almostvoid
-191
26
almostvoid has not written any posts yet.
almostvoid has not written any posts yet.
the over complications, the suppositions in all areas, the assumptions of certain outcomes, the complex logic of spaghetti minded mental convulsions to make a point. It all misses the essence of AI in whatever form. I ran into this at uni doing philslophy-logic and couldn't be philosophical about the proposed propositions. I cheated to pass. It is the same - more erudite - here and the book in general. Creating more forests and hiding the trees. Still it's a learning curve.
since men are wired to mate diversely then obviously the recipient must feel the same not different. I mean it takes 2 to tango. I've met women who wanted to ** with me and once asked the proponent that I had a lover and she said: so what? Lesson over.
brain emulation: what a concept. makes interest re sci fi which I shall actually write into my third novel- how a brain feels as it thinks in it's vacancy. Because with no experience of anything it comes into being just-like-that. A baby has a loaded unconscious but will an emulated brain? empirically not. It is a test tube - tank creation. It will be a blank. The best it can think of if at all is a void-state [not zen]. For this globular entity to function it needs ideas to think with which must be implanted. And that is just the beginning. It may lead to totally absurd answers-results. Nature as per usual has the answer: a baby! OK so it takes at least a decade before it is mentally making progress but emulated brains might end up in controll if at all: watch City of Lost Children to see what could easily happen.
prosperity going even incrementally onwards as a for-ever process is impossible to maintain. This happened nearly 80 yrs ago with the big Crash [1929] when the perfect socity [USA] couldn't save itself from a mega disaster of major proportions. Yet across the Atlantic neither Italy nor Germany [after 33] suffered. So it is a matter of applying collective intelligence to this reward system. The 1950s achieved a dream run that stalled 20 yrs later and the oil shock was a symptom not a cause. Collective failure was the debilitating source of this slow down. During the 80s Australia had a progressive govt [Labor] which adjusted to the neo-conservatives whilst America and the... (read more)
we don't talk about red lights for a train having made a moral decision. i don't think even in AI it applies. if it does than i'd be worried about the humans who offload thinking-decision making to a machine mind. anyway that entity will never comprehend anything per se because it will never be sentient in the broadest sense. I can't see it being an issue. Dropping the atom bomb didn't worry anybody.
We are not flawed. Or conversely flaws are our uniqueness {Hawkwind circa 1975}. As for coherency it's a mirror. We got this far without logicians. Our advances were intuitive, artistic. Science organized the insights into applicable manipulated realities [plural] both theoretically as in Galileo and practically since Stevensons's Rocket. [or Shelley's Frankenstein]. There may be alien-artificial life out there in the universe and it might be totally logically coherent but I speculated it will have reached the end of creativity. As long as we remain flawed we will be unpredictable. And that is comforting to know
I am realizing that there is this assumption that robots, AI OSs and variants are gonna work. Well I used to run a live website and working with webmistress realized for starters that codes self corrupt. so no reliability there. then there is human interpretation. some experts simply could not comprehend simple instructions and often to hide their ignorance came back with gobbly-gook speech obfuscation. It took a while to find the right expert. Even then things always went wrong. So future AI is all fantasy as it stands now. Which means a lot of these conversations are fantasy not fact. To give but 2 more examples. I left Twitter but they could... (read more)
I wonder [read the book got the t-shirt & sticker] if it really is -generally- all so complex. I mean a lot of the imputations are anthropomorphic. Machines are dead brains that are switched on. There is nothing else. Unless mimickry which might con some people some of the time. 2001 the movie was still the closest to a machine thinking along certain logic lines. As for rebelling robots, independent machine inteliigences [unless hybrid brain interfaces] I cannot forsee anything in this book that is even relevant. Nice thought experiments though. I am finished. This is it.
In a way happiness is ingrained into specific personality types. My neighbour - next flat - is amazingly happy even after she locked herself out and I tried to break in for her. That happiness can only be duplicated with good drugs. Then there is attitude. I was in India [not as a 5 * tourist either] and found they were content [a bit less than happy] with their lives which compared to ours was a big obvious difference. Anyway it's a moot point as the Scandinavians won that round globally the last time because - social democracy works and it is not socialism which a lot of the braindead insist it... (read more)
the concept was great fantastic delirious to me even. the book itself showed how anglo-american logic can get totally lost in its own myriad paradigm defined logic maze and loose sight of the trees and the redefine the forest. All the maybe spinoffs were totally irrelevant as primary causes-field-events. Hardly anything [in the book not the conversation here] mentioned really intelligence artificial or otherwise. Nor was human senescence alluded to to create an avenue how AIs might progress. Sentience was truly thin on the ground. More about un-related conceptualizations that belonged to a degree to thought-experiments that really should have been appendixed. And most books in this field all repeat each other.... (read more)