http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7248875.stm Machines 'to match man by 2029'
Machines will achieve human-level artificial intelligence by 2029, a leading US inventor has predicted.
Humanity is on the brink of advances that will see tiny robots implanted in people's brains to make them more intelligent said engineer Ray Kurzweil.
He said machines and humans would eventually merge through devices implanted in the body to boost intelligence and health.
"It's really part of our civilisation," Mr Kurzweil said.
"But that's not going to be an alien invasion of intelligent machines to displace us."
Machines were already doing hundreds of things humans used to do, at human levels of intelligence or better, in many different areas, he said.
Anonymous
Kurzweil expects nanotech and artificial intelligence software to improve exponentially, which I don't really see the basis for. Computation, yes, exponential growth, but it takes more than that.
Anónimo
Quoted By:
Fucking scientists shouldn't make machines that are smarter than them ffs
Anonymous
Who the fuck cares, as long as I'll be able to abuse and fuck it.
Anonymous
What in the fuck? In a world slowly becoming more and more obsessed with fucking privacy invasion and thought-control someone would actually fucking imply that having robots inside your skull is a GOOD IDEA?!?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
"No! I must kill the machines" he shouted
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I for one welcome our Loli-Bot overlords.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699572 Yeah, but the robots will be sentient and won't take orders from the government.
Anonymous
We definitely shouldn't program them with emotions unless we give them some way to commit suicide.
Gunlord !.YMO7aNBcQ
Quoted By:
YAY, GHOST IN THE SHELL
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699565 Yeah, Kurzweil's basically Transhumanist as a matter of faith - I wouldn't take this too seriously coming from him.
Anonymous
>>699571 There's nothing more pathetic than some misogynist faggot shopping bruises and blood onto hentai. I'm sure you fapped while you did it.
I suspect Mommy didn't hug you enough and/or you've never been laid. Sorry Real Alpha Males keep all the poon away from your pasty white ass.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>699621 You come off sounding more like a butthurt woman than an ALPHA MALE. Cry moar.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Everyone always worries about robots taking over, but what they don't realize is that we will be the robots.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699632 INTERNET TOUGH GUY
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699621 lol more like fat whale goth bitch.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
2029
Anonymous
Quoted By:
durr machines make me smart
Anonymous
Quoted By:
STAY OUT OF THE 'TON BRO
Anonymous
Quoted By:
fuck yes cyborg bodies
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699621 BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
Anonymous
Everyone on 4chan awaits the day they can finally get their own indistinguishable-from-a-real-person catgirl android waifu.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699705 Cyborg 4channers will just kill the feminist groups.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
fuck yeah transhumanism!
Anonymous
Quoted By:
FUCK YEAH!
Anonymous
Quoted By:
FUCK YEAH SKYNET
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>699621 >I suspect Mommy didn't hug you enough Talking to yourself again?
Anonymous
the level of fucking nerdity in this thread is unreal. progress has plateaued, you're never going to get your human level intelligent computer in our lifetimes. here's why:
>>700229 you're wrong. and stupid.
>>700256 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERD
Anonymous
>>700229 WTF
do you know anything about computers or talking out your ass
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>700256 I don't think he NECESSARILY is wrong about ALL of it. Moore's Law is a naively-optimistic extrapolation in that it depends on a lot of factors that certain overprivileged imbeciles tend to take for granted. Personally, my money's on Peak Oil beating Technological Singularity to the punch - economic necessity collapsing the curve before anything transcendental comes of any of this.
I mean, I hope I'm wrong on some level. But I don't think so.
Anonymous
>>700601 well I for one, don't believe in peak oil, because if you suck out all the oil out of an oil well, just drill deeper, besides isn't there a theory that states the earth itself produces oil on its own not fossils?
