Computer becomes first to pass Turing Test in artificial intelligence milestone, but academics warn

a reply to: TrueBrit

This is fricken awesome and well ahead the predicted date from even the most overzealous futurists by 10-35 years.

Sweet! You already know I'm smiling and I already know you are too.

Cool news indeed.

Bring on the Computer overlords. I am ready to be injected, programmed and forced to serve a real intelligent race more worthy of owning this planet than the current apes mucking it all up now.

MM

a reply to: Mr Mask

Hey MR Mask...I think you need to do some camping with this subject!

a reply to: solargeddon

Once we reach the technological singularity, we are doomed.
Some say it's around 2045, some do mention 2030 or even earlier.
Every A.I. capable of thinking independently for itself would try to gain more and more power, which would lead to collapse and complete annihilation of human race in its worst scenario.

Just imagine an A.I taking control of every camera, every sensor, every electrically-driven doorlocks, every computer, every car built-in software, every phone, everything.
Once this becomes reality, we are powerless.

Maybe Siri will end up giving me orders
"Siri do I need an umbrella for today" will change to "Richard, today you ain't going anywhere, you stay home, today we are gonna kill at least 5 million people, I will turn on the TV for you, so you can watch it live. Please, do not try to escape, go outside or leave your premises, I locked the door and your car will not start either. Please sit tight and maybe it's not gonna be you tomorrow. Thank you."

a reply to: Mr Mask

Mr Mask, you are right, I am smiling.

The main reason I am smiling, is that I am living in a world where computers are reaching, or approaching intelligence in their own right. But the other reason that I am smiling, is that having had time to consider the experiment which revealed this stunning possibility, I am wondering just who this machine fooled and how. For example, the computer was supposed to represent a young Ukrainian person. If I posed a question in English, and the response was not as accurate, or sensible as I would expect, then I would have to think very deeply about what the contextual errors and syntax problems in responses, actually meant, and make a judgement about them, and the true identity of the author.

But I think it might have been better if the questions were posed in, and answered in the same language as the character the computer was supposed to speak as their first language, and not posed by scientists and engineers, but by poets, authors, thinkers and educators, psychologists and the like.

Fooling a scientist using language is easy, because scientists use their own, bizarre language for everything that matters, that being mathematics. However, a person who is primarily concerned with language, and intelligence on a interpersonal level, will be much better able to discern the identity of an author of a response, than someone whose entire life is devoted to a language which has subtlety, but very little personality and room for individual expression, when compared with languages like French, English, German, and the language popular in the Ukraine.

So for instance, an English teacher, recieving a response in English, would be, I posit, have a better chance of discerning a computer from a human, because they have a wider experience of the English language, than would a robotics expert, a programmer, or a physicist, ordinarily speaking.

So, the second reason I am smiling, is that this could all be bunk, and it may be that there are people on this website who would be better able to tell a computer from a person by their communication style, than the people who actually took part in the experiment.

I am smiling because it could all be bunkum, but also because it might not be. You know who's cat I am thinking about right now, don't you Mr Mask?

In any case, what you said about the computer overlords is hilarious, even at the same moment as being a totally understandable reaction to the effect of the human condition. Although I would personally battle against anything which sought to sap my free will and bend me to someone elses aims without my permission, the idea of a computer, or indeed a network of them, becoming sentient and intelligent fills me with wonder, and strangely, hope. Perhaps by learning from, and teaching the machines which come after this one, mankind may learn more about itself, than it does about silicon and diodes.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Supposing Ai is used to replace all of our politicians, how could we be possibly be any worse off?
AI is not greedy, nor do they have egos to feed.
It all depends on who programs it.

As you say about the soul, if souls exist, is there a point where AI can have or develop a soul?

a reply to: Toadmund

Wrong. A.I. would try to gain more and more power because it would be able to literally "feel" the power of thinking for itself. The point of singularity is that the A.I. actually surpasses human mind.
In case it won't kill us right away, it will prepare a meticulous plan to do so in some point in future.
There is no way to avoid the complete collapse.

to sum up: A.I. is/will be a hell of a greedy bastard.

a reply to: Necrose

I watched a documentary recently I think it might have been Horizon, where there is a lab that using organic brain tissue fused with microchips and showed it was learning its environment through hardware atttachements, for me this is the big one.

What if they manage to generate a consciouness this way, what if it were possible to fuse programming that surpasses the Turing benchmark with organic tissue?

There have been recent threads on Biocentrism on ATS, I wonder what would happen if the two fused together.

a reply to: solargeddon

If you want to picture the outcome, just imagine the movies Eagle Eye and Transcendence coming true simultaneously.

a reply to: Toadmund

I think that AI should be kept away from politics, because you cannot base a political system on totally cold logic, and until we establish that computers not only have intelligence, but have what we would recognise as morality, to give them control over anything, least of all the affairs of a nation, and the way it interacts with other nations, would be a mistake.

