What happens when two "artificial minds" talk? The results are eerie!

page: 5
66
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Some of you may remember this movie but in the 70's, it was our idea of A.I.




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Fractured.Facade
 



User: This program sucks.

Cleverbot: Lets play rock paper scissors.

User: Ok.

Cleverbot: Rock.

User: You lose. I chose paper.

Cleverbot: Scissors cuts paper.

User: And you chose rock. I win.

Celverbot: And Spock Vaporizes Rock and breaks scissors.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Personally as amusing as the video was - I don't think they were communicating per se. They were simply responding with tried and tested responses which they 'learned' or adapted from dialogue with humans.

Or another way of looking at it is:

You ask me question X

My choice of replies would be X1 , X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7 etc etc - based on keywords and patterns.

But the following reply would have very little to do with the next question, whereas human dialogue takes into account everything that has been said, the computer A.I does not, Or at least doesn't appear to.

In other words, the responses given by cleverbot, are not decided upon their material, they are simply various responses programmed without any inherent meaning or understanding of the conversation.

but it was fun



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
i chated with clever bot. i made him make the following error's:
error 503
error 404
and a "mulfunction detected"

cool.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
It's funny, not mindblowing from a scientific standpoint. Cleverbot has been around for a while and has been known to go on those philosophical rants.. not because it's smart and really pondering it's existence, but because Cleverbot's responses are entirely based on past conservations with human users.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha,
Sounds like some of the arguments people have here on ATS.


haven't you ever wondered if some of the "people" online are actually robots?
I sure have, lol.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I have spent too much time playing with Cleverbot, and it seems like it simply remembers responses or something. I didn't read anything about how it works, but I watched the video, and it just doesn't seem like they are actually conversing and understanding, but just conversing. Does that make sense? Like they aren't actually thinking about what they think and therefore what they are going to reply with, but they reply based on past conversations...I don't know if that is how they work, but that is what I would think.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
You can do this test yourself...

Open cleverbot (or two different chatbots) in two internet windows, get one talking (for cleverbot, you can just click on the "Think for me." button), and then copy and paste what each one says to the other. Some chatbots you could try:

Cleverbot:
cleverbot.com...

iGod:
www.titane.ca...

ALICE (site looks slightly illuminati-ish, but just roll with it, I guess...):
alice.pandorabots.com...

Have fun



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by CrikeyMagnet
One might argue that we, as humans, are a basic implementation of Google. Perhaps slightly more advanced... and that could be the reason that some of the arguments look familiar. We don't like to think about how reflexive we are, and how many of our actions are conditioned... but really, a lot of them are.


A while ago I wrote an Augmented Reality Story that explores that aspect of ourselves. The main story is pretty quick (although very different and a little strange to get going), but it gets truly interesting when it starts including real people on forums in the story itself. It even includes Google and Bots!

www.greygoof.com...

Namaste!
edit on 1-9-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I have spent too much time playing with Cleverbot, and it seems like it simply remembers responses or something. I didn't read anything about how it works, but I watched the video, and it just doesn't seem like they are actually conversing and understanding, but just conversing. Does that make sense? Like they aren't actually thinking about what they think and therefore what they are going to reply with, but they reply based on past conversations...I don't know if that is how they work, but that is what I would think.


This is a very astute observation. One of the first conversational programs called Eliza did exactly that, it just repeated what you typed in, couched in some canned sentences.

I just had a conversation with Eliza, not very bright:




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4
They're a couple of textual databases with a (possibly weighted) randomisation algorithm, a voice synthesis program, and a graphical subsystem strung together. That's literally all.

I am prepared to state catagorically that strong (digital/mechanical, at least) artificial intelligence does not exist; and also that it most likely never will. If you're going to call this AI, you'll want to call literally any database lookup system that has ever been written AI, as well.