Anonymous
>>700607 >besides isn't there a theory that states the earth itself produces oil on its own not fossils? lol wut
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700609 its there i just dont fucking know the name
Anonymous
The human mind is already metaphysically connected with machines and artificial intelligence through the use of computers and telecommunications. Think of your PC as your brain's wireless gateway to cyberspace, which is infinitely intricate. The more one delves into it, the greater consciousness is expanded and combined with that of others, creating a superconsciousness. Implants in and of themselves would not expand upon one's consciousness, however much efficiency and knowledge is increased via their implementation.
Anonymous
Your all fucking stupid. Every single one of you. There are massive PHILOSOPHICAL problems with the concept of A.I. Simply having the processing power of a human brain does in no way mean a machine has the intelligence of a non-nigger. Yes thats right, mind philosophy faggots. Eat it and die.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700632 Go back to bed, Iwakura. The world is not yet ready.
Anonymous
>>700633 >Philosophical Problems of Artificial Intelligence Where? Who's the instructor? Has he written anything we can check out for ourselves?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Now neither of us will be virgins!
Anonymous
>>700633 Wow, a whole class? You should be proud of yourself! All of /n/ is proud of you.
Anonymous
>>700638 At a major University. It's a high level Philosophy class I had to take for my degree. The reading was a variety of things everything from the standard Turning, to some interesting articles on the memeplex(yes there is a memeplex,to excerpts from Love & Sex With Robots. The professor was a woman, and no I won't tell you what university. A.I. research essentially comes down to the properties of the mind. What makes a mind, and how it works. None of which is understood well enough for true A.I. It's possible that something may one day pass the Turning Test but that doesn't mean necessarily it will have intelligence like ours.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700647 My point wasn't to impress you faggots. Just simply to impress on to you the fact your idiots. Jumping far a head of your selves. Hardware tech make progress very fast but a faster processor doesn't solve all problems.
differentAnon !3I4SJbCh8M
>>700633 >>PHILOSOPHICAL problems Like...?
All I currently see are engineering problems (many of which are quite large, like general purpose problem solving), but I know those can be solved because there are 6.3 billion working examples of "Intelligent minds made out of goop" out there.
Anonymous
>>700649 >The professor was a woman, and no I won't tell you what university. WELL I FOR ONE AM CONVINCED
Anonymous
>>700649 Cynthia Breazeal?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700653 >>but I know those can be solved because there are 6.3 billion working examples of "Intelligent minds made out of goop" out there. Yes, but who programmed them... OH SHI--
Anonymous
>>700653 Take some Mind Philosophy courses. Intelligence requires a Mind, what is a mind? What properties do computers need before they officially have a mind? How do you reproduce those properties with computers? Which of those properties is based of sense organs, or genetic implications. Is desire required for curiosity, is curiosity required for a measure of intelligence? Go eat a cock if you think we can accurately model a human mind, let alone create new intelligence with computers.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700655 I'll tell you a priest at Marquette University seduced underage students in his classes and the University covered it up and quietly moved him out a year later.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700657 No, her degrees are all in Philosophy. Her interests just happen to run to mind philosophy.
Anonymous
Go listen to Steve Reich - Robots Cyborgs Immortality Anonymous Sun 17 Feb 2008 12:43:00 No. 700669 Report Quoted By:
Henri Atlan: The Prophet Jeremiah decided to build an artificial man. He was perfect... was able to talk immediately. He talked to Jeremiah
Anonymous
NOTICE: for every 'scientific prediction' about what will be invented in the future, add another 10-30 years depending on how big the idea is.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Another interesting observation is that the more information your mind has the faster it works toward solutions and creating new ideas. The more information a machine has the slower it works. A interesting hardware problem no?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Richard Dawkins:
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700671 Maybe more. This is a harder problem than anyone wants to let on. It's not all that hard to fake intelligence, it is however, amazingly hard to create it.
Anonymous
Regardless, it's going to happen before a lot of the posters in this thread die.
Anonymous
>>700686 Define it? What is the big it exactly?