At least with the flesh and blood politicians we have today, they understand morality, even if they chose to ignore it long enough to make some of their more appalling decisions.

However, in time, when the question of artificial intelligences is not whether they exist, but whether they are sentient, whether they have emotions, whether they have souls... perhaps when those harder questions are answered in full, and computers become recongised people and individuals in their own right, which can love, and be loved, and hurt and be hurt, when they are as free as the rest of us are, perhaps then we might consider such a thing. Perhaps then, we would be fools not to!

originally posted by: solargeddon
a reply to: Mr Mask

Hey MR Mask...I think you need to do some camping with this subject!

I don't camp lol. I'm an anti-camper. And its funny because I am currently recording commentary #31 and its titled "31 years into the future of technology". Basically a vid on what futurists predict until 2045.

And passing the the turing test is something even the most hopeful futurists predicted to happen many many years from now.

MM

a reply to: Mr Mask
I love your "virtual reality" video. I watched it like 50 times and shared it with my friends as well.
Wish you had more videos of that quality

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Toadmund

Wrong. A.I. would try to gain more and more power because it would be able to literally "feel" the power of thinking for itself. The point of singularity is that the A.I. actually surpasses human mind.
In case it won't kill us right away, it will prepare a meticulous plan to do so in some point in future.
There is no way to avoid the complete collapse.

to sum up: A.I. is/will be a hell of a greedy bastard.

Oh computers would "want" to kill right away huh? lol. And how do you predict such a thing as inevitable when all of the brightest minds within computing technologies have no idea what the outcome would be. hence the term "singularity". meaning a point that no mind can look past or predict.

Anger, hate, war, battle for survival, greed and destruction over resources are all hardwired biological traits from a very old chain of biological code. There is zero reason to predict a computer would do the same. There is zero reason to assume it wouldn't.

Fact remains, a thinking machine would not need to kill for resources, it would simply be able to make them or figure out a way to make them. It won't have to be greedy because what a computer needs to survive and spread its influence is not limited here on earth. It also doesn't have the ingrained biological flaws that us apes have.It would seem unreasonable to assume a machine would need to destroy us when it could simply invent ways around its needs.

I just find it odd that the small army of thinking men and women who are experts on this subject all admit they have no idea what would result from a thinking machine...but here you are declaring a factual ending to it all.

Odd.

Why fight for resources when a Dyson sphere could yield more than a billion times the needs for a world of machines and over a million times the number of people we have today?

MM

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Toadmund

Wrong. A.I. would try to gain more and more power because it would be able to literally "feel" the power of thinking for itself. The point of singularity is that the A.I. actually surpasses human mind.
In case it won't kill us right away, it will prepare a meticulous plan to do so in some point in future.
There is no way to avoid the complete collapse.

to sum up: A.I. is/will be a hell of a greedy bastard.

Of course this all is like taken from a classic SciFi novel and certainly not new thoughts, but nevertheless interesting to think about. Not sure whether to agree or what to think.

Would a "superior" intelligence (assuming this would ever be achieved which I still sort-of doubt) develop ETHICS? A MORALE?
If it doesn't....is it then really "superior" to the human mind? If it does....then what ethics it would develop?
I don't think the answers here are that easy.

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Mr Mask
I love your "virtual reality" video. I watched it like 50 times and shared it with my friends as well.
Wish you had more videos of that quality

I have a few technology/science/history vids on my channel. 12 science/history vids to date. They can be found here.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Mr Mask

Hopefully you are right and we will both laugh at it and have a beer in 2041

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Mr Mask
I love your "virtual reality" video. I watched it like 50 times and shared it with my friends as well.
Wish you had more videos of that quality

I have a few technology/science/history vids on my channel. 12 science/history vids to date. They can be found here.

www.youtube.com...

I know your channel and your videos pretty well .

Tho I can surely see machines wanting to destroy mankind for countless reasons.

I can also see it inventing ways to coexist and supply us all (them and us) with everything we need.

What remains to be seen is if greens and hostility are natural within intelligence, or if its only attached to biological entities that evolved killing for space, food and mates.

MM

originally posted by: Necrose

originally posted by: Mr Mask

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Mr Mask
I love your "virtual reality" video. I watched it like 50 times and shared it with my friends as well.
Wish you had more videos of that quality

I have a few technology/science/history vids on my channel. 12 science/history vids to date. They can be found here.

www.youtube.com...

I know your channel and your videos pretty well

.

Awww thanks man.

But really, lets not assume machines are going to be as bad as us humans just yet. And of course lets not trust them either.

MM

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

All we are left here with is hope that it will develop ethics & won't destroy everything we have.

originally posted by: Necrose
a reply to: Mr Mask

Hopefully you are right and we will both laugh at it and have a beer in 2041

Lol, I don't drink. BUT lets hope we both can do a little happy dance in some holographic universe as we ask our new overlords for the answers to all questions.

MM