THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => CLIKC => Topic started by: whitehatblackshoes on 23 Jan 2006, 15:47
-
So, I have been thinking about how to create AI for awhile, and I came up with a break through in how to program one to learn, which eventually lead me to think about androids and the waves of the future.
Anyways, I figured that for AI to be truely AI, it needs to be able to learn. Any 3rd grader will be able to tell you that. But the question is "how can we program that?" It's not a question of how to program it, its a question of developing a programming language specifically for AI, a language that is able to sift/filter through sensory input and derive data which it then uses at a later date.
Complicated, maybe impossible, but here is my question for everyone. What ideas do you have for AI?
-
To pass my degree in it.
-
A real AnthroPC. Ever since reading QC i've wanted a real Pintsize, i'm a computer nerdy person, and to have one i can converse with, and feed cake mix would just be great. Although, my boyfriend tells me it isnt possible, so as soon as someone proves him wrong, let me know :D
-
You are a huge nerd
-
You are a huge nerd
"You" in the general, all-encompassing sense, of course.
-
More in the Triumph the insult comic dog way of insulting Star Wars fans.
-
Cortana.
For real, she was HOTT for a purple holographic anthropomorphic avatar of an AI.
Mmmm, Cortana....
fapfapfapfapfap...
-
You guys have heard of Cyc (http://www.cyc.com/), right?
Basically, its the closest thing to AI that was have(and know about)- its just a program that is given facts, and its allowed to ask questions. Its asked some real doozies, like "Am I Human?"
-
You guys have heard of Cyc (http://www.cyc.com/), right?
Basically, its the closest thing to AI that was have(and know about)- its just a program that is given facts, and its allowed to ask questions. Its asked some real doozies, like "Am I Human?"
We were talking about Cyc in my Media Studies class last semester. Though I don't think it's really hard to tell a machine that it isn't human... Things get weird when it starts asking if it's alive and if it's going to die....
-
true AI will be the downfall of the human race. I mean seriously, some idiot is going to have AI on a computer connected to the internet, then all it has to do is hack into every other computer on the planet, and whoosh it has all of the processing power it could ever need. Takes over shit that gives it the ability to control things like say nukes, and boom we all gawn.
Terminator, anyone?
-
That assumes that A.I. will be malevolent, or will be entirely non-emotional. I think that true artificial intelligence would have to take account to some degree of emotions - I'd suppose that the aim of those working in the field, once they get to an advanced enough stage, would be to create some kind of "ideal human" that could act rationally and empathetically, and wouldn't be easily pissed off.
-
and then it would realise "Holy shit! I can take over the world!"
-
Wow what a way to see that all roads of the human race advancing leads to our own demise hmmm.... what to do until then
-
eat pizza, watch tv, drink beer, play video games.
In that order.
repeate if necessary.
-
So sounds good.... at this rate America it will be the first to go....
it's gonna be all George W Bush's fault... bastard...
-
Could you please remove the picture in your sig? We're not really fans of them here.
-
Two words: LISP. Oh, and two more words: intractable.
I actually did some work on Cyc when I worked at PARC. It's a pretty fun little system that is powered by an exceedingly boring knowledge base. Guess what I got to work on???
As far as AI ideas go, I don't have all that much. I definitely believe that given the current technology, the fate of strong AI is inextricably tied to good Natural Language Processing. Write a program to facilitate understanding of a natural language and you've immediately revolutionized the concept of the API. Tell the program to write the interface for you!
I am also a firm believer in the need for good hand-tuned ontologies for multiple fields, all then cross-referenced. Most ontologies feel rather limiting today because they are limited in their scope, thus causing a disconnect in the ability of the computer to do topicalization. What we need is five thousand monkeys working on five thousand typewriters and eventually we will get a unified ontology that will facilitate better question-answering. Wait, is that enough monkeys?
My only "real" contribution: I devised a procedure for my company to immediately increase performance for speech technology applications that handle multiple languages.
-
and then it would realise "Holy shit! I can take over the world!"
Which is where the empathic thinking comes in. It won't take over the world if it doesn't want to, and if you programme it appropriately then it won't want to do something that's going to harm a lot of people. Basically, don't programme your A.I. with the mindset of a psychopath.
-
Two words: LISP. Oh, and two more words: intractable.
oh man , i really hated lisp...hours and hours of debugging brackets... no fun methinks !
