It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Is this robot self-aware???

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   
In what could be a breathtaking development for robotics -- and a new challenge for philosophy -- researchers have announced the development of a robot that can recognize itself in a mirror.... and that can distinguish itself from other identical robots in a mirror.

Considering that the 'mirror test' is used in biology to detect the signs of sentience in animals, this new robot may be, arguably, the first self-aware machine in history:
dsc.discovery.com...

"A new robot can recognize the difference between a mirror image of itself and another robot that looks just like it.
"This so-called mirror image cognition is based on artificial nerve cell groups built into the robot's computer brain that give it the ability to recognize itself and acknowledge others.
"The ground-breaking technology could eventually lead to robots able to express emotions."




posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
wow...just wow. Its almost scary how far technology is going. Why can't CNN spend 20 minutes of a day talking about something like this?
Simply AMAZING



posted on Dec, 31 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   
This dsc.discovery.com...


"In humans, consciousness is basically a state in which the behavior of the self and another is understood," said Takeno.


plus this:
www.trnmag.com...

The skin could eventually be used to make domestic robots more appropriately sensitive of their surroundings, said Someya. "Robots working at home definitely require touch sensitivity," said Someya. This has proven difficult, he said. "It is not trivial matter to give a robot the ability to pick up an egg."


plus this:
www.trnmag.com...

"It's one of the best [robotic hands] that I've seen," said Reid Simmons, a senior research scientist at the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. "It's really quite an amazing piece of work. It's got very good dexterity. It's amazing how compact it all is."


plus this:
news.bbc.co.uk...

She has flexible silicone for skin rather than hard plastic, and a number of sensors and motors to allow her to turn and react in a human-like manner.


equals ???



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 01:52 AM
link   
i feel so bad for those robots though, what happen when they expires, and found out they don't have a soul. I know when I thought of death when I was younger, it brought life to a halt for a few years, I just pondered about souls, living, dying. It's not going to be different for them, except they really don't have a soul like I do, unless if we give them one..the force!! lol



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   
This is not artificial intelligence. The robot still relies on programming to idenify itself in the mirror. Dogs can learn to recognize themselves in a mirror over time and conditioning.



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheHorseChestnut
This is not artificial intelligence. The robot still relies on programming to idenify itself in the mirror. Dogs can learn to recognize themselves in a mirror over time and conditioning.


My cat can recognise anything in a mirror as a reflection of the real thing.
He usually sits on the back of a sofa looking through the window but uses the reflection in the window to see what is happening behind him, and he recognises not only the person but also the direction where that person is going, specially if that is the direction of the kitchen.


The fact that the robot can recognise itself 70% of the time shows a big fault, the fact that it can not see the reflection of itself in one second as the continuation of the reflection of the previous second, meaning that it does not have the sense of being, only the sense of presence in an instant in time. (I hope I made myself clear, I have some difficulty in speaking in English)



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   
How does this equal self awareness at all? All it is doing is its function which it is designed to do, it doesnt think or act on its own impulses... I could set my webcam up to recognize me sitting in front of it, does that mean my camera knows me?

True AI is impossible and sci-fi rubbish.



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by HiddenReality
How does this equal self awareness at all? All it is doing is its function which it is designed to do, it doesnt think or act on its own impulses... I could set my webcam up to recognize me sitting in front of it, does that mean my camera knows me?

True AI is impossible and sci-fi rubbish.


You should never say that something we can defined is impossible.

One of the problems of AI is the definition of intelligence, and that has been changing as the researches show different results.

Also, you do not know if any one of us here in ATS are real humans os just some AI program,



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by HiddenReality
True AI is impossible and sci-fi rubbish.


Just as we all know that Faster then Sound flight is impossible, or heavier then air flight, or faster then horse/ship communication.
This type of thinking is actually rather dangerous as when the day comes WHEN true AI emerges people like you will still claim it's an inanimate object and proceed to treat it as such. Can you see the danger in that? An Aware Slave race that doesn't even get recognition as a sentient species(organic or otherwise) is a potential threat. Only fix is to expand the definition of what it means to be a Sentient Species. It ain't unique to Humons and it's pure arrogance and faith(rather then Logic and Science) that makes people state unequivically that it is.

[edit on 1-1-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Hey

When is something sentient? This is getting dangerously close to philosophy, and frankly, I don't look good in a toga!

Wasn't it either Arthur C Clarke or Isaac Asimov that wrote something like 'If it can get through a big conversation with you and you can't tell it's not sentient, then it's sentient?' Probably as good a definition as any other. Maybe you'll end up with a new 'abolitionist' movement, just like in the 19th century with slavery.

At the end of the day, our minds and conciousness somehow results from a big tangle of billions of cells that can depolarize and make other connecting cells do the same. The physiology of that is pretty clear but how that means we can come up with a concept of 'self' is beyond comprehension. It would be a bit ironic if we could create something sentient without actually knowing what makes *us* human.

If someone else can do the same thing by silicone semiconductor rather than a sodium channels then I for one would recognize them as being of equal worth. Just hope they'd do the same for me!

Have a good 2006.

