The day Asimovs robots become a reality would be quite interesting, I doubt they'd run on Windows or Mac OS though likely the OS used involving the three laws will be Linux based likely since it is open source and no royalties would have to be paid to Apple or Microsoft, you'd be surprised how many of the complex gadgets we take for granted use Linux because if they used any software other than that electronics manufacturers would have to pay through the nose for the licensing fees or perhaps pass them on to the consumers.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How near do you think the singularity is?
- Thread starter spaceboots06
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Processing power is the ability to manipulate data. Chimpanzees can not manipulate even half of the data we can. Chimpanzees can execute basic motor functions and carry out simple tasks, not solve physics problems.
I am reading Kurzweil's book right now, although have only just started. I won't comment on what I think will happen in the future, but what is interesting in the book so far is how he highlights the fact that we are in the midst of exponential curve with respect to technology.
Most of us make future projections based on past experience, and expect the pace of progress in technology to follow past patterns. While this is a close approximation when you are on the "flat" of the exponential curve, once you hit the "knee" of the curve things take off very quickly. Kurzweil suggests that we are entering into this "knee" phase of the growth curve now.
If this indeed is the case, it will be very interesting times in these next 30-40 years.
Most of us make future projections based on past experience, and expect the pace of progress in technology to follow past patterns. While this is a close approximation when you are on the "flat" of the exponential curve, once you hit the "knee" of the curve things take off very quickly. Kurzweil suggests that we are entering into this "knee" phase of the growth curve now.
If this indeed is the case, it will be very interesting times in these next 30-40 years.
That's what they want you to think.
Anyway, simply having the ability to make calculations really really fast and having lots of RAM doesn't make a machine "intelligent". It's still as dumb as a rock. No matter how fast it goes and how much storage it has, it won't get any smarter. What makes us smart (or, at least, smarter than a rock) isn't particularly related to how fast we can calculate stuff.
--Eric
Sorry guys, but The Singularity is way off. There's one thing everyone is assuming will happen, that we've seen no evidence of, or steps towards, that has to happen before (or at) the singularity.
Artificial creativity.
So far, nothing has ever been programmed to think creatively. We haven't even programmed anything to learn, which is the first step toward creativity. We program things to remember patterns and make programmed assumptions about what might happen next, and we call that learning for marketing purposes, but they aren't seeing anything we haven't told them to look for and they aren't making decisions we haven't told them to make.
Artificial creativity.
So far, nothing has ever been programmed to think creatively. We haven't even programmed anything to learn, which is the first step toward creativity. We program things to remember patterns and make programmed assumptions about what might happen next, and we call that learning for marketing purposes, but they aren't seeing anything we haven't told them to look for and they aren't making decisions we haven't told them to make.
Ah but thats where your wrong. There was a lab robot that was able to design and execute its own experiment.
Still, AI anywhere near threatening is a LONG way off, after all, someone would have to program it and it would only be as smart as we can think logically. If a programmer cant think of a way to make a certain thought process happen, its not gonna happen.
Well, we can teach computers to "learn" but only if we have a very cconstrained definition of learning. And there are incredible programs that can have computers mimc Bach and drawings. There are story generators that will produce suspense stories. Much depends on how you define learning and creativity. And humans are still way faster at alogical, non rule-based thinking.
Kurzweill places much stock on the higher order thinking that is used when most of us think of "intelligence", and on symbolic representations that are in "the head" (read CPU in the computer). I favor Rodney Brooks' insect robots, that use a bottom-up approach to how creatures interact with the environment, and learn from these interactions. The nature of these "beings" may evolve to something more like sentient creatures, which is where the scary stuff begins.
http://singinst.org/
Kurzweill places much stock on the higher order thinking that is used when most of us think of "intelligence", and on symbolic representations that are in "the head" (read CPU in the computer). I favor Rodney Brooks' insect robots, that use a bottom-up approach to how creatures interact with the environment, and learn from these interactions. The nature of these "beings" may evolve to something more like sentient creatures, which is where the scary stuff begins.
http://singinst.org/
All I know is that my dolphins just took off, leaving a note that said, "So long, and thanks for all the fish."
And my mice are all experimenting on me.
And my mice are all experimenting on me.
If you think about it, it will be nice to live in a Human zoo, the robots will feed us, keep us healthy, and give us a comfortable living environment, and we won't have to work! But thats assuming that there will be a robot organization for the humane treatment of humans .
.