20 Jan
2025
20 Jan
'25
1:51 p.m.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 09:15:54PM +0000, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote:
On 19/01/2025 15:37, ben via cctalk wrote:
There are theories which speculate that self-awareness is not needed for
intelligence, but that is diving into philosophy ...
On 2025-01-19 6:12 a.m., Adrian Godwin via cctalk
wrote:
Now define "self-awareness"! I like to parse the 'artificial'
differently. It's not AN artificial
intelligence - a manufactured entity that exhibits intelligence -
it's JUST
artificial intelligence - something that appears to be intelligence but
isn't, like artificial turf.
I hope that one day we will have machine intelligences. But I'm
unsure that
merely imitating how they might look is a path to that.
I thought that all was covered on the movie, Metropolis.
Ask HAL 9000 for real answers. I think self aware is needed 1st
and a body, other wise it all just text word games. But we're absolutely seeing word games and
probability right now. Like the mechanical Turk, there's nothing intelligent
in the machine.
But there sure is a lot clever marketing around it.
While we're at it, biological science had clearly
been unable to create
life. Not even a single cell. And I've no reason to believe we're about to
see a breakthrough it that either.
There have been various "simulate early (theoretical) earth conditions
in the lab to see what happens" and while at least some got all the way
to some interesting organic molecules, none of them reached even the most
primitive life forms - maybe they just need to refine their experiments
and run them for a billion years? ;-)
Kind regards,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison