Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Future Is Coming P4: Artificial Intelligence

page: 4
69
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
It's not called ACE, it's called DAVID.

Unless I was played as well ofcourse.


What does "DAVID" stand for?

From what I understand there are multiple Artificial Conscious Entities. It is quite possible that if that is the case that each would have their own unique designation/name.




posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
I don't understand all the appeal to this trans-humanism stuff. Uploading yourself into computer network might sound fun for some, but to me I think it sounds boring. At that level we'd be able to compute so fast that we'd actually see that "You've reached the end of the internet" page. And, I don't see many Dell desktops sitting in hammocks, drinking a pina colada and enjoying a cool breeze. How would all that work? Would we be too above ourselves to enjoy the smell of flowers or the taste of something sweet? If I'm ever in a future where the thing to do is to upload your soul into some fiber optics I'll be joining the group of outcasts and preferably burning the abomination, burning it with fire! A Butlerian Jihad if you will. ^_^ I already have enough to experience with this shell alone.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by DJM8507
 


I ponder if you've ever played Portal. We may want to take this into PM. Not sure if it is on topic.

In essence, would you imagine the government building something like this?



-mods, if this is advertising or something, just tell me and I'll delete it cause something tells me it kind of is.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by cerberus00
 


the point of transhumanism is that we have escaped the evolutionary ladder m by being able to upload our consciousness to a machine we can therefore live forever through the use of artificial / synthetic machines ( cyborg) bodies

that would allow the human race to travel to every system in the known universe , making the human race a formidable race one which could become all knowing !

which kinda makes me think what if we are the first advanced race and we will be the UFO's travelling to other less developd systems !



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DJM8507
 


...
purposefully keep civilian society "back in time" 50+ years in order to ensure the USA has an edge over our enemies, foreign and domestic.



Despite that at first sight it looks quite possible I see a big problem about this:

How do evolve that technology and knowledge further if you keep the people that would potentially be able to contribute out of it?

Say you have already developed a quantum computer... if you keep that only for a small team of people, say 1000, you will never be able to improve that technology at a rate that main stream would in a matter of a some months. And I'm thinking from both a quantitative and qualitative point of view. Even if that 1000 people team would be the best in their fields they'd still miss the ideas and experience of some other people from different fields whos ideas might help you make the next jump to further develop that technology. Even the exposure to market might actually be an enormous help and that would be completely impossible in such a secret environment. There are also some other huge problems like how can you really control a team of 1000 people that are 50 years more advanced than mainstream.

A couple of days ago I run on a video on the web page of a company, Franz Inc. that develops a quite special and old computer language, LISP, used for AI among other things.

Intelligent Decision Automation

The thing is that the technology demonstrated in that video is basically the core foundation of the Cyc project. This technology, semantic web and applications, would more likely really hit mainstream in the next 1-3 years with HTML5.

You could perhaps say that Cyc Corp was 26-30 years more advanced that the so called mainstream as they were actually working already with this particular technology 26 years ago but really all the advances that they might have achieved will look insignificant in comparison with all that is going to be developed in the next 5 years by the community as a whole. On the other hand there have been scientific papers about this before that project started. I myself learned about the project back in 95. So it wasn't actually so much of a secret project as it was a research line being explored.

If that is what the 15 or 50 years of further development means, sure that is quite possible and I totally agree is true, if instead we are talking about people being able to teletransport themselves or working with intelligent wearable quantum computers then I think that is Sci-fi.







[edit on 26-8-2010 by Torbu]

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Torbu]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Torbu
 


You don't keep people who could contribute out of it. You give them what they need and want in exchange for silence and secrecy. It's a lot to give up, yes. Most scientists want to be known for what they do. To be erased from history in exchange for full funding and resources for your projects is really one hell of a deal. But really it comes down to this. Do you give up your existence in exchange for unlimited resources, or do you keep yourself in history but end up like Tesla: discredited, abused, death in poverty, and borderline associated with pseudoscience, doomed to never get known for another 50 years, and doomed to never get full recognition from anybody. It's really a hell of a choice.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tearman
For anyone interested in machine intelligence, especially about its potential friendliness (or unfriendliness), I very highly recommend reading this: singinst.org...

It is a long read, but raises some extremely interesting points.
Sorry to post this again, but I hadn't made it clear why I had posted this link in the first place (and I don't seem to be able to edit my older post). The section titled "Beyond anthropomorphism" argues very strongly that machine intelligence, whether designed or evolved, will not come to possess any evolved human traits, in contrast to some of the arguments made in this thread. If you can't find the time to read any other part of this document (it is very long), give "Beyond anthropomorphism" a look through. If you are interested in the subject, you'll find it fun to read, perhaps enlightening.