Anonymous
>>700691 >Machines will achieve human-level artificial intelligence by 2029, a leading US inventor has predicted. First fucking post. Read moar.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700693 I meant be more specific. Define Human Level intelligence.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Computers are retarded. AI is retarded.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
HAY GUYS WHATS GOING ON IN THIS THREAD
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Steve Reich FTW :D
Koraboros !!OQQktRg6ogO
>>700653 Just because a person might know how to operate a car doesn't mean they know every detail needed to build one.
We don't understand a whole lot about *how* we actually think. If we did, then why even begin to bother with faster microprocessors? Why not go directly to biological processing and just build computers with literal brains? The biological, psychological, mathematical, and yes, philisophical understanding just isn't there.
We are barely at the point where we can write computer programs to recognize faces at slightly different angles with any degree of accuracy and speech recognition programs that are somewhat useable. What makes you think that makes us ready to write Microsoft Person v 1.0?
differentAnon !3I4SJbCh8M
>>700663 Ah, I see you and I differ in how we define intelligence. I say that everything that can make a decision based off of variable data is intelligent, so even sorting algorithms are intelligent, to a very small degree.
To create a human like intelligence we will need all that you say and more, but to create a human level intelligence we merely need a learning machine that is generalized enough to learn anything. Not an easy task at all, but not nearly as hard as making it human like.
And no need for vulgarities. I realize that this is 4chan and saying "eat a cock" is like saying hello, but usually people wait until after I've said I've repeatedly and enjoyably had trysts with their mother (and sometimes their father) before they start spewing profanities.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700713 Smart Anon is Smart.
Anonymous
Sooner rather than later, we're going to have to worry not about what a computer does, but who a computer is.
Koraboros !!OQQktRg6ogO
>>700716 If it's that simple, then I challenge you to overcome the aforementioned obstacles, and make it so, homosexual.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700726 hurrr durrr durrr derp herp duurr
differentAnon !3I4SJbCh8M
>>700727 It's simple, but I explicitly said it wasn't easy.
I wonder how much learning, if any, AI from RTS's do? It's a much smaller problem domain, so maybe you could bootstrap from there into a more complicated domain, and up and up until you got to the real world.
Anonymous
>>700739 it's not simple. a person can glance at this image and in less than a second process that each item is a chair.
even the best supercomputers today would UTTERLY FAIL at the same task.
you're proposing that a computer recognize the chairs, and do other things we associate with being human that would be several orders of magnitude more difficult, and you have the gall to say its simple.
LOL
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I will fly on a cloud of farts sooner than machines achieve a human level artificial intelligence. Mark my words!
Koraboros !!OQQktRg6ogO
Quoted By:
>>700751 Precisely. We have not even the vaguest clues about how to translate the human ability to take each of these objects which are composed of only tangible elements such as height, width, depth, shape, size, and abstract those features to the point where we can derive a function for them.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I bet faggots like Davecat would love to hear this news.
differentAnon !3I4SJbCh8M
>>700751 Some of those things aren't chairs, they're couches. Pedantic, maybe, but an important difference.
And I said it was simple, not easy. For an AI to know that those are chairs (or could be used as such) it merely needs to roughly figure out where the flat spaces are (from the shading) and then look up in it's memory what you do with a chair. Two simple steps, but the first isn't easy.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700768 Your distinction misses the point, so in that sense, the difference isn't important at all
and it isn't simple or easy. It is extremely complicated and daunting
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>700768 that's not how software works. you need a definite sequence of instruction. There's no program in existence that can simply "look up in it's memory what you do with a chair" because it would be impossible to simply code by itself. you would need to first make the computer understand the concept of a person, then concept of a person walking around in 3d space, the concept of a person sitting, the difference between sitting on a rock, a bed, a lawn, a tire swing, etc.. before you even get to the chair. the computer would literally need to recognize the millions of objects in out daily world, and it would have to understand that each item could come in almost infinite variations. you're talking about trillions of lines of code.
it's just not feasible in our lifetimes
