Social Link checked the thread. Wow! This is a nice thread!

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

I know that there has been some recent-ish interest in analog AI as opposed to digital. Which one are you talking about?

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

The thing with AI is the fact that it has been created without feeling. If you were to create a machine dedicated to killing people do you believe it would experience regret? One of the most powerful feelings a normal human being would experience?

That's what separates our intelligence from a machine. The machine makes decisions based on what was encoded into its "brain" while people make decisions that rapidly change and adapt to the situations that come before them. A machine is built (by humans) with specific purpose. We were built with general purpose.

 

[FSK]

I know that there has been some recent-ish interest in analog AI as opposed to digital. Which one are you talking about?

Most likely the AI they teach in a computer science degree. Which is digital since its programmed on a computer.

What do you mean when you say analog AI?

The thing with AI is the fact that it has been created without feeling. If you were to create a machine dedicated to killing people do you believe it would experience regret? One of the most powerful feelings a normal human being would experience?

That's what separates our intelligence from a machine. The machine makes decisions based on what was encoded into its "brain" while people make decisions that rapidly change and adapt to the situations that come before them. A machine is built (by humans) with specific purpose. We were built with general purpose.

A human wouldn't feel regret if they thought they were doing the right thing. Machines can be programmed to adapt to situations that come before them. I don't follow you when you say we were built for a general purpose.

and as a phd in engineering cybernetics I agree with Drigo, AI is dumb and has a long way to go.

 

[Zelkam]

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the day that AI becomes advanced to the point of self consciousness, but if we did I would wager that they would be put on the same moral standing as animals. Right now if a dog were to attack someone there wouldn't be a trial or anything, they would just put the dog down. I have a feeling that's how machines would be treated as well. No matter how advanced AI becomes, it'll always lack the one thing that set humans apart from everything else - a soul.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

The thing with AI is the fact that it has been created without feeling. If you were to create a machine dedicated to killing people do you believe it would experience regret? One of the most powerful feelings a normal human being would experience?

That's what separates our intelligence from a machine. The machine makes decisions based on what was encoded into its "brain" while people make decisions that rapidly change and adapt to the situations that come before them. A machine is built (by humans) with specific purpose. We were built with general purpose.

But if the AI is self aware and can learn, then assuming there is nothing controlling it, it can have its own determinative force. It no longer becomes a matter of it being whatever we make it to be, no more than people can make other people what they want them to be anyway (debatable, though I don't want to go into it).

If an AI can think for itself and is self aware, what is stopping it from reflecting? Isn't reflecting just thinking about past experiences? Isn't reflecting a small step away from experiencing something similar to regret?

Most likely the AI they teach in a computer science degree. Which is digital since its programmed on a computer.

What do you mean when you say analog AI?



A human wouldn't feel regret if they thought they were doing the right thing. Machines can be programmed to adapt to situations that come before them. I don't follow you when you say we were built for a general purpose.

Essentially the thing with digital AI is you're restricted to 1's and 0's, but analog AI can store much more than this in multiple states. It's much more similar to the way nature operates, though digital is simpler. Recently there have been some break-throughs with it. Some Aussies claim to have developed the equivalent to an artificial brain cell that works just like ours do.


Edit:

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the day that AI becomes advanced to the point of self consciousness, but if we did I would wager that they would be put on the same moral standing as animals. Right now if a dog were to attack someone there wouldn't be a trial or anything, they would just put the dog down. I have a feeling that's how machines would be treated as well. No matter how advanced AI becomes, it'll always lack the one thing that set humans apart from everything else - a soul.

Ah, but arguably, if an animal exhibited enough intelligence and self awareness, wouldn't you start to feel uneasy about treating it like an animal? That's why I used the alien example.

 

[DarkDeity15]

Im sorry, @ DarkDeity15 . Im 29, so you are really a kid to my eyes... maybe kiddo is just too friendly? If you are not confortable with this, I will not do it again. In other hand, i do have good grammar... maybe I make some mistakes, but i can deffend myself in english environment D:, I'm german, you know...
I don't want, by any means, that you don't try to win... but the odds are that you would be destroyed... just take it easy and learn.


Derzeit leben in Düsseldorf, aber Chile ist wärmer in menschlicher Hinsicht.
Btw, right now my city is a bit cold... but we need some rain, so i think it is ok.

