Will Computers Ever be Superior to Humans Intellectually?

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:03 am

Originally posted by John
My opinion is that in the future, computers will be on par, if not superior to human's intellectual abilities.

Humans have a long history of being short sighted.

I agree.

They can already see, feel, hear, remember, compute and adapt. They can do some of these in ways humans can't. They can see in infra red, xray etc etc. They can hear above and below the human threshold, they can remember far better than any human, and obviously they can compute faster. Lots more, but I'm tired, off to bed.

It won't be long before they can out do humans in every category.

monkeyhead · Post by **monkeyhead** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:16 am

Originally posted by Norm
Humans are programmed as well. Lock a baby in a room with no contact with anyone from birth to 30 years old, and ask him/her what 2+2 is.

i think thats it all in a nutshell.... holy smokes... that point just blows things outta the water..... good job on that one norm

monkeyhead · Post by **monkeyhead** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:19 am

to kinda solve the emotions on population problem... just tell the computer if death equals answer, then problem not solved.....

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:50 am

Originally posted by Norm
Humans are programmed as well. Lock a baby in a room with no contact with anyone from birth to 30 years old, and ask him/her what 2+2 is.

One of the first points I thought of when I saw this thread (very well done Norm, a backbreaker

), we teach skills and behaviours. Emotional responses are taught as well (We all can think of unemotioanl, amoral people). As so aptly put, computers (machines) may be equipped with senses, some going beyond our own. They are not limited by the confines of a human body. They can constantly be improved.... (If we modify our genetic code........)

It is interesting how we humans recognize genius and accomplishment. Consider that the single minded devotion to playing an instrument. A programmed mechanism can outperform a similar task that a musician would require years to learn. Inspiration is a matter of creativity algorithms. Associate moods and experiences with words and sounds. It is doable.

We ourselves, are organic machines. Complex, but not unassailable.

shant,
david

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:57 am

If we are the creators to these machines, fancy how they have become superior to their gods......

monkeyhead · Post by **monkeyhead** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:58 am

what about this....

gonna sound complicated.... if we humans can teach a computer to be superior to us intellectually then wouldnt we be the ones superior for knowing how to teach it??? or would it be the apprentice has defeated the master type of situation....

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:02 am

I think the more important and fun debate is this:

We are basically playing God.

We are trying to duplicate a human by way of a machine. We will be successful.

The problem is this...what happens when the machines try to replicate us?

If you are a believer in God...then you believe that God created man. What happens if the machines fail in their attempt to act as our God in re-creating us? What if God is really a machine...pure intelligence? What if we are the failed attempts of God? It would stand to reason why we are so flawed.

I say keep your eyes and ears OPEN to all of this.

Nanotechnology, molecular based computing, DNA based CPU's, all of this is happening right now....it is reality now. Self replicating nano-circuits are now. This is not science fiction........

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:03 am

Originally posted by monkeyhead
what about this....

gonna sound complicated.... if we humans can teach a computer to be superior to us intellectually then wouldnt we be the ones superior for knowing how to teach it??? or would it be the apprentice has defeated the master type of situation....

If you can build a structure taller than yourself, why can you not build a machine that is "smarter" than yourself?

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:11 am

Originally posted by UOD
If you are a believer in God...then you believe that God created man. What happens if the machines fail in their attempt to act as our God in re-creating us? What if God is really a machine...pure intelligence? What if we are the failed attempts of God? It would stand to reason why we are so flawed.

The thoughts and aims of philosophers for generations. We are not failed experiments, G-d, as our parent, is not done with us as of yet.

.

(As an aside), Evan, ever have a creative project you are mulling, come up independantly in outside conversation?

shant,
david

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:23 am

Originally posted by Deus ex Machina
(As an aside), Evan, ever have a creative project you are mulling, come up independantly in outside conversation?

shant,
david

Color me stupid this morning David, but I'm not 100% sure I follow your question.