One argument is that those evolved traits, which exist in humans, came to be as the consequence of a very specific (and vast) set of selection pressures which existed in our ancestral environment. We wouldn't want to or be able to duplicate those selection pressures in an artificial evolutionary environment.

This link takes you straight to the section "Beyond anthropomorphism" -- singinst.org...

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Tearman]

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Tearman]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
I really wasn't to interested in this thread at first as this is old technology, somewhere in some lab they already have this and tech thats 50 years ahead of the public. ALTHOUGH, the video with the monkey displaying psychic abillities was astounding to see ALTHOUGH I've done telekinesis before it's still interesting nonetheless to see a 2nd density being do it.

S&F!



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


My point was that you don't know who can contribute to it if you keep it secret.

Your approach would work for researching a simple item... say a cryptographic algorithm or one simple application of a quantum computer...

But what I think is completely impossible is to develop an i7 in the 1960. Even if you'd have the blueprints and all the technological process described it'd be an impossible task as you'd anyway need develop a lots of tools and a lot of technologies that would on which you'd depend to build the final product. Next problem is that sometimes it's impossible to be sure which development direction is the correct one and if you really want to speed up research you need to follow several approaches in parallel, each of them with their sub-branches and at a given point one of them would start to pay off.

About computing and AI for example... Neural networks as we know them today is a technology that started back in 48 almost simultaneously with modern computers. It was considered a more or less interesting field for some 20 years then it was dropped as it was shown that they can't solve certain sorts of problems. Then some new applications were found possible and the research was restarted. De Garis, for example, did some research for some years around 1995-2001 getting some great funding from the government but then in 2001 they quit supporting him... Now he is being supported by China. If he would achieve some spectacular results I'm sure he will get back into US. So this kind of demonstrates that the US government doesn't really follow all possible development lines.

Another more generic example: while at university a college and I built one of the first Beowulf clusters, a 36 computers cluster, which at that time was like a great achievement and like really high tech thing it was anyway the first cluster built at my university which despite that is not something like MIT was somewhere around the position 20 in the American University Ranking on CS. Long story short after developing a couple of optimized applications for the machine which meant quite a lot of work, our teacher end up telling us that 20 years before his generation used to work on some mainframes that had a compiler that automatically used to generate parallel optimized binary code. Some years after that parallel computing kind of quit being the coolest thing in the world and gave up being a buzz word. Last year cloud computing "emerged".

The problem here is that for you to have cloud computing back in 1950, among other things you'd need to have virtualization technology and in order to have virtualization technology you'd need to imagine that you'd have huge amounts of resources that would go unused, etc, etc.

So the problem is that evolving some technology is not a linear process and not a one-man process. (Even if the one-man is really a group of 100 men).

I'm nevertheless not saying that secret research doesn't exist. Sure it does but I'm quite sure that it is not something that significantly advanced in comparison to today's technology.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Torbu
 


Well you are kind of judging based on different time periods. Every generation thinks differently. And the last 10-20 years are especially true to that.

And then of course is the fact that they'd only need the idea. The thought process behind it. After that the think tanks take it from there on.

No the US does not follow along all pathways. This is quite obvious. This is why China is gaining up on us. This is why there is an increasingly larger hatred of the government. The old order is washing away and the new order must rise. It will come. Weather through violence or peaceful exchange of the crown is our choice and theirs.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 




And then of course is the fact that they'd only need the idea. The thought process behind it. After that the think tanks take it from there on.


Let me disagree with that, George Boole (1815–1864) or Gottlob Frege (1848-1925) never saw their models materialized. And a model is quite a lot more than an idea. Nor did Pascal (1623-1662) build the first computer as Turing didn't really see a computer either.

From the wikipedia:


Technology is the usage and knowledge of tools, techniques, crafts, systems or methods of organization.


What I'm really trying to say here is that there is a very intimate relationship between the idea, the model and the tools that really make possible a given technology. That relationship is what makes to me, an alternate science/technology, tens of years more advanced than current one, impossible. I think that the precise moment you are bringing a new technology into the mainstream you are exponentially improving it as a simple result of the feedback you'd get. This effect would probably render your 50 years of prior development nearly useless in a matter of months.

To continue with the previous example, imagine some government or group of people already built a quantum computer. That computer is being used decrypt third party's messages and to achieve an unbreakable security level on the communications of the party that developed the system. Now the computer is a very simple one in comparison with what could be built using the principles that it is based on. Now some years after this group is using this computer the quantic computers hit the mainstream and instead of purpose specific quantic computers, multipurpose ones are built.

