A case against GOD

[ararat]

I'm wondering when wang ching starts charging a monthly subscription fee ^_^

I'm wondering when he'll receive his nobel prize for creating such an advanced AI

 

[buffachino]

What are we if not computer programs?
Who programmed the computer, if not a program itself?

 

[Meduzz]

Who programmed the computer, if not a program itself?

Natural selection :wink:

Who programmed natural selection? Logic...
But what's logic?? aranoid:

 

[Entheonaut]

Who programmed the computer, if not a program itself?

Natural selection :wink:

Who programmed natural selection? Logic...
But what's logic?? aranoid:

Mathematics is a form of logic... So it's gotta be wang the chinese kid AKA the creator / GOD :wink:

Now it all makes sense to me :roll:

 

[Subtle_Nod]

there's nothing bad about AI, except it is stuck in a program loop...

Not quite true. Infinite loops are bad in the sense almost. I'll try not to bring my work into the forum too much but - the loop that made the AI "do things" and "live" would be a loop it was stuck in.

It would die (or, persistence permitting shutdown) as soon as it left the loop.

If an infinite loop is in a daemon thread, the program will still exit after all other threads exit as well - though, the "Live" part of the AI program would have to be a nondaemon thread. Loosely something like:

while AI is not turned off
process senses
process feelings
process other inputs
send outputs
start the loop again

It would do this until it was shut down.

Shifting sideways slightly. The hard part about AI is modeling it accurately, the easiest way to model an AI would be to take an existing intelligent model and copy it - IE people. If this could be done well, the resulting AI would think much faster than people.

The problem is creating an accurate model of people think, which although much easier than modeling intelligence from nothing, is still VERY VERY hard to do well, or even quite good.

I think if Psychonaut was a profession one of the ways it would best serve would be to help build the model that AI would be built on. Something can be programmed to behave exactly like any model provided. If a team of Psychonauts were to accurately define the workings of their mind it would be little work to program something that mimicked it.

The problem is that getting a detailed, accurate model that performs is hard if you were to stop a man in the street for example, they would not be able to describe a human brain enough so that if you were to program word for word what they said - it wouldn't do anything.

People around here however, by having stepped out of the normal processes of their mind, have found that they see those everyday processes where other people would be caught up in their operation.

 

[Dantediv86]

I know GOD is kinda pissed off at me because i've been off the forum for a while
and he thought i went suicidal and he did things he regrets.
i've always liked him tho
i don't care if he's evil, good or both
if he's german, Italian, french or chinese
if he sleeps or not
if he's rude or polite
if he's right or wrong
i just like his radical behaviour
and his rough answers to vaguely stupid
or heavily idiotic, or even smart posts
depending on his view
i just like GOD (which can be read as German Old Dude, or Georg Otto Dodd, or Grand Over Dose, or Give Only Diethylamine, or God Ogd Dog, or Good Ol' D...fill in whatever D word comes to mind, or JUST GOD)

 

[lol*fan]

still wondering what this wang ching thing is about....

itll make you go blind :wink:

What?! It's masturbation?!

 

[Forkbender]

there's nothing bad about AI, except it is stuck in a program loop...

Not quite true. the loop that made the AI "do things" and "live" would be a loop it was stuck in.

The mind is an endless loop as well, so people might succeed in emulating that. Awareness, however. What is that? Can you program it?

 

[Forkbender]

Who programmed the computer, if not a program itself?

Natural selection :wink:

Who programmed natural selection? Logic...
But what's logic?? aranoid:

Mathematics is a form of logic... So it's gotta be wang the chinese kid AKA the creator / GOD :wink:

Now it all makes sense to me :roll:

rayer: rayer:

 

[Meduzz]

Good job forkbender, all A.I. are in a loop!

 

[restin]

what?? I really don't understand...if you read his posts,ey,that sould be a computer program...? hell...well,the only thing stroke to me was his strange type of quoting but hell,what do you mean with loop?

 

[Subtle_Nod]

what?? I really don't understand...if you read his posts,ey,that sould be a computer program...? hell...well,the only thing stroke to me was his strange type of quoting but hell,what do you mean with loop?

A loop is a section of code or instructions that a computer will repeat, in the case of AI, the loop would consist of the things that made it intelligent.

 

[buffachino]

You programmes are in more of a loop than you think, lol.

 

[BrainEater]

every AI is always in a loop, simply because it is a constructed machine and has a limited pool of reactions... so the loop might also consist of many loops, but being a loop in itself. except the AI had the possibility to become so intelligent to decide not to be AI anymore. an AI that can program itself and attain knowledge still has the same intelligence in a way... advanced AI's would even be able to alter their intelligence level by learning...

you know of the mega computer deep thought ?? it said the answer to the universe and everything else was 42... forty-two...


peace :weedman:

 

[Forkbender]

Well, 42 was the answer to the Big Question. Now they are trying to find out what the Big Question is. Sort of like Jeopardy on a large scale.

 

[restin]

Now they are trying to find out what the Big Question is.

the big question is How Many Roads?....at least officially

I understand...and what was the failure that convicted GOD?

 

[Subtle_Nod]

every AI is always in a loop, simply because it is a constructed machine and has a limited pool of reactions...

Almost, it is a loop because if it wasn't, the program would end or only run as many times as there was code.

That is:

Lather,
Rinse,
Repeat

Versus:

Lather,
Rinse,
Lather,
Rinse

First would get to repeat, and start lathering and rinsing, then when it got to repeat the second, third, one millionth time, it would still repeat.

Second one would repeat twice.

If you had:

Lather,
Rinse,
Repeat Twice

That would work exactly the same as the second example. With millions of lines of code, it is easier to tell it to do something more than once than it is to write the same instruction as many times as it needs doing.

Same with AI, you have:

Process stuff,
Do stuff,
Repeat

It would keep doing it.

Millions of times. Even if it WAS truly intelligent, it would still need to loop.

If you had:

Process Stuff,
Do Stuff,
Process Stuff,
Do Stuff,

It would only "be intelligent" twice, if you wanted it to do it 100 times without a loop, that would be a lot of extra work. (You could copy and paste, but, if you wanted to change one instruction, or add something between Processing and Doing, you would need to redo it all, if there was a loop, only one change is needed.)

 

[Brugmansia]

Well, fascinating that it's possible to create an indenpendant 10100010100101010101011111100010101010110 etc thinker, but it's nothing like fused moleculs.

 

[buffachino]

if there was a loop, only one change is needed.

You just said more than you realise.

 

[pooz321]

do you pm god to talk to him or wat?