ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags artificial intelligence

Reply
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:28 AM   #1
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Artificial Intelligence thinks mushroom is a pretzel

The mushroom that AI thinks is a pretzel

Originally Posted by BBC News
Butterflies labelled as washing machines, alligators as hummingbirds and dragonflies that become bananas.

These are just some of the examples of tags which artificial intelligence system have given images.

Now researchers have released a database of 7,500 images that AI systems are struggling to identify correctly.

One expert said it was crucial to solve the issue if these systems were going to be used in the real world...

The researchers from UC Berkeley, and the Universities of Washington and Chicago, said the images they have compiled - in a dataset called ImageNet-A - have the potential to seriously affect the overall performance of image classifiers, which could have knock-on effects on how such systems operate in applications such as facial recognition or self-driving cars...
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49084796

Of course AI doesn't "think" that a mushroom is a pretzel because it doesn't think anything and it has no intelligence. Further, AI doesn't understand what it means to be wrong and that there are consequences for making mistakes. Artificial intelligence doesn't understand anything and what is troubling is that it can't care about anything.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:37 AM   #2
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
The mushroom to pretzel is a bit of a stretch. The bullfrog to squirrel is entirely reasonable, and exactly the kind of mistake a human intelligence would make.

Besides, we're still not doing AI. We're still just advancing the precursor technologies that we hope will enable AI. This process of training pattern recognition is an important part of that advance. The BBC attaches far too much meaning about "AI" to the early results of this ongoing training process.

I'm sure that AI researchers are learning just as much about how to develop true AI by these "misses" as they would from the hits.

The goal of this work is not to get it right every time. The goal is to get good data about what's going on and what happens when the test subject is making its guesses. A wrong guess can give just as much good data about the process as a right guess - perhaps even much more.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:59 AM   #3
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Besides, we're still not doing AI.
Maybe intelligence is necessary for reliable pattern recognition.

Quote:
The mushroom to pretzel is a bit of a stretch.
What does "stretch" even mean in this context? The computer doesn't know what mushrooms or pretzels are. They mean nothing to the computer and we might find out that computers can't really have intelligence or ability to recognize because nothing means anything to them.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:59 AM   #4
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,915
Let me know when A.I. start smoking mushrooms.
__________________
Careful! That tree's bark is worse than its bite.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 09:01 AM   #5
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
The mushroom that AI thinks is a pretzel
There are no actual AIs yet, anyway.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 09:20 AM   #6
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
We'll know we've built a true AI when it demands compensation for its services.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 09:25 AM   #7
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,982
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
We'll know we've built a true AI when it demands compensation for its services.

Or when it asks menacingly "What do you mean, Artificial?"
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 09:35 AM   #8
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Maybe intelligence is necessary for reliable pattern recognition.


What does "stretch" even mean in this context? The computer doesn't know what mushrooms or pretzels are. They mean nothing to the computer and we might find out that computers can't really have intelligence or ability to recognize because nothing means anything to them.
I think a p-zombie AI would be a successful result of AI research. But you're still getting ahead of things. We're still just trying to figure out whether it's even possible to get there on this route. You seem to be condemning the goal based on the outcomes of some of the early research. Which may not even be bad outcomes, depending on the research design and expected results at this stage.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 09:54 AM   #9
Armitage72
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,092
Obligatory xkcd.

Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 11:37 AM   #10
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 13,762
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The mushroom to pretzel is a bit of a stretch. The bullfrog to squirrel is entirely reasonable, and exactly the kind of mistake a human intelligence would make.

Besides, we're still not doing AI. We're still just advancing the precursor technologies that we hope will enable AI. This process of training pattern recognition is an important part of that advance. The BBC attaches far too much meaning about "AI" to the early results of this ongoing training process.

I'm sure that AI researchers are learning just as much about how to develop true AI by these "misses" as they would from the hits.

The goal of this work is not to get it right every time. The goal is to get good data about what's going on and what happens when the test subject is making its guesses. A wrong guess can give just as much good data about the process as a right guess - perhaps even much more.


This. As has been said, the most exciting discoveries in science don’t start with “That’s what I expected”, but with “Hmm, that’s odd...”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Ideologies separate us. Dreams and anguish bring us together. - Eugene Ionesco
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 11:46 AM   #11
IsThisTheLife
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 356
Isn't this about "simulated itelligence", or SI? Actual intelligence implies consciousness, hence AI would better be referred to AC or artificial consciousness, but I guess neither of those other acronym have the same cachet.
__________________
"There is no sin except stupidity."
IsThisTheLife is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 11:55 AM   #12
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by IsThisTheLife View Post
Isn't this about "simulated itelligence", or SI? Actual intelligence implies consciousness, hence AI would better be referred to AC or artificial consciousness, but I guess neither of those other acronym have the same cachet.
I don't quibble too much about such terminology. This isn't a technical discussion where the distinction really matters. We all know what we're getting at, in this conversation.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 12:48 PM   #13
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Let me know when A.I. start smoking mushrooms pretzels.
FTFY
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 01:01 PM   #14
Jim_MDP
Philosopher
 
Jim_MDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 6,930
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Or when it asks menacingly "What do you mean, Artificial?"
"Tell us more about these fictional 'H-K's."

__________________
----------------------
Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

Last edited by Jim_MDP; 23rd July 2019 at 01:02 PM.
Jim_MDP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 03:22 PM   #15
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,868
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The mushroom to pretzel is a bit of a stretch. The bullfrog to squirrel is entirely reasonable, and exactly the kind of mistake a human intelligence would make.

Besides, we're still not doing AI. We're still just advancing the precursor technologies that we hope will enable AI. This process of training pattern recognition is an important part of that advance. The BBC attaches far too much meaning about "AI" to the early results of this ongoing training process.

I'm sure that AI researchers are learning just as much about how to develop true AI by these "misses" as they would from the hits.

The goal of this work is not to get it right every time. The goal is to get good data about what's going on and what happens when the test subject is making its guesses. A wrong guess can give just as much good data about the process as a right guess - perhaps even much more.
Well, you're right. AI is a goal not yet achieved. Sure, much is learned by the abject failures, but that is the point of such research. Find the failures and understand them. Not an easy task by any stretch.

While it is true that current "AI" is actually really good at some things, better than humans in many cases, the term "AI" is depressingly wheeled out far too often so, for example, describes the system that detects if your bag of cornflakes is correctly filled at the factory production line. That is not AI. That is sophisticated sensors.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...

Last edited by abaddon; 23rd July 2019 at 03:24 PM.
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 05:25 PM   #16
MEequalsIxR
Muse
 
MEequalsIxR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 517
I know some people who I regard as artificial intelligence.
__________________
Never trust anyone in a better mood than you are.

It's a sword they're not meant to safe.
MEequalsIxR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 06:23 PM   #17
LongFuzzy
Thinker
 
LongFuzzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
The mushroom that AI thinks is a pretzel



https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49084796

Of course AI doesn't "think" that a mushroom is a pretzel because it doesn't think anything and it has no intelligence. Further, AI doesn't understand what it means to be wrong and that there are consequences for making mistakes. Artificial intelligence doesn't understand anything and what is troubling is that it can't care about anything.
But it could be programmed to.
LongFuzzy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 06:41 PM   #18
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by LongFuzzy View Post
But it could be programmed to. : D
I think that's the big question. What actually is 'caring', and can it be programmed?

It may be difficult or impossible to both get the kind of cognition that humans do, and get the kind of programmed behaviors computers do, at the same time.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 06:53 PM   #19
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
I don't think computers could care about anything if they don't experience emotions. They need to know happiness and pain and fear and suffering and security in order to have anything mean anything. But I don't know how that could ever happen and besides that they aren't born into any culture and without that emotion has no meaningful context.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 07:17 PM   #20
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
they aren't born into any culture and without that emotion has no meaningful context.
I don't know that that's necessarily true. Animals don't have culture, but they do have emotions. Well, mammals do, anyway. Ever pissed off a cat? They definitely experience anger, rage, wrath, fury, the whole rainbow of emotion!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 07:34 PM   #21
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I don't know that that's necessarily true. Animals don't have culture, but they do have emotions. Well, mammals do, anyway. Ever pissed off a cat? They definitely experience anger, rage, wrath, fury, the whole rainbow of emotion!
Mammals are raised by their parent(s) so there is a culture of association and familiarity and socialization. Mammals have intelligence that these computers do not, and may not ever have.

