim something is almost certain in artificial intelligence. It is not even close to being reduced to mathematics and scientific laws, so its very uncertain.

I certainly wouldn't label anything i say as almost certain on the topic.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings 

lebowski   Greece. May 21 2015 13:24. Posts 9205

computers lack "soul" or "free will"?
Humans lack these as well, not such an infinitely complex concept

btw Ex Machina is a fun movie on the subject of A.I.

new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man... 

lebowski   Greece. May 21 2015 14:04. Posts 9205

people suggesting that A.I. isn't possible are in essence proposing that human or biological consciousness is something more than the bi product of evolution carving matter through countless trial and error instances to create survival machines for genes.

a)if that's exactly how we came to be, it's obvious that we could at some point carve matter ourselves in ways that could "bless" it with our existential troubles

b)if not then we are all special snowflakes of divine origin that can ignore the rest of the laws of the universe by making free, soul based decisions and obv can't be replicated

new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man... 

Highcard   Canada. May 21 2015 20:33. Posts 5428


  On May 19 2015 07:53 Stroggoz wrote:
Show nested quote +



machines cannot think. They compute, and do a set of instructions. Computers are not creative, they cannot come up with proofs, theories or fall in love. They very clearly operate differently from biological systems.

computers are probably the most simple minded concepts in science behind mathematics, where as concepts like free will are infinitely complex, almost no progress has been made on those concepts since ancient Greece. AI has similar complexity, and many scientists/philosophers in that field have had embarrassingly bad predictions.

And there are some computers that can beat anyone at chess, that means very little, like all they do is follow a series of algorithms and combinatorial mathematics probably. Humans who play chess don't follow algorithms.

And there is another thing. The vast array of things that a human has to react to, a computer the size of the universe that was turned on for trillions of years could not have the computing power to mimic another human being. There is a problem in mathematics called NP=P which is an unsolved problem that deals with what can and can't be computed by computers the size of the universe. Until mathematicians give a proof for that, computers will not be very impressive in the field of AI or even mimicking human behavior.


Creativity is spontaneous ideas derived from previous stimuli, in an identical process to chemical-physical reactions. You see it in code all the time, bugs/quirks that develop over many instances, usually fucking stuff up. Or industrial assembly lines, where a flaw in the creation process results in failure rates that can be 1^100, but it happens, fucking stuff up. That same fucking up, can result in creating something useful. That happens in the large hadron collider or many developed drugs.

Falling in love is a chemical reaction that is programmed into the brain at a deeper genetic/subconscience level. A program could be setup to 'fall in love' with a certain pattern that triggers conjugation between it and x, helping achieve a common goal.

Anyways, the point is AI at it's full form will be no different than human brains, and perhaps with less limitations

That is my expectation, at least, however, not binding.

I have learned from poker that being at the table is not a grind, the grind is living and poker is how I pass the time 

Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 22 2015 14:25. Posts 5290


  On May 21 2015 13:04 lebowski wrote:
people suggesting that A.I. isn't possible are in essence proposing that human or biological consciousness is something more than the bi product of evolution carving matter through countless trial and error instances to create survival machines for genes.

a)if that's exactly how we came to be, it's obvious that we could at some point carve matter ourselves in ways that could "bless" it with our existential troubles

b)if not then we are all special snowflakes of divine origin that can ignore the rest of the laws of the universe by making free, soul based decisions and obv can't be replicated



I don't see how the negation of A implies B. If we cant recreate AI that behaves like us, then that makes us pretty ordinary, as no other animal can do it either. How does it make us special? does this imply that cats and dogs are of divine origin as well since they cannot recreate themselves? Humans happen to have biological limitations that limit us from understanding certain concepts. just like dogs and cats do, they cannot use reason.