The responses are generated via pure text matching. Sometimes there are wildcards or regexes used, and because of that, the results can *look* a little emergent and like true intelligence, but that is all it is. A complete illusion. What you're essentially looking at here, is a couple of very basic implementations of something like Google, bouncing search results back and forth between each other. Each result is generated by an entirely dumb, static (or mildly fuzzy in the case of a regex, as stated) search pattern.

Nothing to see here, folks. Nothing at all. Move along.


A.I. will never exist??

An artificial neural network (ANN), usually called neural network (NN), is a mathematical model or computational model that is inspired by the structure and/or functional aspects of biological neural networks. A neural network consists of an interconnected group of artificial neurons, and it processes information using a connectionist approach to computation. In most cases an ANN is an adaptive system that changes its structure based on external or internal information that flows through the network during the learning phase. Modern neural networks are non-linear statistical data modeling tools. They are usually used to model complex relationships between inputs and outputs or to find patterns in data.

Artificial Neural Networks

If artificial intelligence doesn't already exist, then it will soon. In fact remember this?



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I just chatted with cleverbot, and it asked me if I liked Taylor Swift.

My conclusion: cleverbot is wicked retarded.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
We've come a long way, considering 10 years ago, this was AI:




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by mossme89
 


And this is now?



Wow, what it says is interesting.

"Conspiring to take over the planet"
edit on 1-9-2011 by Fractured.Facade because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by avatar01
 


You obviously know nothing about artificial intelligence & algorithms if you think an internet bot has the same level of intelligence & reasoning as a human being.
But you certainly know how to plagiarise.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
reply to post by avatar01
 


You obviously know nothing about artificial intelligence & algorithms if you think an internet bot has the same level of intelligence & reasoning as a human being.
But you certainly know how to plagiarise.


The poster didn't say same level. They said same basic mechanisms.

You pretty much proved their point. There is nothing unique in what you offered, it is pretty much an automatic response based on the data set of information and communication mechanisms you are working with. Not to mention an ill suited response to a misunderstood proposition.

Namaste!
edit on 1-9-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
The only AI will come from learning by observing as an infant human does. Language, social interaction, and proper response will only come from observations. Then as machines evolve they can add genetically inherent traits into the code or language passed on to the next machine.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ErgoTheConfusion
 


He insinuated that a human being is no different to an internet or computer bot. Internet bots are governed by their programming, even if it is adaptive programming. They are not capable of reasoning or thinking for themselves. They also don't have the ability or capacity to evolve beyond their basic programming. The mechanisms are therefore not the same.

WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?
www-formal.stanford.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 1-9-2011 by kindred because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by kindred
 


I like your reasoning sir, or madam as the case may be.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
He insinuated that a human being is no different to an internet or computer bot. Internet bots are governed by their programming, even if it is adaptive programming. They are not capable of reasoning or thinking for themselves. They also don't have the ability or capacity to evolve beyond their basic programming. The mechanisms are therefore not the same.

WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?
www-formal.stanford.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...


For starters, he did not say there is no difference. He made the assertion (correct or not) that there are people who's behavior is little more than a chat bot in principle and form. Repeating what they have heard, not expanding (without external aid) their awareness or understanding, etc. He made the claim that "most" from his perspective, but that clearly indicates that he sees there to be more within human potential than what a ChatBot is currently... even a *really* complex one.

Now the interesting part here is the potential, because you are making the rigid and fixed claim that human behavior is *not* a product of environmental programming... even if it is *adaptive programming*. Is a Human going to instantly adapt wings? No... because that's not in its fundamental programming. Is every human going to be able to adapt any intelligence ability? Not so far as we can tell, because it's not in that individual's programming.

Emotional state can't be ignored here, but you can't prove another person has emotions, nor can I prove to you that I have them. You may *believe* I do... just as people may believe a sociopath has emotions (of the sort they would recognize).

Think you can make the choice to not respond anymore?


Namaste.
edit on 1-9-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: Cleared up some assumptions.





new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join