so eric wrote:
>Pardon me, but bullshit! All one needs is a reaction scheme -- general
>rules, and a fall-back position. Whether one even needs that for
>"intelligence" is another question entirely -- do humans have a
reaction
>for every action? I doubt it...
later i explained that since programming a computer to understand things
changing is impossible and therefore you must teach the computer to
teach (program) itself. whether you like it or not humans react
everrything. your sensory nerves react to all stimuli unless they are
impared. we obviously dont rememeber every stimulus, we do have a
selective memory otherwise wed overflow our minds capacity, should an
artificailly intelligent computer have a selective memory?
>> intelligence is the ability to react.
>
>In that case, certain forms of bacteria certainly score highly on
>intelligence tests...
do you really think i mean that all intelligence is, is the ability to
react? clarification: part of intelligence is the ability to react.
another part is to react "intelligently". also, "certain forms" of
bacteria dont have sensory such as vision and hearing and smelling to
react to.
>> intelligence feeds off of conciousness and awareness.
>
>No... both consciousness and awareness are *properties* of
intelligence.
intelligence increases because of consciousness and awareness (the
ability to react...) and i guess it works to say that you are and
intelligent life form because of conciousness and awareness (among other
things).
>> we learn from observing: a book, a person, an email etc.
>> can you teach a computer to program itself by what it sees?
>
>Vision, perhaps not yet (any body read anything more about the
Ping-Pong
>robot?). However, if you're looking for computers which learn from
their
>past actions (and the actions of of those they encounter) you need look
no
>farther than the chess programs. I believe there was also a checkers
>program about 1950 which "bootstrapped" itself so far that it easily
beat
>it's programmer...
wouldnt it be great if we could apply this form of artificial
intelligence into other places...
>> id like to see a computer that can install a new hard drive in
>> itself when it runs out of disk space, and can fix itself when
>> it has a problem.
>
>And I'd like to see a human who could grow a second brain, or even just
>regenerate a limb which was missing. My point being humans don't know
how
>to extend themselves yet either... although we're working on it!
yes but do we run out a of memory? and how many megabytes of data do
you think can fit in the human brain? maybe we have compression
algortihms for information where we break down knowledge into a pallette
of words and then that pallette of words compresses our knowledge? a
computer would need to ugrade its memory to fit more knowledge other
wise it would need to select which things to "forget" and do we really
want artificial intelligence to need forget things?
>> that computer is the first step towards artificial intelligence,
>> the next step of course would be to "teach it to learn."
>
>Again, computers learning from their own encounters has been done many
>times[1] -- a defining property of intelligence, yes, but it's just not
>quite enough.
what more does the computer need... it needs the ability to expirience
things, to actually be able to learn. programmers might program in the
english language into the "brain" of the computer... but what good is
that. babies dont know a language when they are born. the problem with
programming artificial intelligence is that we need to be minimalists,
we shouldnt program in knowledge we should program "intelligence" and
then let the machine do the learning.
~the great tinkerer
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com