And like i said, while brains may be carved from matter, yeah that seems true. But if they are carved in the same way that computers are, a computer the size of the universe that put out millions of operations per second on the tiniest particles, would not be able to compute what humans are capable of doing.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beingsLast edit: 22/05/2015 15:13

TalentedTom    Canada. May 22 2015 15:19. Posts 20070


  On May 19 2015 07:07 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



That is almost a certainty


Wouldn't that suggest that every superadvanced civilization in the universe eventually becomes AI's? If we ever do make contact with an alien race it would then prob be an AI race, in which case we are 100% doomed.

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us and as we let our own lights shine we unconsciously give other people permision to do the same 

LikeASet   United States. May 22 2015 17:16. Posts 2113

I've heard (not personally) from experts such as people that have worked for nasa state that all the supercomputers in the world combined couldn't replicate what goes on in a single tea spoon taken from the ocean. I think Michio Kaku stated that as of right now our current AI technology is as smart as a retarded cockroach. In order from AI on the level of at least a human to exist a lot of "If's" have to become accomplished, such as if we eventually understand how combinations of certain neuron pathways translate to emotion, information processing, being creative, etc. Another if is making quantum computing a reality so that machines have enough space to contain the hardware necessary to exert the required computing power needed from complex decision making. We'll also have groups trying to prevent advance AI technologies from coming into fruition, even people like Elon Musk describing the creation of AI like releasing a great big demon into the world.

I would think that if A.I. in machine form with god-like reasoning, problem solving, and computing power was possible it would have conquered the universe by now, assuming that A.I. would want to spread itself for the sake of gathering more information and material for ensuring its survival, and that the first possible formation of life could be 10-13 billion years ago. That would give the first spots of life a billion years to evolve into large capable organisms, plenty of time to create advanced technology, and then another 9-12 billion years to branch into outerspace! and you would think the branching out would be exponential.

I guess it just boils down to whether you're an optimist or pessimist. It's been thousands of years since we had the great philosophers, hundreds of years since our Newton, hundred years since Einstein. It's been hundreds of years and we still use the same internal combustion engine. For decades computers haven't really been changing, just getting smaller. I'd like to consider myself on optimist but I think people's view on reality is too influenced by modern science fiction.


Spitfiree   Bulgaria. May 22 2015 21:10. Posts 9634

I feel like there isn't a single human being on the planet that could make suggestions that could be even 1% close to reality on the topic of AIs being final evolution form of life and all of the results due to that, there s just too many unknowns.
And @ science fiction, usually it takes at least a century for science fiction to even get close to reality, but its far from unattainable. Tons of writers have "predicted" ( doubt it was their idea at the time ) tons of not only technical progress, but political in the means of international relations and such

 Last edit: 22/05/2015 21:12

ggplz   Sweden. May 22 2015 23:34. Posts 16784

Just remember this from the matrix!

if poker is dangerous to them i would rank sports betting as a Kodiak grizzly bear who smells blood after you just threw a javelin into his cub - RaiNKhAN 

Baalim   Mexico. May 23 2015 02:32. Posts 34246


  On May 19 2015 07:53 Stroggoz wrote:
Show nested quote +



machines cannot think. They compute, and do a set of instructions. Computers are not creative, they cannot come up with proofs, theories or fall in love. They very clearly operate differently from biological systems.

computers are probably the most simple minded concepts in science behind mathematics, where as concepts like free will are infinitely complex, almost no progress has been made on those concepts since ancient Greece. AI has similar complexity, and many scientists/philosophers in that field have had embarrassingly bad predictions.

And there are some computers that can beat anyone at chess, that means very little, like all they do is follow a series of algorithms and combinatorial mathematics probably. Humans who play chess don't follow algorithms.

And there is another thing. The vast array of things that a human has to react to, a computer the size of the universe that was turned on for trillions of years could not have the computing power to mimic another human being. There is a problem in mathematics called NP=P which is an unsolved problem that deals with what can and can't be computed by computers the size of the universe. Until mathematicians give a proof for that, computers will not be very impressive in the field of AI or even mimicking human behavior.


