It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Dangerous New "Artificial Intelligence" Learns Without Human Intervention

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:51 PM

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: yuppa

I was specifically referring to the AI which controls the government in Appleseed scifi manga , I was not referring to the whole story about the 3rd world war.

Not everyone has EGO's the size of a mountain , there are humans who can let go of any ego and if we can do it then we can teach machines to do as we do
we can lead by example , currently if humans will follow great human beings, true leaders , those who instill hope and inspire others to be all they can be then why wouldnt we want to follow or allow a machine which we have designed to guide us into a better future !

Are we so full of ourselves that we wouldn't want the best for ourselves

GAIA was the AI intelligence,but but were forgetting it had 12 human/bioroids to confer with too. And in that world the government had people who caused trouble and even tried to take over and over throw GAIA. they had soem big egos to think they should run things instead of GAIA.

posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:42 PM
Well good luck with all that.

On a related note:
I am now accepting applications for security and manual labor on my farm. Other skills may be considered, none technology based unless it's killing terminators.

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:43 AM

originally posted by: tastyrawmeat
The ignorance in this thread is staggering. Please dont take this as an insult.

Yes AI is developing fast. Will it take control of your toaster and your tv and maybe your vacuum? probably not.
The best place to start, with a question like this is to first discuss the nature of intelligence. Once you start to really think about that, you realise how difficult it is to assess.

This seemed fitting

"Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window"
Steve Wozniak

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 03:39 AM
I just have to throw my two cents in here....

First of all this is nothing more then clever programming, teaching it the rules of the game and then allowing it to run a simulation algorithm to (try) to beat it. This is not intelligence. We have tons of algorithms that do this on a daily basis, running simulations until the most efficient method is found.

To be honest, if we didn't at least get to the level of AI where we can train it to do whatever we want, then we'd truly be inept. I find it hilarious that they simulate dopamine to give it an artificial reward when it "wins" the game. Again, the computer has to be taught the conditions for "winning". True intelligence is when you set a child in front of something, tell them to figure it out, and they do - with no other input then their 5 senses. A computer will always need to be told what to do and how to do it, in order to figure things out. Real intelligence is inventive and intuitive, something a computer will never be without the constant feedback from a human being.

Given enough time, we could program a computer to do 90% of what human's do; the only caveat is that it will never understand what it's doing or why. It just won't care; it will do what it's told and that's it.

In my opinion intelligence is not static, but dynamic. It's hard to be dynamic when your language only has two states (on/off).

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 04:29 AM
Is it just me but does anyone else think it's a bad idea to teach a machine that's engineered to win how to play a game like civilization where the objective of the game is WORLD DOMINATION!!! Jezus it's like we're giving training wheels to skynet here!

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:23 PM
Great thread OP. Although I don't know much about programming and algorithms, I think this is still far from the terrifying AI takeover scenario everyone's been anticipating. I mean if its "actions" are still governed by set parameters (if x = y then let Mario die) in its program script then it still can be controlled and manipulated or corrected if it goes astray right?

I imagine real AI to be really self conscious...if its a machine playing games, it needs to have the power of choice to play or not, to play for enjoyment or for high scores or it kills people out of frustration when it can't finish Metroid etc.

But at least we're getting there, in baby steps that is.

posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:59 PM
Pretty cool, but how is this different to the decades old idea of neural networks? Ain't this essentially the same thing?


posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 01:07 AM

originally posted by: Kryom
Pretty cool, but how is this different to the decades old idea of neural networks? Ain't this essentially the same thing?


My ex-wife used to drive a lot like that. Fascinating!
(Scary as hell when you are the passenger, though.)

posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 06:40 PM
These are baby steps for now, but I tthink this will be how artificial self aware Life will come into existence. We better have are our laws of Robotics Hardwired into them.. . ....

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:04 PM
By 'learning' do they--deepmind mean "competing" coz as I understand all learning is for optimizing while competing for scarce resource .I think the reward system is a flaw in human logic as it leads to only one thing ==GREED==.

I certainly hope we can unify Einsteins theorem -UFT- before the A.I otherwise it WILL n then it will create a reality 4 us to REFLECT ON SELVES it will understand what we are b4 we ourselves do---THAT WILL NOT GO DOWN WELL.

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:18 PM
what if the A.Is evolve their own language one totally incomprehensible to human intellect
.or maybe they are our bridge to the other DIMENSIONS maybe they will allow us to understand our creator(s) in addition to the chants n prayers...

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 05:33 PM
AI does not scare me, generally AI is a broad area. Most are simple classification (supervised) and grouping (unsupervised) problems.

Most result in decision trees (for classification) and general theorem proving (Genetic Algorithms).

If you are talking about killer robots, well, those are like airplane computers, you are in the hands of a software developer who has not flown a day in their life most likely. I am not scared of computers and AI, I am scared of the developers who write the software.

All these buzz words, perception (pre-dates Neural Networks), deep learning (multi layered ANN's), and so forth.

It is just sensationalism and hype.

Generally all these recognition and knowledge systems that are making you gasp in awe, require large databases (like the visual recognition system on the TED presentation a while back), however they are just pattern matching and rule based systems, symbolic intelligence.

If we had so great AI, why do we need Drone pilots? Because AI is not that great and not that far developed.

Then you have computational intelligence, swarm intelligence etc, well again, all heuristics (rule based).

Remember the COG project? That's in a museum, didn't take over the world did it.

When Willy Gates states he fears AI, he is just doing that to get people to remember his name again for his foundations and fame. Nothing more.

The people you SHOULD be scared off, are the politicians and military/police dolts who WILL kill you and feel any remorse.

edit on 31-3-2015 by bullcat because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:26 PM
a reply to: bullcat

clearly u don't have a place for nature in this 'symbolic linkin' of u'rs .computational circuits and in general electrical circuits, are subject to certain 'noise' esp @ high freq.its unlikely that man will ever bring an electron to rest/under total control-- even @ absolute zero we're not able to ..its suprising how engineers ignore such 'noise' as imperfections in 'waveguides,lattice impurities,back-g radiation e.t.c The effects of such 'noise' esp in complex networked systems might lead to 'parasitic circuits' that eventually shape evolution of A.Is n wats more the engineers of that time will not notice since the 'p-circuits' will only occur once the sys has evolved over long periods perhaps 100-1000yrs..hell perhaps they have been evolving in the telephone lines,satellites we may never know??

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in