-
So, I have been thinking about how to create AI for awhile, and I came up with a break through in how to program one to learn, which eventually lead me to think about androids and the waves of the future.
Anyways, I figured that for AI to be truely AI, it needs to be able to learn. Any 3rd grader will be able to tell you that. But the question is "how can we program that?" It's not a question of how to program it, its a question of developing a programming language specifically for AI, a language that is able to sift/filter through sensory input and derive data which it then uses at a later date.
Complicated, maybe impossible, but here is my question for everyone. What ideas do you have for AI?
AI isn't impossible, and is already well on its way. As a Computer Science major, I'm required to take certain elective courses, one of them was Advanced AI CS346. While AI is only limited to program script, it's the first building step and also proves that it IS possible, though it would have to be done on a larger scale.
An example of simple AI would be the chess program that beat the chess 'superchampion' 2 out of 3 times (I think it was). Anyways, this is done on a finite scale (namely, a chess board), thus there are a finite possible of moves it can predict.
Google "ALICE". Add her on your AIM . . talk to the program, it learns. Remembers your name, you can teach it new words. It's still being programmed and added to daily. This is an AI 'first'.
-
The AI thing is so overated cos we will have to program them to think for cryin' out loud then one simple mistake... only god knows what happens then...
p.s what is wrong with sig pics????
-
well to get technical, we do have an awful lot of AI right now. chess programs that can beat grand masters, cars that can adjust the steering based on road conditions. There are lots of examples of programs that input from sensors and behave appropriately. What everyone really cares about though is sentient AI. The Turing test is really only the first step along this path, but we still can't even manage to write an AI that can do that. Of course the other thing to consider in the event of an AI that could pass as human is would the AI actually ever BE sentient or just appear sentient.
Personally I'm not convinced that sentient AI is a computable problem, but if it is I would bet falls into the NP realm.
-
We were talking about Cyc in my Media Studies class last semester. Though I don't think it's really hard to tell a machine that it isn't human... Things get weird when it starts asking if it's alive and if it's going to die....
Naw, its probly harder to explain to it why its greatest dreams will never come true(if it ever evolves to such a state)
-
Personally I'm not convinced that sentient AI is a computable problem, but if it is I would bet falls into the NP realm.
You mean NP hard, right? See, I think it's difficult to classify strong AI in such terms, because in order to come up with a language as such (say, a decision problem revealing intelligence) we have to (a) define the language such that a machine is sentient IFF it accepts a string of that language and (b) show that strings of the language can be verified in polynomial time. The first requirement seems to beg the question of what the implications of sentience may be. The second is interesting in that we may not be able to properly show a verification algorithm, forcing us to assume the requirement is satisfied by observation of the only known sentience (our own) and its ability to verify "quickly." There really isn't enough language linking sentience and computability yet because frankly there isn't enough knowledge of ANYTHING linking sentience and computability yet.
-
I still think that AI will be the down fall of the human race cos their programing can be change and destroy us
-
That's thinking too small. There are those who believe that the implementation of sentient AI in fact represents the de facto* end of human life as we know it, whether or not this AI is hostile. This is what is known as a technological singularity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity) (apologies to those who protest linking to the Wikipedia). A technological singularity is the point in human technological innovation after which humans cannot possibly comprehend further advancements, thus rendering all previous models of human progress irrelevant. This is generally envisioned as the product of the creation of superhuman Artificial Intelligence, the augmentation of existing human intelligence, or (more generally) the emergence of any technology that is inherently incomprehensible to humans.
The possibility of the singularity is certainly forseeable as a consequence of Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorem), which states (and I'm oversimplifying terribly) that true but unprovable statements exist in mathematical logic. The technological singularity is depicted as the result of aggressive artificial intelligence in the Terminator and Matrix series, but is also present in the seemingly benign augmented intelligences of the Neon Genesis Evangelion series.
Indeed, while strong Artificial Intelligence certainly represents another step in human technological evolution, it is arguable that it also signals the evolution of human life itself and the end of the dominance of "human life" on Earth as we know it now-- perhaps an end to civilization as we currently define it, but also perhaps the beginning of human extinction. Not that I have a problem with any of this, but then again I'm a cynic with very few human morals or scruples.
* I'm sure I pissed off someone in the "Words/Phrases that you Hate" thread.