That is incredibly narrow-sighted, an fish cannot come up with proofs or theories or fall in love, yet it was our ancestor.

Consciousness and other properties of more complex animals dont come from some weird magic, its simply a result of a higher intelligence and as silicon brains become more advanced they will also develop consciousness, creativity etc.

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Baalim   Mexico. May 23 2015 02:46. Posts 34246


  On May 19 2015 12:11 dnagardi wrote:
Show nested quote +



considering they lack the "soul, consciousness and feelings I would say thats unlikely

it depends on what you measure it, yes they can reproduce, yes they can make billion times more tasks than a human but without the ones mentioned above, its just emptiness, not evolution



Soul? you are not fit to have this conversation if you are going to say such things.


Simple animals are not conscious, but when they develop are more advanced brain through evolution they gain this ability.

Feelings are not intelligent, where is the intelligence in anger or envy? actually they are irrational responses from our genetic coding, they do appear on complex brains but the higher the intelligence usually the more detached to these genetic impulses

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

ggplz   Sweden. May 23 2015 16:15. Posts 16784

if poker is dangerous to them i would rank sports betting as a Kodiak grizzly bear who smells blood after you just threw a javelin into his cub - RaiNKhAN 

lebowski   Greece. May 23 2015 19:32. Posts 9205

^lol

  On May 22 2015 13:25 Stroggoz wrote:
But if they are carved in the same way that computers are, a computer the size of the universe that put out millions of operations per second on the tiniest particles, would not be able to compute what humans are capable of doing.



how do you reach that conclusion? Because this seems to me like new age "limitless human brain" shenanigans

new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man...Last edit: 23/05/2015 19:32

Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 24 2015 10:16. Posts 5290


  On May 23 2015 18:32 lebowski wrote:
^lol
Show nested quote +



how do you reach that conclusion? Because this seems to me like new age "limitless human brain" shenanigans



i don't know what this new age thing your referring to is. I'm going from what i've studied on theory of computation, and complexity theory in mathematics which is a field of mathematics that came out of the ideas of Kurt Godel, and Alan Turing. There are lots of things that cannot be computed by a computer the size of the universe. For example, a computer the size of the universe could not compute this problem in mathematics:

If a traveling salesman decides to travel(lets say hes flying) to 1000 cities, and has to travel to each one exactly once and returning to their starting point on their last flight. To tell a computer to find a path where that happens, the computer has to find all the different combinations of how he can travel, which is 2^1000 combinations. A computer the size of a universe that was manipulating every particle and running for a trillion years could not compute that. that's a mathematical fact and problems like these are called Hamiltonian paths. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamiltonian_path_problem and the mathematical term for how long it would take (much more than a trillion years) is called time complexity, denoted by Ta(n)

For further reading i would look up the problem 'NP=P'

What i'm getting at here is that i think that human decision problems are much more complex than the above problem. Just the things and possibilities they encounter in everyday life would create very big decision trees. So even if human brains operate like computers do, then they would instantaneously implode because they couldn't handle it, imo.

But i don't think they operate like computers do in the first place. Since they are creative, something that's fairly obvious from observing the behavior of human being. And we can all understand computers are not creative.

And i agree with Baal on the soul concept, someone needs to define what a soul is before we can start talking about souls in a comprehensible manner.


One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beingsLast edit: 24/05/2015 10:22

Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 24 2015 10:30. Posts 5290


  On May 23 2015 01:46 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



Soul? you are not fit to have this conversation if you are going to say such things.


Simple animals are not conscious, but when they develop are more advanced brain through evolution they gain this ability.

Feelings are not intelligent, where is the intelligence in anger or envy? actually they are irrational responses from our genetic coding, they do appear on complex brains but the higher the intelligence usually the more detached to these genetic impulses



Whatever feelings are, they are a complex phenomenon which we understand almost nothing about. It seems strange to call feelings irrational as well.