Not only these would render the secretly developed one useless, but they would probably render all the research done by that specific team useless.

On the other hand it'd be much simpler to just stay top-tech all the time. You'd make sure that if mainstream processor is performing 10 FLOPS you are at 100.000 or 1.000.000 FLOPS. You can achieve this easily: you tell Intel: "hey you are giving me the 16 core CPU, then you wait 6 month to release it to the public, I'm going to buy you 100k units" or "Hey, I'm first in queue for the first X units of that CPU" where X is a really big number. At that point even if Intel would feel like selling those new CPUs to someone else they won't be able to as they won't be able to produce enough.


Could you please comment further on the relationship of NWO with the technology advances?

Greetings



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
UPDATE:
Science illustrated september edition-

The Brain Goes Digital



The first ever 3-D human brain "atlas" is on the horizon. Last year, neuroanatomist jacopo annese and his team at UofC San Diego's Brain Observatory slice a human brain into 2401 ultrathin slivers. Now they're mounting the slices onto glass slides and staining them to reveal the organs neurons and connective fibers, after which they will digitally scan the slides and reassemble them intoa zoomable 3-D model that will illustrate the anatomy of the entire region at a cellular level. In time they will continue to add examples of healthy and diseased brains, which should help physicians spot the differences between them.


This approach belongs with the MRI and EEG section. This is called invasive or destructive scanning, typically because it is done on dead matter, or else it would kill the organism to complete the scan. This will of course give us a better idea of the architecture of the brain, however we wont really be modeling AI after this, as the deadness of the brain would skew the model.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by highlyoriginal
 


And what exactly would we be a simulation of, in a non-religious sense? Im having trouble coming up with even an unreasonable explanation?

I would argue we are not a simulation (without going into physics and the holographic universe theory). I believe we are the real deal.

Thanks for the input though and im glad you enjoyed the thread!



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


Well couldnt we follow your logic and say all 20th century tech was really an improvement on previous tech? The car being an update of the wagon. Gun being updates of bows. The list goes on and on, so i would have to disagree. new technologies are always being invented. here read this
Modern inventions of the 21st century
Bio-implants
fuel cells
portable and digital music players
a phone implanted in a tooth
optical camoflauge
pollution eating cement
flower speakers
Genome Chip
motion detection in game controllers
nanomaterials entering the marketplace
Autonomous Automobiles
emotive - "telepathic" came controller
6th sense - HUD interactive virtual reality display

theres plenty of innovation coming.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Torbu
 


Well you are talking about things centuries away. And due to the exponential nature of technology, the time between idea and physical reality gets shorter and shorter and becomes only limited by laziness. See my banner to the left? That's a story that's been in my head for years now. Only I'm too lazy to bring it to full realization. Takes time. I have great ideas out there and I intend to bring them to reality. It will take time though.

I firmly believe that the government has technology well beyond anything one could think about. But right now I think these so-called powers that be are trying to release control of America while trying to move somewhere else. As I said elsewhere, many nations are immune to these powers, having been infected previously with them. Many are too genetically incompatible to ever have them. America has been their host since I would say 1950s. I say the infection began with the Federal Reserve, but that it did not activate until after WW2. I don't think the Federal reserve was the infection. I think it merely allowed it to come in. Where technology comes into this is power. They invested a lot for keeping America at the top. But you can never keep one nation too powerful or you risk losing control and having to compete with it. I view them as desiring America to fall but unable to get it to fall. As such they cannot fully transition to a new host government or nation. America is an anomaly. And she has a fever now. She is growing immune. They are worried that this nation has grown so strong that after they transition it will still be powerful and they will be unable to keep at the top. In fact I would say Obama is not under their control. Obama is the direct result of their relinquished control. They hoped Obama would mess up, crash the nation, and they could take a new host. But America has not. America has gone AWOL to their plan. And she has all that technology they gave her. Now they are scared. How can they take a host government when their technological supremacy is in the hands of a host government they no longer fully control and loose more and more control every day.

That's where technology comes into the effect. They offer the host technology in exchange for control. Your soul in exchange for king of the world. But now we're taking our soul back and keeping the give from those powers. That means they have to either accept the fact that they are no longer at the top, or like a species in a new environment unwilling to adapt, they will go extinct. They've only been around since the middle ages. Nobody lasts forever. Every nation, even invisible ones, even viral ones, has to go out and get replaced eventually.

reply to post by VonDoomen
 


And if you created each cell in a program to do the work of its RL counter part, would you have a digital human brain working like a human?

