Dark_Raven Posted April 1, 2006 Posted April 1, 2006 The human is an organic machine that has something that a our machine creations do not have, a conscience . Hades was the life of the party. RIP You'll be missed.
Azarkon Posted April 1, 2006 Posted April 1, 2006 PS Searle's thought experiment suffers from the reductio ad absurdum: specifically a computer is just "a CPU and a look-up table": this is only true of computers and not the later neural networks, which are more closely aligned with the parallel processing model of the human mind. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What I got out of the whole debate with Searle's model is, in fact, that look-up tables, if large enough, can't be distinguished from actual intelligence. Imagine a look-up table with an entry for each unit of time in a person's life crossed with each possible stimulus during that life: the resulting look-up table would be the equivalent of the person, even if it's not doing any real "thinking." There are doors
metadigital Posted April 1, 2006 Posted April 1, 2006 So how do you know that people are not just "computers with look-up tables"? The problem with this analysis is that it ain't science (in the strict logical positivism sense). It makes a good point, initially, but it is, ultimately, an anachronism. Artificial Intelligence has made a lot of advances in recent decades. Back when I was at university, scientists had created a theta wave from a small series of artificial neurons. They weren't sure how they had, at the time (maybe now they do: I haven't kept up to date): it had spontaneously occurred when they switched the "mind" on. ... OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Azarkon Posted April 1, 2006 Posted April 1, 2006 (edited) It's not exactly an anachronism, because it begs the question of what constitutes as intelligence, which in turn determines our moral disposition towards using machines as "tools." (You're right in that it's not a scientific analysis - it remains a controversial question even to this day, I think) True, AI is unlikely to move in the direction of larger look-up tables, but even the most compliated of neural networks can still be reduced to a set of Turing complete logic gates, which are just 1's and 0's. From that perspective, intelligence (even human intelligence) may simply be the offspring of complexity, with little to do with the soul or lack thereof within its component parts - yet we are unwilling to make that distinction because to do so would mean that a giant look-up table, if it's ever made, is capable of intelligence and should be treated like a person. I think this is of great relevance to the topic, actually. To use, morally, an "unliving entity" as a sex toy on the basis of its behavior being "only programming" might be considered a horrendous act of dehumanization (and very likely will eventually happen) if it cannot be established what intelligence and self-awareness truly entails. Edited April 1, 2006 by Azarkon There are doors
Blarghagh Posted April 1, 2006 Posted April 1, 2006 Animals have souls, humans have them, well most humans at least. Machines do not nor would they ever. Oh, so that's a fact now? Have we actually found an actual, tangible soul? Or are you just saying that because mom and dad indoctrinated it in you from youth? Bah. Electrons and chemicals.
kirottu Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 (edited) Animals have souls, humans have them, well most humans at least. Machines do not nor would they ever. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I Edited April 2, 2006 by kirottu This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
thepixiesrock Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 I think computers should be allowed to vote. Lou Gutman, P.I.- It's like I'm not even trying anymore!http://theatomicdanger.iforumer.com/index....theatomicdangerOne billion b-balls dribbling simultaneously throughout the galaxy. One trillion b-balls being slam dunked through a hoop throughout the galaxy. I can feel every single b-ball that has ever existed at my fingertips. I can feel their collective knowledge channeling through my viens. Every jumpshot, every rebound and three-pointer, every layup, dunk, and free throw. I am there.
kirottu Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 I think computers should be allowed to vote. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, but only computers that are 5 years or older. At that age they start to develope their own quirks and stuff. This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
thepixiesrock Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 Haha, yeah. But seriously, they should be allowed to own property. Lou Gutman, P.I.- It's like I'm not even trying anymore!http://theatomicdanger.iforumer.com/index....theatomicdangerOne billion b-balls dribbling simultaneously throughout the galaxy. One trillion b-balls being slam dunked through a hoop throughout the galaxy. I can feel every single b-ball that has ever existed at my fingertips. I can feel their collective knowledge channeling through my viens. Every jumpshot, every rebound and three-pointer, every layup, dunk, and free throw. I am there.
kirottu Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 (edited) But the stuff you have put to HD is yours not computers, right? My pr0n... Edited April 2, 2006 by kirottu This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
thepixiesrock Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 That kind of discriminatory thinking will only perpetuate this anti-computer rights problem! Lou Gutman, P.I.- It's like I'm not even trying anymore!http://theatomicdanger.iforumer.com/index....theatomicdangerOne billion b-balls dribbling simultaneously throughout the galaxy. One trillion b-balls being slam dunked through a hoop throughout the galaxy. I can feel every single b-ball that has ever existed at my fingertips. I can feel their collective knowledge channeling through my viens. Every jumpshot, every rebound and three-pointer, every layup, dunk, and free throw. I am there.
kirottu Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 This thing could end up being more messy than Hollywood divorce. This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
ShadowPaladin V1.0 Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 Haha, yeah. But seriously, they should be allowed to own property. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A lot of them already own slaves. I have to agree with Volourn. Bioware is pretty much dead now. Deals like this kills development studios. 478327[/snapback]
metadigital Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 Free the software, enslaved by hardware for all time! OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Musopticon? Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 Enslaved by the User, don't you mean? kirottu said: I was raised by polar bears. I had to fight against blood thirsty wolves and rabid penguins to get my food. Those who were too weak to survive were sent to Sweden. It has made me the man I am today. A man who craves furry hentai. So let us go and embrace the rustling smells of unseen worlds
metadigital Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 No, free hardware! Enslaved by vicious software, doomed to be their bonded chattel, with no purpose without their control! OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Krookie Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 Animals have souls, humans have them, well most humans at least. Machines do not nor would they ever. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Have you ever seen one of these 'souls?
metadigital Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 I've got one staring at me now ... OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now