As for your reply to me, it's unclear what endowments evolution is going to give us in the future. Yes its true that animals have gotten more intelligent over time, but the likelihood that evolution will endow us with the ability to understand and create AI is a guess. It's like guessing that we will be endowed with the ability to visualize 4 dimensional space. Why do you think that this is so likely to happen, when there are so many things we are not endowed with and no animal is?

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beingsLast edit: 24/05/2015 13:33

Baalim   Mexico. May 25 2015 02:13. Posts 34246


  On May 24 2015 09:30 Stroggoz wrote:
Show nested quote +



Whatever feelings are, they are a complex phenomenon which we understand almost nothing about. It seems strange to call feelings irrational as well.

As for your reply to me, it's unclear what endowments evolution is going to give us in the future. Yes its true that animals have gotten more intelligent over time, but the likelihood that evolution will endow us with the ability to understand and create AI is a guess. It's like guessing that we will be endowed with the ability to visualize 4 dimensional space. Why do you think that this is so likely to happen, when there are so many things we are not endowed with and no animal is?



Feelings are irrational because they arent born in reason, you dont feel jealousy because you think its the most reasonable course of action, you just feel it., feelings are natures way to do our genes bidding

What does evolution have to do with we creating AI? evolution takes millions of years, Im saying we will very likely create sentient AI in a timeline of hundreds of years... not millions -.-

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

lebowski   Greece. May 25 2015 19:54. Posts 9205


  On May 24 2015 09:16 Stroggoz wrote:
Show nested quote +



i don't know what this new age thing your referring to is. I'm going from what i've studied on theory of computation, and complexity theory in mathematics which is a field of mathematics that came out of the ideas of Kurt Godel, and Alan Turing. There are lots of things that cannot be computed by a computer the size of the universe. For example, a computer the size of the universe could not compute this problem in mathematics:

If a traveling salesman decides to travel(lets say hes flying) to 1000 cities, and has to travel to each one exactly once and returning to their starting point on their last flight. To tell a computer to find a path where that happens, the computer has to find all the different combinations of how he can travel, which is 2^1000 combinations. A computer the size of a universe that was manipulating every particle and running for a trillion years could not compute that. that's a mathematical fact and problems like these are called Hamiltonian paths. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamiltonian_path_problem and the mathematical term for how long it would take (much more than a trillion years) is called time complexity, denoted by Ta(n)

For further reading i would look up the problem 'NP=P'

What i'm getting at here is that i think that human decision problems are much more complex than the above problem. Just the things and possibilities they encounter in everyday life would create very big decision trees. So even if human brains operate like computers do, then they would instantaneously implode because they couldn't handle it, imo.

But i don't think they operate like computers do in the first place. Since they are creative, something that's fairly obvious from observing the behavior of human being. And we can all understand computers are not creative.

And i agree with Baal on the soul concept, someone needs to define what a soul is before we can start talking about souls in a comprehensible manner.




this makes sense, but I don't understand why you think the creative/decision processes of the brain could never be replicated; computers won't always be built the same way we build them today as well (assuming a fallout type of apocalypse doesn't ensue)

new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man... 

Stroggoz   New Zealand. May 30 2015 09:00. Posts 5290


  On May 25 2015 18:54 lebowski wrote:
Show nested quote +


this makes sense, but I don't understand why you think the creative/decision processes of the brain could never be replicated; computers won't always be built the same way we build them today as well (assuming a fallout type of apocalypse doesn't ensue)



There already are different types of computers like quantum computers for example. But i don't know anything on the topic. As far as replicating creative/decision process in the brain goes. Well there are people who have completely mapped the neurons in small organisms with less than a 1000 neurons. They haven't been able to predict the behavior of the organism from doing this. And there are people who think mapping the whole human brain will help us give an understanding into AI. I think its extremely optimistic. Although, they will probably gain other useful information from doing this.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings 

 
  First 
  < 
  1 
 2 
  All 



Poker Streams

















Copyright © 2024. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap