Technological Singularity

  blutac said:

the machine will just instantly give us the most efficient form of power possible

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/a...-authority.html

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

the machine will just instantly give us the most efficient form of power possible

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/a...-authority.html

Very well done on learning a fallacy, although I don't think you understand if you think that was an appeal to authority, not to mention that an opinion can't be fallacious as it's not an argument.

I wouldn't normally respond but I had to do a term of Critical Thinking at uni and this makes it not useless for the first time

  blutac said:

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

the machine will just instantly give us the most efficient form of power possible

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/a...-authority.html

 

Very well done on learning a fallacy, although I don't think you understand if you think that was an appeal to authority, not to mention that an opinion can't be fallacious as it's not an argument.

 

I wouldn't normally respond but I had to do a term of Critical Thinking at uni and this makes it not useless for the first time

What, then, do you call a supercomputer coming to scientific conclusions without peer review and saying its right because "LOOK AT ME IM A SUPERCOMPUTER, DON'T QUESTION ME"

  blutac said:

  Rambo said:

didn't want to start a thread

 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KLWnWKvmkvg&...0F0&index=0

 

A lot of that stuff seems pretty cool but it's all based on the idea that we'll continue to live the same way we do now, I'd think that the most profound technological change will be in areas that we haven't even thought of yet.

yeah of course. Those video's are 3 a penny really. I was just watching it and threw it on.

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

the machine will just instantly give us the most efficient form of power possible

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/a...-authority.html

 

Very well done on learning a fallacy, although I don't think you understand if you think that was an appeal to authority, not to mention that an opinion can't be fallacious as it's not an argument.

 

I wouldn't normally respond but I had to do a term of Critical Thinking at uni and this makes it not useless for the first time

What, then, do you call a supercomputer coming to scientific conclusions without peer review and saying its right because "LOOK AT ME IM A SUPERCOMPUTER, DON'T QUESTION ME"

not to butt in, but how is this relevant? does a calculator need to fact check with a mathematician before it gives you the answer to 58x24? it's not like the supercomputer is making some crazy statement like "the universe is the size of a pinhead" and then plugging it's ears when people start asking how it came to that conclusion. a supercomputer can, however, crunch tons of data and run countless virtual simulations simultaneously to give you the results of a statistical analysis much faster than humanly possible, which is all it would really be doing to determine the most efficient form of energy. and i don't see where in this process "peer review" would be prohibited. in this case, the only thing the computer would be doing is saving humans countless 1000s of hours of trial and error and experimentation. it's not barring anybody from trying to independently confirm it's conclusions.

  catsonearth said:

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

  my usernames always really suck said:

  blutac said:

the machine will just instantly give us the most efficient form of power possible

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/a...-authority.html

 

Very well done on learning a fallacy, although I don't think you understand if you think that was an appeal to authority, not to mention that an opinion can't be fallacious as it's not an argument.

 

I wouldn't normally respond but I had to do a term of Critical Thinking at uni and this makes it not useless for the first time

What, then, do you call a supercomputer coming to scientific conclusions without peer review and saying its right because "LOOK AT ME IM A SUPERCOMPUTER, DON'T QUESTION ME"

Not to but in, but how is this relevant?

I assumed you meant that I was making an appeal to authority, it's different if you look at it from the point of view of the computer itself committing the fallacy in appealing to itself as an authority.

in retrospect "most efficient" is probably something that would be impossible to verify, unless theres a theoretical limit to how efficient something can be. I think I was wrong and it was an appeal to authority if you can consider the computer to be appealing to itself as the authority.

I don't think I remember enough logic to know if that's right. in retrospect it was rash to jump in with that rebuttal when I really was absolutely rubbish at that module.

This is a bizarelly interesting sidetrack though.

the thing about that graph is that people may have underestimated how complex neurons are. some people suggest that each individual neuron in our brains is a sortof quantum computer in its own right, which would put our brain capacity beyond the reaches of moores law for quite some time

2012 it is.

set your calendars.

that reminds me, did anyone hear about that AI by wolfram ? It's taken quite a few by surprise from what i can gather.

He's such a thick twat, this guy.

http://www.wolframalpha.co.cc/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram

That link doesn't go anywhere, here's an article:

http://www.twine.com/item/122mz8lz9-4c/wol...rtant-as-google

i heard about wolfram's search engine, i dont see how people thought it could rival google, with a name as catchy as wolframalpha

How do you program imagination? Isn't that what really "creates" things? The practical matter of putting it together is down to tasks. Which computers are good at performing. Not the ideas. With all this money gone into AI has a computer actually come up with an original idea without the help of a human saying, yes that is an original idea?

Like a melody for instance. Take the Beatles' Yesterday. If you had a program to find a nice melody that ran indefinitely for a million years it might play the melody to yesterday, but would it know its a nice melody? How do you program that capability into a computer?

  zazen said:

some people suggest that each individual neuron in our brains is a sortof quantum computer in its own right

dang, i have a lot of quantum computers dedicated to sex

to me, if it's a computation that can be performed by the brain, well then it can be performed by an AI in theory. Imagination is a mechanical process after all - deciding something is good is a mechanical process too.

We don't have any free will after all, it's just a big domino effect, which is just as amazing to me anyway.

robot scientist makes discovery without human help

the time is near, folks!

  marf said:

How do you program imagination? Isn't that what really "creates" things? The practical matter of putting it together is down to tasks. Which computers are good at performing. Not the ideas. With all this money gone into AI has a computer actually come up with an original idea without the help of a human saying, yes that is an original idea?

 

Like a melody for instance. Take the Beatles' Yesterday. If you had a program to find a nice melody that ran indefinitely for a million years it might play the melody to yesterday, but would it know its a nice melody? How do you program that capability into a computer?

Once You have a fully programmed intelligence with a big old network of "neurons", imagination is pretty much just random deviations in thought coupled with simple pattern-recognizing systems and a little bit of personal preference (personality).

There are already machines that can create pleasant melodies by "listening" to great melodies others have made, recognizing patterns, and building melodies along those guidelines. The toughest part for a robot to create original ideas would be to have its own personality and preferences to drive the creative process. If the machine doesnt have any drive to create something outside of a prompt that says "create a good melody, Create a good beat, Put the two together, execute, repeat.", Itll get old quick.

So the machine needs to want to do something of its own volition, and to follow examples that it likes (afx), and avoid the ones it doesnt (vsnares). Once a machine can "think of" one idea, modify it with another idea, and create while developing new ideas, all without being entirely random, to come from a self-derived "personality", then you've got yourself an art-bot that can take a blank slate and make somethin purdy of it.

imagination and creativity are nothing more than the recycling and modification of ideas already in existence.

besides, making a "good" melody is totally subjective and no one can tell you what a "good" melody is as opposed to a bad one. see above, lots of people still buy vsnares albums but his melodies are not very good.

  catsonearth said:

robot scientist makes discovery without human help

 

the time is near, folks!

fuck

  catsonearth said:

robot scientist makes discovery without human help

 

the time is near, folks!

if only it knew how to LOVE

It can deduce the chemical compounds in the brain that cause us to think we feel love and EXPOSE IT FOR THE ILLUSION IT REALLY IS!!!

  Caustic said:

  catsonearth said:

robot scientist makes discovery without human help

 

the time is near, folks!

if only it knew how to LOVE

"i now know why you cry"