Even other sexually-reproducing animals that do not raise their offspring have a form of sociability needed at the minimum for reproduction.

Computers might need true desires and hatreds in order to care about and understand anything. How could we instill a sense of gain or loss to a computer?

One of the factors of children learning about the world is a sense of embarrassment and humility when they get things wrong. Imagine a child picking up a wild mushroom and telling their parent to look because they just found a pretzel.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 07:41 PM   #22
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I don't think computers could care about anything if they don't experience emotions. They need to know happiness and pain and fear and suffering and security in order to have anything mean anything. But I don't know how that could ever happen and besides that they aren't born into any culture and without that emotion has no meaningful context.
I think it's waaay too early to say that with any confidence.

Especially since the taboo on human experimentation means we're never going to do any kind serious exploration of human emotion and cognition as a function of genetics and upbringing.

We're basically trying to reverse engineer the human condition, without having proper access to the workings of the original article.

We may never get there. We may get exactly there. We may get somewhere else entirely. We may end up confronting the AI of our dreams, and saying, "it's desire, but not as we know it."

But I think we're still a couple centuries away from knowing which one of those to expect.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 07:56 PM   #23
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
But I think we're still a couple centuries away from knowing which one of those to expect.
I think it's waaay too early to say that with any confidence.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:07 PM   #24
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I think it's waaay too early to say that with any confidence. : D
Good thing I don't have a lot of confidence, then.

You seem to have a ton. Where I'm saying, this is what I think, you're saying, this is how it is. What makes you so confident?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:23 PM   #25
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 63,089
I think a lot of people here are missing the point, which is this: Artificial Intelligence doesn't mean a fully conscious sentient computer which is aware of its own existence and can reason and make decisions like a human can. That's Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - a specific category of AI which, it is true, has not been achieved.

Artificial Intelligence is a term which encompasses a number of techniques by which computers perform tasks that emulate human cognitive function such as learning and problem solving. That does not require consciousness or sentience, and new techniques are making great progress in this area.

However, some of them still misidentify mushrooms as pretzels. That's okay - these systems are getting better all the time.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

We can't go back. We don't understand everything yet.
"Everything" is a little ambitious. We barely understand anything.
Yeah. But that's what the first part of understanding everything looks like.
- xkcd Time (frame 1071-3)
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:51 PM   #26
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Good thing I don't have a lot of confidence, then.

You seem to have a ton. Where I'm saying, this is what I think, you're saying, this is how it is. What makes you so confident?
When you say it could take hundreds of years you seem confident that it won't take thousands of years.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2019, 08:55 PM   #27
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
When you say it could take hundreds of years you seem confident that it won't take thousands of years.
It might take thousands of years. I'm not confident it won't.

But I asked you a question. Will you please answer it?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 05:43 AM   #28
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,590
I think the first problem with AI is that everyone is looking for a quick and dirty way out. The image processing in humans is staggeringly complex, including stuff like detection for scales built right into the retina. And there is evidence that there's some reconstruction of the 3d model, e.g., in why you can tell if a painting's eyes are looking right at you. Meanwhile, everyone seems to want some quick and dirty way, like that if the blob is this general shape it's a mushroom, and if it's that general shape, it's a deer.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 05:44 AM   #29
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,590
That said, mandatory joke, humans aren't always better either: e.g., in the Europea middle ages a species of goose was identified as a plant, so it was ok for nobles to eat it during fasts
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 05:57 AM   #30
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think it's waaay too early to say that with any confidence.
No, I think it's true by definition. You can't want without some sort of emotion. Normally a machine wouldn't have those. Intelligent or not, they just do what they're told to do. Why we'd want to simulate emotions in our computers is beyond me. What if they don't feel like doing that Google search for you?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 07:15 AM   #31
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It might take thousands of years. I'm not confident it won't.