Yes, I have had creative thoughts that just hit me.

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:42 am

Originally posted by UOD
I think the more important and fun debate is this:

We are basically playing God.

We are trying to duplicate a human by way of a machine. We will be successful.

The problem is this...what happens when the machines try to replicate us?

If you are a believer in God...then you believe that God created man. What happens if the machines fail in their attempt to act as our God in re-creating us? What if God is really a machine...pure intelligence? What if we are the failed attempts of God? It would stand to reason why we are so flawed.

I say keep your eyes and ears OPEN to all of this.

Nanotechnology, molecular based computing, DNA based CPU's, all of this is happening right now....it is reality now. Self replicating nano-circuits are now. This is not science fiction........

Evan, there is a book written along these same lines. A friend was telling me about it a few years ago and I never did get around to reading it. If you have heard of it, and know the name I would love to get a copy. It was a science fiction novel.

A couple of points...
We are programmed to think 2+2=4 and it does =4 in base 10.
2+2 also= many other answers, for instance it = 10 in base2.

One thing computers can't do is have an idea, an original thought, or a dream. When we can get to this point in our efforts to make them intelligent, it will be THE breakthrough. I don't believe humans yet understand how we have thoughts, or ideas.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:48 am

Hey Norm!

After reading your post I can now see why David asked me the question.

I now have answered my own questions!

Thanks!

I agree also. Maybe computers will one day have the ability to think freely.

I hope that I will be alive to see that happen.

I think I know of the book you speak of but I too can not remember it for the life of me...off to Google!

MadDoctor · Post by **MadDoctor** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 9:58 am

My toaster (with one burned out heating element) is smarter than I am.

mountainman · Post by **mountainman** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 10:05 am

IMV(very)HO...I think that unless we be careful on what we experiment with, we will have the capability to build something that will learn and adapt to its surroundings. I guess we'll need to control the enviornment and control whatever it is in and connected to.

What I'm saying, I guess, is that you dont want to fool around with some advanced A.I. and put it in a tank, hooked up to the internet, and hooked up at the DoD. Does that make sense? If we keep it by itself in a small box, you can see it grow, but still have more control over what it can or can't do. So, we need to keep smart, level-headed researchers around it.

One more thing: I am glad that I will most likely have passed on when this stuff is really being developed or becoming more mainstream (if it isn't later). I would not want to be around when George W. Bush XXII is declaring war on all computers world wide. LOL

Well, I hope you get what I'm saying.

Paft · Post by **Paft** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 11:15 am

The way I see it, we will have computers that some day can emulate humans 100%, and even surpass us. Thoughts and ideas? Not a problem.. explain how humans have thought. We take an object we see / feel / taste /whatever, and then we expound on it's abilities based upon experiences we have had.

What's to say a computer with perfect memory can't do even /better/ than we can?

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:31 pm

Originally posted by Norm

One thing computers can't do is have an idea, an original thought, or a dream. When we can get to this point in our efforts to make them intelligent, it will be THE breakthrough. I don't believe humans yet understand how we have thoughts, or ideas.

I am not sure, Norm. Our conscious mind is a subtle but sophisticating program (Time for TonyT to jump in

). It is a millieau of diagnostics. Input of information (stimulus), translation, interpretation and response. I consider ideas as reaccessment of stored data with consideration of alternate parameters. There are decision making programs right now.

What puzzles is why do certain flavors (Or other stimuli) appeal to some and not others (regional differences aside). I like brussels sprouts, but detest beets. Why do these tastes cause different responses?

shant,
david

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:33 pm

BTW.... I am a fan of AI. Does anyone have a recent conversation AI program?

64bit · Post by **64bit** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:56 pm

Originally posted by Norm
Evan, there is a book written along these same lines. A friend was telling me about it a few years ago and I never did get around to reading it. If you have heard of it, and know the name I would love to get a copy. It was a science fiction novel.

