I just finished watching this TED talk on how computers are learning to learn and do what humans do.
Now combine this with the massive amounts of data that will easily be stored on SAFE and given incentivised app development. At first glance your first wave of learning apps might be hyper intelligent search engines and data analyzers. But what happens when you have apps that write news articles and blogs for you? What happens when you get cybersex A.I.s and artificial porn whorebots running around? What happens when you want to go for a job interview and you’re being interviewed by an A.I.? (Actually that’s starting to happen a bit already as your resume acceptance or rejection largely is dependent on keywords.) Are all our major institutions going to become proxied by programs?
Come to think of it with such advanced learning as “Deep Learning” would it not be conceivable to program in emotions into an A.I.? Create an A.I. that could feel as well as think.
It depends on your definition of emotion - using my definition, then the answer would be “Yes” an AI can meet all the criteria for learning emotions.
My definition in its simplest form would be consistent with the following from the web btw:
“Emotion, in its most general definition, is a neural impulse that moves an organism to action, prompting automatic reactive behavior that has been adapted through evolution as a survival mechanism to meet a survival need.”
In regard to “feelings” “experiences” etc, I would also say yes, though you are getting into topics like consciousness and self. I obviously believe these things are emergent properties of the brain (as opposed to invoking souls etc). This being the case, I believe these things are covered by my definition of emotion and that in principle “emotions” could easily become an emergent property of an AI “brain”.
Probably loads of people will disagree with me here…lol
I have never heard of the concept of invoking souls before, scientifically or spiritually. From my explorations the general idea is one either has one, or perhaps is part of one, but I’m not too familiar with the notion that a soul is “summoned” or invoked at any point. Please elaborate on your idea here.
There are those that would argue that emotions and intuition are how we sense the spiritual or our soul and what it is perceiving. Yes we do have the base animal emotions and then we have the higher emotions and intuition from our soul. The concept of evolutionary spirituality isn’t exactly new. (Whether you believe in the spiritual or not you really should look into it if only from an accademic and conceptional understanding of various ideas. May I suggest brushing up on your sacred geometry because it applies to this topic of evolutionary consciousness.) Also keep in mind machines aren’t evolving on their own. They have help from us.
But yes I guess the point is evolutionary consciousness isn’t new. Of course we then get into the whole age old arguement about theism vs atheism, intelligent design vs chaos or all that kind of thing which has been argued ad nauseum but suffice it to say we could replicate the given natural form synthentically. As you say we could replicate “emotion” using the simplistic definition you provide. After all DNA is at first glance very simple, a string of four proteins in varying combinations. However look at all the life forms and information that can be stored and expressed there. Simplistic in essence doesn’t mean simplistic in expression and manifestation. As also proved by the internet and by this very project.
I didn’t mean “invoke” in the sense you took it to mean - I meant using as an explanation, rather than raising spirits/souls or any other such mumbo jumbo.
Invoke-: " To cite or appeal to (someone or something) as an authority for an action or in support of an argument…
I don’t cite Souls as an explanation for consciousness/self etc…my argument is that these things are emergent properties of the brain.
Yes there are, including yourself and I have argued ad infinitum on this forum with such people, though no convincing argument for the existence of “souls”, "spirituality etc has ever been put forward to date.
As far as I’m concerned, there is no longer any “debate” to be had here and If you really want to invoke souls for your arguments again can we please take it off topic…thanks
Bah Humbug!.. to everyone btw…and a happy New Year!..lol
I suspect technology will be augmented with flesh and the appropriate device will be used as required. It may seem like a shocking thought now - particularly with so much centralized control, this is understandable. However, technology continues to be assimilated into our lives and this will surely be the next step.
In short, I doubt it will be humans vs robots, but instead evolution via implanted technology. Ofc, robots may exist and maybe flesh will be integrated with them, but I suspect we will reserve the best technology for ourselves.
Edit: for example, why learn Chinese with flesh over many years when tech implants can learn and translate it seemlessly via an implant, feeding directly into your ears/brain?
Another article I read this morning which plays out into the whole A.I. development thing given it is about our own psychology.
I guess where my mind went with all this is SAFE is ideal of big data and much of the programs we’ve discussed involve intelligent searches and end user decentralized design. And that in turn benefits from A.I. and machine learning. So I don’t see it as a huge leap for developers from adopting a lot of machine learning in their coding.
It could make a huge difference to user interaction too. If you can ask a question with natural language and the software is intelligent enough to data mine for you, things are getting pretty radical. In fact, it is pretty close to star trek stuff!