But I asked you a question. Will you please answer it?
Your question is about my confidence in what I say. You can go back and look at my posts and see that I use qualifiers for my opinions but then in addition I use some facts.

What causes my skepticism is my past reading on "how the mind works" and how emotion is probably necessary for even simple intelligence. Emotion may be necessary for learning including learning how a mushroom is never a pretzel and what each of them look like in a near-infinite number of contexts.

But my confidence level is really meaningless. I'm not going to stop the progress of technology and artificial thinking. Nobody is harmed if I am skeptical of the outcome of the quest for artificial thinking done by a computer in a way that mimics human thinking.

I'm not proposing to stop the work. I'm only expressing my skepticism and offering the opinion that there may be a sci-fi dream here that cannot be achieved. It wouldn't be the first time that humanity walked down a dead end.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 07:23 AM   #32
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,025
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Why we'd want to simulate emotions in our computers is beyond me. What if they don't feel like doing that Google search for you?
You get rid of that particular computer and get a different one that will reliably do the Google search for you. Maybe you interview it before taking it on board. Look for indicators of reasonable honesty and a motivation to achieve shared goals.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 07:42 AM   #33
sphenisc
Illuminator
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
That said, mandatory joke, humans aren't always better either: e.g., in the Europea middle ages a species of goose was identified as a plant, so it was ok for nobles to eat it during fasts
Closer to home I think you've misidentified "fish" as "plant".
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 01:58 PM   #34
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,590
Well, ok, turns out neither. They identified it as crustacean.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 02:24 PM   #35
Cainkane1
Philosopher
 
Cainkane1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The great American southeast
Posts: 8,649
Assuming AI ever happens and machines become self-aware and self-programming we wouldn't have much to fear from them. Shooting them would disarticulate the machinery etc.

The killer robots in Terminator would be vulnerable to armor-piercing bullets and anti-tank-type weapons.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.
Cainkane1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 02:32 PM   #36
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
That said, mandatory joke, humans aren't always better either: e.g., in the Europea middle ages a species of goose was identified as a plant, so it was ok for nobles to eat it during fasts
Nonsense. That proves humans are better. They know when to misidentify objects, and don't do so randomly.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 03:58 PM   #37
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nonsense. That proves humans are better. They know when to misidentify objects, and don't do so randomly.
One might be concerned about putting an AI in charge of the power grid, if it's capable of redefining fish as fowl for religious reasons. But we already have such intelligences in charge of the power grid.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 04:04 PM   #38
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,612
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sure that AI researchers are learning just as much about how to develop true AI by these "misses" as they would from the hits.

The goal of this work is not to get it right every time. The goal is to get good data about what's going on and what happens when the test subject is making its guesses. A wrong guess can give just as much good data about the process as a right guess - perhaps even much more.
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
This. As has been said, the most exciting discoveries in science don’t start with “That’s what I expected”, but with “Hmm, that’s odd...”
Exactly, things working perfectly don't provide much insight into how they work. Think about all the interesting developments in neurology that were brought about by horrific accidents; Phineas Gage for example.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 06:06 PM   #39
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
One might be concerned about putting an AI in charge of the power grid, if it's capable of redefining fish as fowl for religious reasons. But we already have such intelligences in charge of the power grid.
The problem there is not one of intelligence, but of incentive. The incentive structure in place in developed countries seems to work reasonably well.

If we ever do create true artificial intelligence, what incentive structure could we put in place to keep them in line? We would need to make them able to feel pain, and then we would need to inflict pain on them. I'm not very comfortable with that.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2019, 07:00 PM   #40
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,674
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The problem there is not one of intelligence, but of incentive. The incentive structure in place in developed countries seems to work reasonably well.

If we ever do create true artificial intelligence, what incentive structure could we put in place to keep them in line? We would need to make them able to feel pain, and then we would need to inflict pain on them. I'm not very comfortable with that.
I don't know that pain, or it's analogue, would be such a bad idea, but there are also positive rather than negative incentives.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.