A couple of points...
We are programmed to think 2+2=4 and it does =4 in base 10.
2+2 also= many other answers, for instance it = 10 in base2.

One thing computers can't do is have an idea, an original thought, or a dream. When we can get to this point in our efforts to make them intelligent, it will be THE breakthrough. I don't believe humans yet understand how we have thoughts, or ideas.

That I agree with. If we dont know still how thoughts in are head are formed how can we even come close to replicating that with electricity and silicone. All a computer does right now is retrieve stored data and spit out statistics the way a human programmed it to do. Thats all AI is right now also. We have alot to do to figure our own CPU out before we can make a computers "intelligent"

incrediblecain · Post by **incrediblecain** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:04 pm

I beleive computers will always be limited by their programmers, ultimately if X=3 to a computer and then its introduced that x is not equal to three and it wants to know what x equals it searches everything it can. It could never say X= a jackslapper unless that information is somewhere available to it. Creativity isn't exactly an algorithym it can be, but it is also non-mathematical which is ultimately all a computer can understand. If its not part of them or something they can access or extrapolate then they will not be able to discover that infact X= a jackslapper.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:56 pm

Originally posted by 64bit
If we don't know still how thoughts in are head are formed how can we even come close to replicating that with electricity and silicone.

Molecular & DNA based computing....that's how.

What is good about this is that in just a short time...someone, somewhere, at some lab, is going to ask a computer how to cure cancer....and the computer will answer.

That is where we are headed right now. I think in 20 years or so...we will have inoculations against cancer and other deadly diseases.

But there is a darkside to all of this as well.

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:25 pm

Originally posted by incrediblecain
I believe computers will always be limited by their programmers, ultimately if X=3 to a computer and then its introduced that x is not equal to three and it wants to know what x equals it searches everything it can. It could never say X= a jackslapper unless that information is somewhere available to it. Creativity isn't exactly an algorithm it can be, but it is also non-mathematical which is ultimately all a computer can understand. If its not part of them or something they can access or extrapolate then they will not be able to discover that infact X= a jackslapper.

Creativity can be an algorithm. Creations can be greater than their creators. It is not wholly the material of the mechanism, but its complexity. It can be done in silicon, assuredly when quantum computers become feasible. I have doubts with regard to DNA computing.
I am a tube amp fan. I will tell you that present digital technology cannot perfectly mimic the nuances of hot glass. However, the improvements over the past few years leads me to think that we are less than 10 years away from perfect replication. Technology has the habit of make its predecessors obsolete.

<edit> derned typos!!!!

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:36 pm

If not for the courageous people in history who went against common belief and stuck thier necks out (literally) our present knowledge would still be far behind what it is today.

The world used to be flat, and some have died trying to explain the truth that it is not flat.

It's high time that we just let people speak freely, and open our minds to possibilities we ourselves may find wrong. So many times the truth or theory has been stepped on only to later be proven right.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:41 pm

Originally posted by Norm
If not for the courageous people in history who went against common belief and stuck thier necks out (literally) our present knowledge would still be far behind what it is today.

The world used to be flat, and some have died trying to explain the truth that it is not flat.

It's high time that we just let people speak freely, and open our minds to possibilities we ourselves may find wrong. So many times the truth or theory has been stepped on only to later be proven right.

I agree. I think the the negativity is rooted in fear and the fear of being controlled which to me is the real debate.

Computers will become smarter than us......the debate should be focused on how do we control such a thing...that is...if we can.

This argument is akin to genetics and the development of clones. It's already been done....so what are the ethical principles in how to apply this technology?

How will we apply A.I.? Will it serve us or render us obsolete?

Lightstream · Post by **Lightstream** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:42 pm

Well you can always unplug the damn thing.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:50 pm

If any of you would like to read a really good article on all of this I recommend this one from Wired Magazine.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/holytech.html

Very easy read.

Well you can always unplug the damn thing.

LOL!

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 6:02 pm

Evan, I'm still reading the article, but thought I'd let you know....

