It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
If a computer program took the SAT verbal analogy test and scored as well as the average college bound human, it would raise some serious questions about the nature and measurement of intelligence.
Artificial intelligence with human-level performance on SAT verbal analogy questions has been achieved (warning: PDF) using corpus-based machine learning of relational similarity. Peter D. Turney's Interactive Information Group, Institute for Information Technology of the National Rese
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
This doesn't scare me. It really doesn't matter how far AI gets, they will always need electricity or some form of energy to run. Remove the energy, remove the AI.
And besides, we'd never program these things to do stuff without Human interaction and approval. That would be irresponsible.
Originally posted by Ansiroth
act always in harmony with life." I don't think that's too far fetched is it? Of course the golden rule would have to be very exact, as not to confuse AI and cause them to possibly enforce harmony against human will, and seek and destroy discordance although a human might be ignorant of his own discordant actions.
Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
reply to post by dooper
thats what im talking about. im talking about the nut cases out there that make viruses just for the bragging rights. its irresponsible behavior such as this that proves to me humans cant be trusted with the power to create Artificial Life. were just not responsible or smart enough to fully comprehend or understand the far reaching implications of what we are about to do.
it is for this reason alone i say we must always maintain a fail safe off switch. lest we be destroyed or become slaves to the very machines we created.
The Turing test is a proposal for a test of a machine's ability to demonstrate intelligence. It proceeds as follows: a human judge engages in a natural language conversation with one human and one machine, each of which tries to appear human. All participants are placed in isolated locations. If the judge cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test.
Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
we didnt make computers so that we could create artificial intelligences that we could have debates about philosophies of life and the universe with. although that would be pretty entertaining trying to argue with an intelligent machine. we create A.I. to better do the jobs we assign them. a smarter machine means more productivity. this benifits humanity and im all for this. its when the machines start to question its existence that things get a little fuzzy. you cant give something sentience and then say it cant use it, it just doesnt work like that.