Weak artificial intelligence is NOT strong artificial intelligence

The hype over artificial intelligence is brimming. There is so much superstitious nonsense around this topic. Commander Data of Star Trek was actually played by a human actor NOT a computer. Computers are very useful tools. But every computer program is a mindless automaton. A computer program only does exactly what it was designed and programmed to do.

Now many of you are confusing "weak AI" with "strong AI". We have made great advances with "weak AI". We have made zero, nada, absolutely nothing, in advancing "strong AI":

Weak artificial intelligence (weak AI), also known as narrow AI,[1][2][3] is artificial intelligence that is focused on one narrow task. Weak AI is defined in contrast to either strong AI (a machine with consciousness, sentience and mind) or artificial general intelligence (a machine with the ability to apply intelligence to any problem, rather than just one specific problem). All currently existing systems considered artificial intelligence of any sort are weak AI at most.

Weak AI

Strong AI

You can't prove a negative. You can't prove someone will never find evidence for the existence of God. And you can't prove that a computer with the Von Neuman architecture with a get-fetch-execute cycle will at some point achieve strong AI status. But man, what a stretch!

Bits are like an arrangement of rocks in field. No rock is more meaningful than any other. Saying strong AI will arise out of an arrangement of rocks is like saying the rocks in the field next to your house will self-assemble into a Transformer robot and tear down your house. I can't prove to you the rocks won't at some point self-assemble into a Transformer but it's very unlikely.

Computers only ever do exactly what you tell them to do. Computer science is a perfect science. Everything that happens on a computer is repeatable. What happens in a human mind never repeats and only ever happens once for all eternity. The human mind is a non-discrete part of the fabric of reality. What our mind is cannot be represented with discrete words. It is pure delusion to think a representation system is capable of behaving like non-discrete analog system.

The clockwork Universe is dead. Materialism is dead. We live in a Universe of spirit no matter how disturbing it is to accept:



You can't ignore the experimental results of quantum mechanics because Newtonian physics is easier on the brain.

I'm confused by your post.

Should I not be worried about AI, or that "The clockwork Universe is dead. Materialism is dead. We live in a Universe of spirit"?

a reply to: Wardaddy454 I'm glad I wasn't the only one that is confused. I feel that after I watch the video I will have a better grip on this.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
I'm confused by your post.
Should I not be worried about AI, or that "The clockwork Universe is dead. Materialism is dead. We live in a Universe of spirit"?

Weak AI is not strong AI. Saying we are about to have strong Ai is hype. Strong AI is very difficult to achieve because it's like forcing the square peg into the round hole. I hope this explanation helps.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Wardaddy454 I'm glad I wasn't the only one that is confused. I feel that after I watch the video I will have a better grip on this.

I watched it. Still confused.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Computer science does not equal real science. Computer science is a representation framework of semantics. Representation systems are abstractions of reality. Reality is NOT the words we use to represent it.

The human mind is subject to the laws of physics which includes quantum mechanics. With classical physics and the clockwork universe everything seems like it is a computer. We don't know how the mind works and to what depth we can abstract the mind away from the reality it is composed. Our mind is less like a computer and more like analog reality.

a reply to: dfnj2015

How many degrees do you hold in quantum mechanics, Physics, neurobiology, computer science? If the answer is none, then stop trying to explain what they are please.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I gave a s&f because you are correct. The problem is either way it can be of great detriment to us. Even weak AI can decide we're not worth having around anymore. Learning machines can become dangerous even if not sentient.

a reply to: dfnj2015

And yet, weak AI, as you put it, already controls many financial and market decisions. It increasingly controls what we see on the internet. It decides for some who they date or interact with socially. It's built into our safety systems...supply systems... control systems... Etc.

By the time there is strong AI, the world will already have changed into something far different from today. All of that is just around the corner.

Weak Vodka vs strong Vodka, enough of it will still F-- you up. Let the potatoes infuse for longer and it will get stronger....

a reply to: dfnj2015

It seems that you are trying to make a case that technology, by its very nature, is fallible because it is exactly not natural. It is a danger. The implied reasoning being that technology is the work of human brains and not coming from a level straight out of a god-like consciousness.Therefore, AI is the doom of man in that it could never hold any concept that is, shall we say, sacred toward a understanding of consciousness?

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
I'm confused by your post.
Should I not be worried about AI, or that "The clockwork Universe is dead. Materialism is dead. We live in a Universe of spirit"?

Weak AI is not strong AI. Saying we are about to have strong Ai is hype. Strong AI is very difficult to achieve because it's like forcing the square peg into the round hole. I hope this explanation helps.