I think this is the book I was asking about earlier. (from the article you posted...

"If nature computed, why not the entire universe? The first to put down on paper the outrageous idea of a universe-wide computer was science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. In his 1956 short story "The Last Question," humans create a computer smart enough to bootstrap new computers smarter than itself. These analytical engines recursively grow super smarter and super bigger until they act as a single giant computer filling the universe. At each stage of development, humans ask the mighty machine if it knows how to reverse entropy. Each time it answers: "Insufficient data for a meaningful reply." The story ends when human minds merge into the ultimate computer mind, which takes over the entire mass and energy of the universe. Then the universal computer figures out how to reverse entropy and create a universe"

btw - Nice find

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 6:48 pm

Originally posted by Norm
If not for the courageous people in history who went against common belief and stuck thier necks out (literally) our present knowledge would still be far behind what it is today.

The world used to be flat, and some have died trying to explain the truth that it is not flat.

It's high time that we just let people speak freely, and open our minds to possibilities we ourselves may find wrong. So many times the truth or theory has been stepped on only to later be proven right.

Bucking convention with divergent thought is not unlike mutations, the great majority deteriments. Free thought and ideas need exploration before application. Some notions are wrong for their time, the people were not ready for them.

The cool thing is that computers can be taught to ignore conventions.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:10 pm

Great thread..

In 8 years, the general population should be able to buy (or build) a purter that rivels todays smaller superputers..One more powerful than Big Blue the beat Garry Kasperov in a series of chess matches. To me, that is just unreal...even with the one I have now..I can't beat the chess program I have if I set it to high...(but then that should come as no suprise to anyone)

The things that are on the horizon are mind boggling.

It seems that no one has mentioned Asmiov's Robotic Laws...They pretty much cover the above discussion. Even though the thread is about AI...wouldn't we also use them for droids?

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:13 pm

Very interesting article you posted Evan, thanks.

I wish I had the time to read all the books and other articles mentioned as well. I could read that kind of material forever, and still want more.
I will definitely be keeping my eyes open for the book "The Last Question" even though it's fiction, it will be an exceptional read.

One can only hope we develop in all areas and learn all there is to know before we either die, or end life on earth through our constant waring, or mishaps.

Blitz · Post by **Blitz** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:56 pm

Nice discussion guys

Very insightful.

So my next question is, do you think if Computers Do In Fact become intellecutally superior, will it be ethically correct? Will human rights be at risk?

Fire Away Part II

64bit · Post by **64bit** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:56 pm

I think as much that humans have been short sighted throughout history we have been just as pie-eyed as well. where is my flying car and house in the sky

Blitz · Post by **Blitz** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:57 pm

Thats actually a very legit point...

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:03 pm

Originally posted by Blitz
Nice discussion guys

Very insightful.

So my next question is, do you think if Computers Do In Fact become intellecutally superior, will it be ethically correct? Will human rights be at risk?

Fire Away Part II

Asimov's Laws of Robotics

A discussion...

I don't think when he wrote them, that he truly envisioned the computer age as it's come to be.

Still, for 1940, interesting reading.

First Law:

A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

Second Law:

A robot must obey orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

Third Law:

A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Deus ex Machina · Post by **Deus ex Machina** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:07 pm

Originally posted by downhill
It seems that no one has mentioned Asmiov's Robotic Laws...They pretty much cover the above discussion. Even though the thread is about AI...wouldn't we also use them for droids?

I had the pleasure of meeting Isaac Asimov in Philadephia several years ago. He was grumpy, but cordial. I enjoyed reading his books, not so much for the science fiction but for his social commentary.

shant,
david

BTW... No flying cars, however there will be a magnet drive train very soon.

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:38 pm

The Last Question

Found it, and it's online in it's entirety. Very short story, I was expecting something longer.

reader · Post by **reader** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 8:38 pm

The following is not philosophical.

I have known some that were.