TD



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000

Just as we all know that Faster then Sound flight is impossible, or heavier then air flight, or faster then horse/ship communication.
This type of thinking is actually rather dangerous as when the day comes WHEN true AI emerges people like you will still claim it's an inanimate object and proceed to treat it as such. Can you see the danger in that? An Aware Slave race that doesn't even get recognition as a sentient species(organic or otherwise) is a potential threat. Only fix is to expand the definition of what it means to be a Sentient Species. It ain't unique to Humons and it's pure arrogance and faith(rather then Logic and Science) that makes people state unequivically that it is.

[by sardion2000]


This thinking is rather pointless, because like i said true AI is impossible, its not like flying or ships, it is just impossible to create AI, unless you are god himself how are you going to give metal and sand life?

Its not arrogance, its called being sane, and not thinking like a 10 year old. Sorry to burst your bubble but youve been watching too much TV.



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   
[by sardion2000]

This thinking is rather pointless, because like i said true AI is impossible, its not like flying or ships, it is just impossible to create AI, unless you are god himself how are you going to give metal and sand life?

Its not arrogance, its called being sane, and not thinking like a 10 year old. Sorry to burst your bubble but youve been watching too much TV.

Hello

Not sure I agree completely with that statement. What's the brain other than a bunch of complex off/on circuits in a big complex network? Not saying I understand it, but we seem to muddle along somehow. *Theoretically*, replicate this and you've got a brain.

Regards and have a good 2006

TD



posted on Jan, 1 2006 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyblueff0
i feel so bad for those robots though, what happen when they expires, and found out they don't have a soul. I know when I thought of death when I was younger, it brought life to a halt for a few years, I just pondered about souls, living, dying. It's not going to be different for them, except they really don't have a soul like I do, unless if we give them one..the force!! lol


And your sure humans have souls? Your sure "souls" even exist?



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 12:09 PM
link   


This thinking is rather pointless, because like i said true AI is impossible, its not like flying or ships, it is just impossible to create AI, unless you are god himself how are you going to give metal and sand life?


It seems like you're putting limits on technology before you even give it a chance. There were plenty of questions that only god could answer throughout history. Many of them have been answered by man. Besides, I don't think it's been said anywhere that god was the only thing that could create sentient life.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by HiddenReality


True AI is impossible and sci-fi rubbish.


You should never say that something we can defined is impossible.



I have to agree with ArMap people that claim things are impossible concering technology are almost always proven wrong with enough time.

People use to say heavier then air flight was impossible, People said going to the moon was impossible. People said laser weapons where impossible and sci-fi-rubbish. Over and over people that say things are impossible have been proven wrong.

Nobody today can hope to know all the tech we will have in say 500 years no more so then people in 1506 could imagine what we had today.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by HiddenReality
How does this equal self awareness at all? All it is doing is its function which it is designed to do, it doesnt think or act on its own impulses... I could set my webcam up to recognize me sitting in front of it, does that mean my camera knows me?

True AI is impossible and sci-fi rubbish.


Well, you are right that it is not true AI, as the robot is just programmed to recognize itself. But you are wrong that AI could not be programmed in a computer. AI is just a pattern matching algorithm with a feedback that tries to match the best possible experience in order to reach the goal at hand.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt

Originally posted by skyblueff0
i feel so bad for those robots though, what happen when they expires, and found out they don't have a soul. I know when I thought of death when I was younger, it brought life to a halt for a few years, I just pondered about souls, living, dying. It's not going to be different for them, except they really don't have a soul like I do, unless if we give them one..the force!! lol


And your sure humans have souls? Your sure "souls" even exist?


I'll take my chances....



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Lets just talk applicable applications (YAY REDUNDANCY!) for this type of programming of robots.

Could this somehow help the mars rovers operate better? What exactly will any of this technology help improve the current robotics we have today?



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Lets just talk applicable applications (YAY REDUNDANCY!) for this type of programming of robots.

Could this somehow help the mars rovers operate better? What exactly will any of this technology help improve the current robotics we have today?


I think this may have been on old edition of Horizon, or something along those lines, but some scientists got a 'Mars Rover' equivalent, operated remotely, out in the desert somewhere (or it may have been Antartica), looking for signs on life, and they didn't find anything!

Just like in war, there's no substitute for 'Boots on the Ground' in my opinion!

Cheers

TD



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   


Its not arrogance, its called being sane, and not thinking like a 10 year old. Sorry to burst your bubble but youve been watching too much TV.


And how does a couple of sentances burst my bubble? Did you do your PhD on AI and realized it's impossible or are you only thinking in the biblical sense? I'm thinking it's the latter.

Also it IS arrogance to assume that Humans are the only species capable of sentience and it's also arrogance in your beliefs that only god can create a sentient species.



because like i said true AI is impossible, its not like flying or ships, it is just impossible to create AI, unless you are god himself how are you going to give metal and sand life?


How do you know? Because your pastor/bible said so? I missed the part in the bible where it said that we cannot create life. Anyway the Bible is more wrong then right and doesn't even belong in this discussion IMO.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by sardion2000]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join