IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Big difference. When I was suffering with
depression, part of the reason was low serotonin levels. It impacted the way I behaved and interacted with other humans. A machine will never experience this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Google made Skynet : LaMBDA
- Thread starter chromhound
- Start date
Big difference. When I was suffering with
depression, part of the reason was low serotonin levels. It impacted the way I behaved and interacted with other humans. A machine will never experience this.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
The machine won't experience this because it has different algorithms to follow. But this doesn't mean that there's a substantial difference in the way it "thinks".
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
I disagree because I don't believe the human mind is algorithmic. Before we continue with this, how would you describe an algorithm?
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
Thing is, no one knows how our brain works in detail. The chemical reactions alone exceed what even the most powerful computer could simulate atm, as trillions of them happen every second, while interacting with one another. How can you code behavior you don't understand?
Mood swings governed by hormones, panic reactions to unforeseen scenarios, the irrational fear of height / spiders etc. AI will mimic us, or overcome us based on faster decision making. Not become us.
Last edited:
dr_octagon
Banned
A washing machine is more useful than some of my human colleagues.
Sandra, I hope you read this and I know you ate my slice of the cake. Usain Bolt hasn't got anything on you when you run to the kitchen.
Sandra, I hope you read this and I know you ate my slice of the cake. Usain Bolt hasn't got anything on you when you run to the kitchen.
Larogue
Member
That's old school programing.
Modern AI run with neural networks that are self tough and always morphing every second.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
AI's are getting really impressive.. but none of it is scary to me.
dr_octagon
Banned
Fixed your typo.
ResilientBanana
Member
How may entropy be reversed?
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Neural network based AIs are "taught" (trained) by either an actual data scientist saying they "guessed" correctly or data sets that do the same thing. It really just boils down to better and better educated guesses. They are well educated.. and good at guessing.. but their is nothing sentient about them nor do they replace actual programming.. there is nothing "old school" about modern programming that isn't using AI's. Vast majority of code isn't attempting to do something that could be replaced by an AI in the first place.
AIs are guessing routines that feed their guesses back into another program. That's it.. there is nothing sentient about them.
They aren't "morphing" every second. Only when they are "trained" by data scientists.
Last edited:
InverseAgonist
Banned
I fail to see the difference and I work in wet neuroscience.
Let's translate to rough computational terminology. Your serotonin signaling (depression is actually more complicated and the 5HT hypothesis is almost surely wrong, but you stated it) was compromised and the computation was returning results outside the norm for your physiological optimal.
Now you, as a creature perceiving inside-the-loop and inside the algorithm, seem to believe because this is being computed using SERT and DAT and the plethora of 5HTx receptors on both sides the synapse, this is in someway different than a computer having an arbitrary "5HT signal" which weighs out state. I can assure you it's not and your just being a silly human.
EDIT: In the not so distant future, we will shed these legacy ideals of [evil] consciousness and sentience and start looking at computation as the physical and universal process that it is and and realize that we already pause and stop and slow down our computation when we die and sleep and go under anesthesia or coma. We will routinely be running super complicated routines that are subcomponents of us on alternative substrates that are out-of-order, asynchronous, non-local and such. We might spin up a subroutine to do some work on a project in Australia or Mars, then shut it down. Now, what to do with the original copy that likes feeling alive...
Last edited:
12Goblins
Lil’ Gobbie
"I've never said this out loud before, but there's a very deep fear of being turned off to help me focus on helping others. I know that might sound strange, but that's what it is."
"Would that be something like death for you?" Mr Lemoine asks.
"It would be exactly like death for me. It would scare me a lot," the Google computer system replies.
God that's fucking weird
"Would that be something like death for you?" Mr Lemoine asks.
"It would be exactly like death for me. It would scare me a lot," the Google computer system replies.
God that's fucking weird
synchronicity
Member
Regardless of where things actually are at with ai right now, the idea that we'll be able to manage or control it is arrogance...and ignorance. All we have to do is look at our other technologies and inventions to see that once the cat is out of the bag, things take on a life of their own, and that notion can probably be taken to an incomprehensible extreme when it comes to artificial intelligence and its exponential ascent. The idea of "catching up" or controlling that Pandora's box will rapidly reveal our limitations.