You do realize most scientists agreed that at one time.... the Earth was flat, heavier than air flight was impossible and going to the Moon was impossible. We all know what happened after that. If any of these examples are a good indicator (and I think they are excellent indicators) then Super intelligent A.I. is coming and it will be here a lot sooner than you think.

Watch this video. It’s a speech from Professor Sam Harris about A.I. and the danger ahead of us. It’s terrifying yet interesting and entertaining.

a reply to: dfnj2015

The problem lies in the changing definition of intelligence.

Now we have intelligent (we call them "Smart") weapons, ever more capable of destroying people, places and things. How intelligent is that? How will the programmers include this 'intelligence' into the AI 'mindset' ?

What 'Mores' will it have if it sees fit to destroy certain cultures and religions while hiding its real intent to capture territory and resources?

The problem with AI is the richest people will determine its goals and procedures for it. They are after all, the ones funding the project. It will meet their specifications.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: dfnj2015

How many degrees do you hold in quantum mechanics, Physics, neurobiology, computer science? If the answer is none, then stop trying to explain what they are please.

You can read can't you. So can I.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: dfnj2015

It seems that you are trying to make a case that technology, by its very nature, is fallible because it is exactly not natural. It is a danger. The implied reasoning being that technology is the work of human brains and not coming from a level straight out of a god-like consciousness.Therefore, AI is the doom of man in that it could never hold any concept that is, shall we say, sacred toward a understanding of consciousness?

I'm not the one making extraordinary claims. The burden of proof is not on me to make my case. If you claim strong AI is just around the corner what is your evidence? Either you do not understand the problem of intelligence or you do not understand the limitations of computer machinery. Either way, the burden of proof is on YOU to prove your extraordinary claims.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
You do realize most scientists agreed that at one time.... the Earth was flat, heavier than air flight was impossible and going to the Moon was impossible. We all know what happened after that. If any of these examples are a good indicator (and I think they are excellent indicators) then Super intelligent A.I. is coming and it will be here a lot sooner than you think.

You have absolutely no evidence beyond weak AI examples that "Super intelligent A.I. is coming and it will be here a lot sooner than you think." What is you evidence? If you are going to make extraordinary claims you have to provide extraordinary evidence.

This is more than just if man were meant to fly BS or the flat Earth. Based on the modern definition of the word "computer" I just don't think strong AI is possible with NAND gates. I've heard claims of strong AI is just around the corner since the early 80s when I started to get involved with computers. Computer today are virtually identical to computers in the 80s in terms of hardware. Nothing has change other than the endless hype we have on TV.

Now maybe you can use genetics, DNA, and create some new brain organism in a vat with wires coming out of it. But that is NOT a computer.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

The talk was okay but it has nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about the possibility of weak AI becoming strong AI. His talk assumes strong AI is possible and just around the corner even though there is not a shred of evidence to support his claims other than his imaginations.

I might as well say strong AI coming into existence will happen at the same time with the second coming of Jesus. The assumptions and evidence to support the claims is about the same.

you are right about 98% in the op
however the simulation theory is fake news and its slowy turning science into an religion

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Alien Abduct

The talk was okay but it has nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about the possibility of weak AI becoming strong AI. His talk assumes strong AI is possible and just around the corner even though there is not a shred of evidence to support his claims other than his imaginations.

I might as well say strong AI coming into existence will happen at the same time with the second coming of Jesus. The assumptions and evidence to support the claims is about the same.

Ill make this simple we all ready have computers that can write programs. This ability will only get better as our technology advances. Eventually computers will be able to stream line there source code its all ready happening. I think the first true AIs will have the same intelligence levels as its creator. However they can run a million times faster so a researcher may spend years working on a project our AI will be able to accomplish this in week or days. Its inevitable that eventually this technology will surpass its creator. The only way this could be avoided is if we stopped trying. And that isnt going to happen the advantages to any country are just to great. If it takes 50 years 100 years or 1000 years it will happen.we all ready have computers that can beat humans in certain tasks,these abilities have all ready advanced our knowledge. We can write simulations that make the need for experimentation to disapear. For example we can simulte aircraft and test it before we even build it,another example is nukes we can test them without any risk. Simulations are the bases of intelligence when a computer can write its on simulations AI will be created. That computer can imagine any scenario and play it out checking the results.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Here is a well written article that explains your situation very well. This is actually a very good read. It’s bit lengthy but very interesting and entertaining.

Here is a clip...

So the world’s $1,000 computers are now beating the mouse brain and they’re at about a thousandth of human level. This doesn’t sound like much until you remember that we were at about a trillionth of human level in 1985, a billionth in 1995, and a millionth in 2005. Being at a thousandth in 2015 puts us right on pace to get to an affordable computer by 2025 that rivals the power of the brain.

Here is the link to the full article. It’s a few years old but still very relevant.