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Faiol
 


Thanks for the input, you raised some good points. I dont agree with you on everything but i'll try and explain myself as best as i can.


1 - yes, we will evolve our tech to a point where we will die and they will rise, thats a fact, why do we need bodies anyway? we wont exist in a distant future, thats the evolution, there will be only virtual worlds and virtual intelligence


I agree that we will keep improving our bodies. I also believe we will merge with this technology so that we have little to no distinction. However, you are wrong on the point that we wont exist. or there will only be virtual worlds. A virtual world has to be physically stored on some kind of computing medium. We will have the real world and virtual worlds.



2 - we may already be only virtual in the sense to only exist in this "world" or dimension - there is no way to prove that we are real or that we are "solid"

Thanks for bringing this up. Obviously, we cant prove or disprove this. But you have the main idea, what is "real" exactly? I personally believe this reality is VERY similiar to a simulation. It is a real life simulation of what would happen if a universe with our laws popped into existance.



3 - in a close future, there wont be games, there will be lives that you can play, and that will be just amazing if you stop to think ...

there will still be games. i think these will be the main areas of life in the future- art, music, experiencing. We will have VERY realistic games and eventualy we will have full body immersion virtual reality. this will be accomplished by putting neurobots into our brain, and have them nestled between our neurons. They will help compute and exchange information, but this new tech will allow us something very powerful and new. To hack the signal, and replace it with a simulation. It will be very akin to the matrix movie.


one thing I really liked about your post was the important of virtual reality and simulation. what happens when we all have a virtual world of our own to do what we wish?



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   

And if you created each cell in a program to do the work of its RL counter part, would you have a digital human brain working like a human?


I take it, this is about the update i added, about slicing the human brain?

To be honest, we don't know.
First, for the spiritual people, what if theres a part of our humanity that isnt physical? what if the "soul" is detachable, or communicates with the brain through quantum entanglement? If thats the case, then i would reason that theres a part of humanity that we cannot codify. In that case, we will have a damn good simulation, but it will never be 100% human. what is human anyways? theres not 1 set definition. humans can vary by many degrees, from person to person.

another thing we need to understand is the distributedness of the brain. The location of any one single neuron is NOT important. whats really important is the algorithms and patterns it uses. Its kind of akin to the quote from terence mckenna

"it doesnt matter what some scientist in some lab knows. Its all about what YOU know. You cant just say "i dont understand it, but somewhere, someone else does so i dont need to worry about". the only valuable understanding of the universe is the understanding you make for yourself. Its you, you have to live with, and you, you have to die with. Its as they say, the last dance we dance, we dance alone.

However, by dissecting the brain and decoding it, we will get much valuable information that will help us design this system.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by 4stral4pprentice
 


If they already have this tech, then why hasnt skynet taken over alrdy?


But yes, Im sure the government has some pretty sweet AI system, but i doubt they have anything close to like what we saw in I Robot.

secondly, Video of your telekenesis or it didnt happen! You cant just come in here, claim that, and think people will believe you. If true telekenesis was real, im sure i would have seen it on youtube already.

[edit on 8/26/2010 by VonDoomen]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


Quantum entanglement? Nope. If there is a soul it is not physical nor measurable on any scale. If we did do like I said and had each cell from the scan be replicated with a program doing the function of the cell, I feel the thing would have a soul by the mercy of God. But that's religious. Is it related? No idea.

Indeed the patterns and make up of the neurons in whole make the person. After all, Einstein had parts of his brain missing, allowing more direct neuron conversation, without those pesky wrinkles getting in the way. I'd imagine if we were to design the perfect brain, it would not have wrinkles, but rather holes. And the neurons would be in perfect octagonal or Hexagonal placement. With "neuron superhighways" in a gird formation between different sections.

All that said it would be interesting. To get a human perspective from a human without a body. From a 100% virtual perspective. I once had a dream where I had not input. No body. Pretty intense. It's a very odd feeling, to have no input. To have only your own thoughts. It was an experience I will never forget. After that a light appeared and some voice said "I am that I am, you are who you are, we all are who we all are". Then I woke up so shocked that I was literally a foot or so above my bed. All my muscles convulsed in fear. Was it God? An angel? Don't really know. But it did affect me religiously.

The thing is. if I was afraid because I am used to my mortal body, what would a soul... A mind... A human brain feel if it never had a body. How shocked would it be if it suddenly received one?



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
What if AI becomes so smart that they come to the conclusion that Humans are too dangerous for themselves and the planet and thus takes action to correct it, wouldn't that be ironic...





new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join