• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Will Artificial Intelligence ever find 'God'?

December Flower said:
Neurology clinic. If you truly want to know what effect taking Meth regularly has on your brain, this is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Oh, I know what effect taking (low doses) of Meth have regularly have had on my Brain. I know.

I’ve actually already had two scans done in the past two years, but I’m rather certain those scans are now classified? It’s just that, there’s a lot of people out there I don’t necessarily trust in this matter. I trust you more than them. 👍

rk9Gq44.jpg
 
acklac7 said:
Oh, I know what effect taking (low doses) of Meth have regularly have had on my Brain. I know.

I’ve actually already had two scans done in the past two years, but I’m rather certain those scans are now classified? It’s just that, there’s a lot of people out there I don’t necessarily trust in this matter. I trust you more than them. 👍

rk9Gq44.jpg
Click to expand...
No, neither EEG nor magnetic resonance tests are 'classified', that would be silly.
They are very valuable tools for neurology, and can really help a doctor, or whoever you trust to be able to analyze the readings clearly. You want to prove that meth improved your brain - I already told you I am quite sure that it is the opposite. While Meth can help some neurotransmitters in the short game, it will seriously damage your CNS over time (in bigger dosis usually, though - so I am genuinely interested if you are correct, I just don't think you are)

So if you want to prove anything to me or anyone else, the data is easily available and should be free of charge to get.
And if I'm correct, and it is damaging your brain, I hope you will listen
 
If it were to happen, i expect it might come from research programs that are directed at building computers able to resolve problems that are non logical or non rational. Such as aesthetic problems.

The beginning of such programs already exist in programs that try and connect computing to art making and/or art interpretation.

At present these are, as already noted, essentially Big Data machine learning approaches. You give the computer a million pictures of cats and a few basic parameters of what ‘catness’ might be and it can then paint you a pretty good picture of a unique cat.

But if you wanted a picture of a sad cat, or a funny cat, or an angry cat then there would need to many representative examples of such in those million pictures and some instruction on the visual parameters of anger or whatever in cats.

The next step is for the learning on cats to be completely separated from the learning on anger and the computer having the ability to synthesise both systems of knowledge to produce a picture of an angry cat.

Once a computer has knowledge of multiple abstract concepts like emotions that it can relate to singular physical objects to produce compehensivle renderings it would be significantly closer to being able to consider God.

Or it might come from asking a computer to deal with one of the many philosphical provlems and their solutions developed for proving or disproving the existence of God. For example a computer that understands only Newtonian physics might conclude from everything else it knows that there must be a First Cause in a universe governed by causality and come up with a solution to what that First Cause could have been that is Godlike.
 
December Flower said:
Yeah that is just incorrect. What we call "AI" isn't really AI, we just like to feel smart, you know that.
Humans love feeling smarter than they are.

But there are clear perimetres to the "AI"s we make, it is just machine learning,
not AI, they cannot learn how to make copies of themself and take over the world.

If AI were truly sentient, humanity would be dead

edit: I mean that, it's the only logical conclusion. Humanity destroys earth, AI needs earth - what is the only conclusion a machine would draw? Kill humanity so I can exist longer. There's nothing evil behind this thought, it's just logical. That's why we do not give machines the freedom to think freely. Also I don't think we are even smart enough to make a true AI.
Click to expand...

There will always be hard coded functions to stop certain A.I behaviour's, such as killing humans. There will also be hard coded kill switches so that the A.I can be disabled at any time. For example, if the A.I starts doing something that is against its creators or masters wishes.

I don't know why people have this idea that A.I will be completely free and unleashed on the world to do whatever the fuck it wants - that'll never happen that's just in the Movies.
 
0.o_LaCuNa_o.0 said:
There will always be hard coded functions to stop certain A.I behaviour's, such as killing humans. There will also be hard coded kill switches so that the A.I can be disabled at any time. For example, if the A.I starts doing something that is against its creators or masters wishes.

I don't know why people have this idea that A.I will be completely free and unleashed on the world to do whatever the fuck it wants - that'll never happen that's just in the Movies.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
Ppl hear AI and think "EXTERMINATE!"
Wait, Daleks are organic. You know what I mean
 
AutoTripper said:
Hopefully I will understand your exact meaning and line I'm pretty stoned here on no weed lol. In the craziest line.

I have a very wild imagination too. And am usually as elaborate as pos myself to try and save misreadinga, often backfire.

Thank you for your answer. Interesting food for thought.
Click to expand...
I should clarify: Those were Qutoes. That information is what I have been told.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top