Yeah it's actually my bad. I reacted so badly to that because I thought you meant that in a negative way.

Speaking of AI, I wish CPUs in Smash learned and adapted similar to how high level players would. And no, the Amiibo BS doesn't actually count since they still can't do things that real players can, plus there's all that equipment crap to worry about. It would be a neat training tool for when you can't find someone to play. Especially for folks like myself.

 

[Lawz.]

This talk reminds me of I Robot

 

[Zerker]

Speaking of AI, I wish CPUs in Smash learned and adapted similar to how high level players would. And no, the Amiibo BS doesn't actually count since they still can't do things that real players can, plus there's all that equipment crap to worry about. It would be a neat training tool for when you can't find someone to play. Especially for folks like myself.

That would actually be incredibly useful for training offline
Guess we can only dream at the moment, though.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

This talk reminds me of I Robot

I read the I Robot short stories by Isaac Asimov a couple of times when I was a kid. I'd recommend it to anyone if you're mildly interested in that sort of thing.

 

[BaPTraPLaP]

Yeah it's actually my bad. I reacted so badly to that because I thought you meant that in a negative way.

Speaking of AI, I wish CPUs in Smash learned and adapted similar to how high level players would. And no, the Amiibo BS doesn't actually count since they still can't do things that real players can, plus there's all that equipment crap to worry about. It would be a neat training tool for when you can't find someone to play. Especially for folks like myself.

The amiibo actually gains bonus stats once level 50 regardless of if you gave it equipment. While the amiibo does tend to pull off combos. In a fighting game, incorperating an A.I. that does combos should be no surprise. They just turn into buffed level 9's with good reactions. But they are still abusable basically go to edgeguard against one and it is dead. They will air dodge without a jump and won't be able to recover. At least with my Mario one.

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

Most likely the AI they teach in a computer science degree. Which is digital since its programmed on a computer.

What do you mean when you say analog AI?



A human wouldn't feel regret if they thought they were doing the right thing. Machines can be programmed to adapt to situations that come before them. I don't follow you when you say we were built for a general purpose.

and as a phd in engineering cybernetics I agree with Drigo, AI is dumb and has a long way to go.

General means a broad range. We all set our own purposes because we are able to do so. The difference between us feeling regret for tough actions is the simple fact that we are able to determine whether it was right or wrong. A machine doesn't necessarily do that.

@ Fox Is Openly Deceptive I know where your coming from. That's a pretty big if. If a machine learned how to feel and speak for its OWN actions, then the machine would be as much of a human as we are.

Humans have the ultimate blessing of free will. Machines do not.

If machines developed All of this or if we truly found a way to accomplish this... I would think that would be a scary time for us as human beings.

 

[FSK]

@ Fox Is Openly Deceptive ,

these questions you are asking are on the basis that we would actually develop AI which can mimick or even be considered functional individuals in society. Therefore I'm wondering why would we do that?

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

@ Fox Is Openly Deceptive ,

these questions you are asking are on the basis that we would actually develop AI which can mimick or even be considered functional individuals in society. Therefore I'm wondering why would we do that?

Why have we built and created many things that we already have?

 

[FSK]

Why have we built and created many things that we already have?

Because they either fulfill a necessity or they generate money :\

 

[Rizen]

Fox Is Openly Asimov.

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

Because they either fulfill a necessity or they generate money :\

There's your answer, my friend.

 

[Zelkam]

Because they either fulfill a necessity or they generate money :\

I question whether Dolly qualified for either of those

 

[Elessar]

I agree with Zelkam. While it could be argued that dolly was cloned out of necessity, scientists have an amazing record of doing things just to see whether it can be done or not.

 

[Naroghin]

Humans have the ultimate blessing of free will. Machines do not.

If machines developed All of this or if we truly found a way to accomplish this... I would think that would be a scary time for us as human beings.

Computers do already have this to a limited degree and it's been developing over the last few years. Just last year there was a study where robot helpers with a more "free" AI (that is, took risks without knowing the outcome, tried new things, improvised, made "human" mistakes) were given to people to complete a task, while helpers with more "traditional," robot-y AI's (precise, accurate, did not act unless outcomes were "certain," and would stop to observe and analyze before taking any actions) were given to others to help with the same things. The study found almost unanimously the people preferred the more human AI's, but that's not the point; the point is that we can already program some aspects of freewill into computers. Just observe this robot 6 years ago improvising with a human performer, not only following tempo, key, and style cues, but also trying out ideas and making "mistakes."

Of course, I can choose whether or not to improvise, while the robot can only choose what to improvise within certain parameters, but isn't that only one order away? When I am acting out "freewill," is it not within a set of parameters based on current, arguably limited human understanding of the definable and affect-able universe? The question isn't whether or not we'll be able to grant human level freewill to computers, but whether or not we've found a further level of freewill by that time and what implications that could have regarding pretty much everything.

#CTHULUSDREAMSARECONTROLLINGUSALL

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

Computers do already have this to a limited degree and it's been developing over the last few years. Just last year there was a study where robot helpers with a more "free" AI (that is, took risks without knowing the outcome, tried new things, improvised, made "human" mistakes) were given to people to complete a task, while helpers with more "traditional," robot-y AI's (precise, accurate, did not act unless outcomes were "certain," and would stop to observe and analyze before taking any actions) were given to others to help with the same things. The study found almost unanimously the people preferred the more human AI's, but that's not the point; the point is that we can already program some aspects of freewill into computers. Just observe this robot 6 years ago improvising with a human performer, not only following tempo, key, and style cues, but also trying out ideas and making "mistakes."

Of course, I can choose whether or not to improvise, while the robot can only choose what to improvise within certain parameters, but isn't that only one order away? When I am acting out "freewill," is it not within a set of parameters based on current, arguably limited human understanding of the definable and affect-able universe? The question isn't whether or not we'll be able to grant human level freewill to computers, but whether or not we've found a further level of freewill by that time and what implications that could have regarding pretty much everything.

#CTHULUSDREAMSARECONTROLLINGUSALL

Exactly as you have stated, it's only improvising based on what he is doing, merely "simulating" a free will. Extremely impressive nonetheless. However, as soon as that machine decides to stop playing with that human performer all together is when we really hit that border.

It's crazy to think how close to that we really are to that.

 

[sasook]

Until Siri is like Jarvis, I won't be impressed.

 

[ama99]

Prince Belessar? EmoDeity?

XDXDXD

 

[Naroghin]

Exactly as you have stated, it's only improvising based on what he is doing, merely "simulating" a free will. Extremely impressive nonetheless. However, as soon as that machine decides to stop playing with that human performer all together is when we really hit that border.

It's crazy to think how close to that we really are to that.

It sometimes feels like I'm merely simulating a free will, as well. The problem with freewill is that we assume that since we have a concept for it, we must have it.

I personally don't fear the development of AI and robotics, as I believe there is a much deeper and more convincing difference between humanity and AI that we won't discover until we take the concept of AI to its logical conclusion. I think once we hit that wall we may be closer to understanding ourselves.

BTW it's conversations like this that continually remind me why I love the Link social over all others. You guys are pretty awesome, freewill or not.

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

It sometimes feels like I'm merely simulating a free will, as well. The problem with freewill is that we assume that since we have a concept for it, we must have it.

I personally don't fear the development of AI and robotics, as I believe there is a much deeper and more convincing difference between humanity and AI that we won't discover until we take the concept of AI to its logical conclusion. I think once we hit that wall we may be closer to understanding ourselves.

BTW it's conversations like this that continually remind me why I love the Link social over all others. You guys are pretty awesome, freewill or not.

My problem with all of it is if AI develops free will, they will become too human. If there's one thing history has shown, it's that humans seek conquest and control.

 

[8MAN]

My problem with all of it is if AI develops free will, they will become too human. If there's one thing history has shown, it's that humans seek conquest and control.

Agreed, once development of AI reaches the "free will" stage, we'll probably all live in a dystopia, where humans are all eliminated or enslaved by the machines.

 

[Vonzar the Soulrender]

It sometimes feels like I'm merely simulating a free will, as well. The problem with freewill is that we assume that since we have a concept for it, we must have it.

I personally don't fear the development of AI and robotics, as I believe there is a much deeper and more convincing difference between humanity and AI that we won't discover until we take the concept of AI to its logical conclusion. I think once we hit that wall we may be closer to understanding ourselves.

BTW it's conversations like this that continually remind me why I love the Link social over all others. You guys are pretty awesome, freewill or not.

I agree here. Humans breed animals for specific personality traits and temperments all the time. Why do we think that our thoughts, personalities and affinities are truly our own? Who I am right now could easily entirely be the product of my genetics responding to environment.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

I don't think it's a matter of 'if' so much as it's a matter of 'when' we'll see artificial intelligence indistinguishable from us. Most predictions see this happening within our life times, but then predictions have been wrong before (where is my hover-board?). There are many people that see no reason why analog AI couldn't become conscious, while digital AI, i.e. what everyone is used to, seems to have no hope of that. The current trend is to simply copy what nature does, and so far on a small scale it has been working. People are seeing the possibilities of combining synthetic biotechnology with analog AI to create new conscious life forms. We'll just have to wrap our heads around that, because it's coming. I think that the biggest obstacle stopping it from happening at the moment is the laws that we've set in place, because it's wierd and we don't want to have to deal with it, not to mention that it's arguably dangerous, perhaps extremely dangerous.

 

[Rizen]

Everything computers or AI do is always based on formula. There is no 'true randomness' that can can be generated by computers. For example on this site it says:
https://www.random.org/
"Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.

RANDOM.ORG offers true random numbers to anyone on the Internet. The randomness comes from atmospheric noise, which for many purposes is better than the pseudo-random number algorithms typically used in computer programs."
This is why AI is different than true free will.

 

[WolfieXVII ❂]

The thread name
Heh, I get that reference

What's up Links?

 

[FierceGaiety]

Getting a Link amiibo to hasten the robot apocalypse

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

Everything computers or AI do is always based on formula. There is no 'true randomness' that can can be generated by computers. For example on this site it says:
https://www.random.org/
"Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.

RANDOM.ORG offers true random numbers to anyone on the Internet. The randomness comes from atmospheric noise, which for many purposes is better than the pseudo-random number algorithms typically used in computer programs."
This is why AI is different than true free will.

That would be digital though. Digital is much more focused on doing only what is programmed.

 

[KenMeister]

Getting a Link amiibo to hasten the robot apocalypse

In that case you might want to get a Mega Man amiibo. *runs*

 

[Lawz.]

I don't think it's a matter of 'if' so much as it's a matter of 'when' we'll see artificial intelligence indistinguishable from us. Most predictions see this happening within our life times, but then predictions have been wrong before (where is my hover-board?). There are many people that see no reason why analog AI couldn't become conscious, while digital AI, i.e. what everyone is used to, seems to have no hope of that. The current trend is to simply copy what nature does, and so far on a small scale it has been working. People are seeing the possibilities of combining synthetic biotechnology with analog AI to create new conscious life forms. We'll just have to wrap our heads around that, because it's coming. I think that the biggest obstacle stopping it from happening at the moment is the laws that we've set in place, because it's wierd and we don't want to have to deal with it, not to mention that it's arguably dangerous, perhaps extremely dangerous.

I see that Back to the Future reference Foxxy.

 

[link7]

So after some consideration, I'll be heading to a small local tourney today. Thanks for pushing me @Volcanic Doomfire
Tourney is allowing Pokémon Stadium 2 and Weegee's Mansion as legal stages. I'm insta banning Weegee, but I can't wait to bombslide across the icy terrain in PS2. It's stupid fun, and Link goes flying.

@Zane the pure I'm going to add you on my Wii U. Would you mind uploading some vids on Youtube I'll send you? They're of me playing WA's current best Link, Tallguy. Intense stuff.

 

[Rizen]

I got some good wifi games in this morning. Which is nice because I was doing terrible last week or whenever.

 

[link7]

Heading off to Orting to play in a tourney. It shall be glorious.

 

[DarkDeity15]

So I looked up TallGuy on YT and t his is what I found. He's pretty damn good imo. Also, jab 2 > Dsmash is guaranteed, maybe?

 

[8MAN]

So I looked up TallGuy on YT and t his is what I found. He's pretty damn good imo. Also, jab 2 > Dsmash is guaranteed, maybe?

It's not guaranteed.

 

[FSK]

so.....much....rolling....;-;

 

[Himura Kenshin]

It's not guaranteed. The only thing that is close to being close to being close to being close to guaranteed is jab 2 to spin attack.