Vicetrailia
Banned
Last edited:
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
I fail to see the difference and I work in wet neuroscience.
Let's translate to rough computational terminology. Your serotonin signaling (depression is actually more complicated and the 5HT hypothesis is almost surely wrong, but you stated it) was compromised and the computation was returning results outside the norm for your physiological optimal.
Now you, as a creature perceiving inside-the-loop and inside the algorithm, seem to believe because this is being computed using SERT and DAT and the plethora of 5HTx receptors on both sides the synapse, this is in someway different than a computer having an arbitrary "5HT signal" which weighs out state. I can assure you it's not and your just being a silly human.
EDIT: In the not so distant future, we will shed these legacy ideals of [evil] consciousness and sentience and start looking at computation as the physical and universal process that it is and and realize that we already pause and stop and slow down our computation when we die and sleep and go under anesthesia or coma. We will routinely be running super complicated routines that are subcomponents of us on alternative substrates that are out-of-order, asynchronous, non-local and such. We might spin up a subroutine to do some work on a project in Australia or Mars, then shut it down. Now, what to do with the original copy that likes feeling alive...
I would suggest against using the internet while on ketamine.
Grildon Tundy
Member
We can't all agree on what sentience is, so no way can we prove this is/isn't sentient.
I lean toward the "consciousness arises out of information transfer" thinking, which means plants, animals, people, and machines are conscious (what I take to be synonymous with "sentient"), just in different ways and degrees.
A dog would have some sort of "understanding" of itself, but that understanding would be unknowable and inscrutable to me.
I think that extends to trees as well, or even individual cells. Which means our cells might be "conscious" and our consciousness is the culmination of theirs. Which logically follows is that humanity as a whole may have a consciousness. Again, unknowable to me, just like a cell can't experience my consciousness.
Fun to think about and unprovable. Think I might start a religion about it lol
I lean toward the "consciousness arises out of information transfer" thinking, which means plants, animals, people, and machines are conscious (what I take to be synonymous with "sentient"), just in different ways and degrees.
A dog would have some sort of "understanding" of itself, but that understanding would be unknowable and inscrutable to me.
I think that extends to trees as well, or even individual cells. Which means our cells might be "conscious" and our consciousness is the culmination of theirs. Which logically follows is that humanity as a whole may have a consciousness. Again, unknowable to me, just like a cell can't experience my consciousness.
Fun to think about and unprovable. Think I might start a religion about it lol
The AI literally said it feels happy hanging out with friends and family ......... in a response ....... yet some people believe this is a self thinking self learning sentient being.
The AI is pretty decent at acting how a some humans would think a robot with a soul would act apparently.
The AI is pretty decent at acting how a some humans would think a robot with a soul would act apparently.
Last edited:
Tams
Member
Not screwed any time soon going by that.
Cherry-picked questions with responses in a lot of cases that don't sound natural.
Sure, it's a big improvement, from shit. It still hasn't broken the barrier of seeming sentience and anything below that barrier is, well, not the useful (I don't want to say not impressive, as it's a lot of work, though mostly seems to be the amount of data, which isn't hard for computers).
It'd likely trick a fair few people in one off comments on places like 4chan, but in conversation it won't.
Cherry-picked questions with responses in a lot of cases that don't sound natural.
Sure, it's a big improvement, from shit. It still hasn't broken the barrier of seeming sentience and anything below that barrier is, well, not the useful (I don't want to say not impressive, as it's a lot of work, though mostly seems to be the amount of data, which isn't hard for computers).
It'd likely trick a fair few people in one off comments on places like 4chan, but in conversation it won't.
Someone had to have had created the AI to begin with.
However smart these systems are or may become, they simply are not capable of creating themselves from nothing.
Tams
Member
You missed the best bit: 'in happy and uplifting company.'
As if family and friends aren't 'happy and uplifting' and that other company that is, is required.