Becoming God

[Nakosis]

This is really about AI - Artificial Intelligence. Something I've been interested in since the 70's.

Prior AI software seemed a trick to me. Encoding a program to emulate human intelligence like "Dear Eliza". Where is was more interesting to see how long a human participate could be fooled into thinking they were actually conversing with another human being. ELIZA - Wikipedia

The a software engine I've come across which I think may actually change all that. It's called Entropica.

"A fan of Frank Herbert’s Dune series, Wissner-Gross drew another analogy for me, but this time to the character of Paul Atreides who, after ingesting the spice melange and becoming the Kwisatz Haderach, could see all possible futures and hence choose from them, enabling him to become a galactic god."

http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-skynet-might-emerge-from-simple-physics-482402911

I see a number of different implications for this, though admittedly I'm still trying to digest it all, from the development of actual machine intelligence to the causal explanation for the development of human intelligence to the mechanism for indeterminism.

The basis of this software engine is the formula for intelligence.

Eclipse and Java Blog by Michael Scharf: A new Equation for Intelligence F = T ∇ Sτ - a Force that Maximises the Future Freedom of Action

I suspect that human beings are just a by product of this causal development of intelligence. That we maybe just an intermediary step in the development of machine intelligence which will be far superior both physically and mentally to ourselves.

 

[Repox]

The final test for the robot is to create something from nothing. Assuming God can take a spark of His holiness and turn it into a material world (universe) designed to imprison another spiritual force, Satan, we have an everlasting marvel.

 

[Quintessence]

That we maybe just an intermediary step in the development of machine intelligence which will be far superior both physically and mentally to ourselves.

How so?

 

[JustWondering]

The final test for the robot is to create something from nothing. Assuming God can take a spark of His holiness and turn it into a material world (universe) designed to imprison another spiritual force, Satan, we have an everlasting marvel.

Why do you assume there was nothing before the big bang? Why do you start with unverifiable supernatural based assumptions (that your god exists, has certain attributes, did certain things)?

 

[Nakosis]

The final test for the robot is to create something from nothing. Assuming God can take a spark of His holiness and turn it into a material world (universe) designed to imprison another spiritual force, Satan, we have an everlasting marvel.

Exactly the theory I'm working on. Not necessarily a robot as I see this as just another evolutionary step in the development of intelligence, but a universal intelligence, whatever form that may take and taking a spark from it's holiness, as you put it, and causing the next material universe.

It's design and purpose however is part of your religious narrative which I don't follow.

 

[Nakosis]

How so?

A machine can go places inhospitable to humans. We biologically require oxygen and a very narrow temperature range.

Computers can make evaluations and decisions much faster and can accurately store information. The only thing currently missing is real intelligence. The ability to think abstractly.

 

[Repox]

Exactly the theory I'm working on. Not necessarily a robot as I see this as just another evolutionary step in the development of intelligence, but a universal intelligence, whatever form that may take and taking a spark from it's holiness, as you put it, and causing the next material universe.

It's design and purpose however is part of your religious narrative which I don't follow.

Sorry, for the confusion. I envision, based on a series of dreams, heaven composed of bright sparks of white light, they have no material basis. Our universe is made from matter and energy with movable parts, or nonspiritual entities based on material attributes. Unless you can reproduce holy sparks you are stuck with a material world. It explains how something can come from nothing. God, a spiritual being with holy sparks, created our material universe. I can imagine your robot in our physical law based world, but it will never transcend into another dimension of reality, one necessary for immortality.

Thinking abstractly may be close to biological functions related to freewill. Being able to be "objectively aware of ourselves" allows for thoughts and actions not available to other species.

 

[Nakosis]

Sorry, for the confusion. I envision, based on a series of dreams, heaven composed of bright sparks of white light, they have no material basis. Our universe is made from matter and energy with movable parts, or nonspiritual entities based on material attributes. Unless you can reproduce holy sparks you are stuck with a material world. It explains how something can come from nothing. God, a spiritual being with holy sparks, created our material universe. I can imagine your robot in our physical law based world, but it will never transcend into another dimension of reality, one necessary for immortality.

Thinking abstractly may be close to biological functions related to freewill. Being able to be "objectively aware of ourselves" allows for thoughts and actions not available to other species.

Sure, I've had my dreams too. I can even see these sparks of light. Followed a Guru from India who taught folks to see them. Even now I can see them plain as day.

I was told this was the light of God. This was evidence of God's existence. Ok, I believed that at the time but I've seen a lot of things. I've spoken with God. Now why should you believe any of that? Just because I've claimed it? I hope not.

Folks thinking they can speak for God are a dime a dozen. I've tested many of them, myself included. They all come up lacking.

So please excuse my lack of enthusiasm regarding your claims about God. It's nothing personal.

 

[Quintessence]

A machine can go places inhospitable to humans. We biologically require oxygen and a very narrow temperature range.

Computers can make evaluations and decisions much faster and can accurately store information. The only thing currently missing is real intelligence. The ability to think abstractly.

I don't see how any of that necessarily makes for superiority, but I also recognize that all claims of "better" and "superior" are always nested in personal or cultural values. A choice, as it were, or a matter of perspective. I'm not a hierarchical thinker, so I do not rank order things like you seem to be. I don't think any of this would make machine-life "better." It is simply different. Were I to call it "better," that would simply be a reflection of my personal values and nothing else but.

 

[Nakosis]

I don't see how any of that necessarily makes for superiority, but I also recognize that all claims of "better" and "superior" are always nested in personal or cultural values. A choice, as it were, or a matter of perspective. I'm not a hierarchical thinker, so I do not rank order things like you seem to be. I don't think any of this would make machine-life "better." It is simply different. Were I to call it "better," that would simply be a reflection of my personal values and nothing else but.

Certainly, we all have our biases as to what is perceived better.

The real question I think as noted in the article is will this machine intelligence perceive itself as better. Also as noted if we try to limit this new intelligence it maybe just the catalyst to cause it to revolt.

This is just, to me, interesting speculation at this point.

 

[Repox]

Sure, I've had my dreams too. I can even see these sparks of light. Followed a Guru from India who taught folks to see them. Even now I can see them plain as day.

I was told this was the light of God. This was evidence of God's existence. Ok, I believed that at the time but I've seen a lot of things. I've spoken with God. Now why should you believe any of that? Just because I've claimed it? I hope not.

Folks thinking they can speak for God are a dime a dozen. I've tested many of them, myself included. They all come up lacking.

So please excuse my lack of enthusiasm regarding your claims about God. It's nothing personal.

I am not disappointed, education seems to be correlated with disbelieve. I do not, however, lack an education. I am familiar with the "scientific method." It is amazing to me as to the audacity of educated people to propose unprovable ideas. There is absolutely no evidence to support any scientific theory for the beginning of the universe, or for the big bang. It is a waste of time to discuss, atheist have no argument. All we have in our world is life, and much evidence of death. Is that all there is?

 

[Curious George]

A machine can go places inhospitable to humans. We biologically require oxygen and a very narrow temperature range.

Computers can make evaluations and decisions much faster and can accurately store information. The only thing currently missing is real intelligence. The ability to think abstractly.

They also could develop faster.

 

[Nakosis]

I am not disappointed, education seems to be correlated with disbelieve. I do not, however, lack an education. I am familiar with the "scientific method." It is amazing to me as to the audacity of educated people to propose unprovable ideas. There is absolutely no evidence to support any scientific theory for the beginning of the universe, or for the big bang. It is a waste of time to discuss, atheist have no argument. All we have in our world is life, and much evidence of death. Is that all there is?

We have creativity. If we can create something, to physically exist in this world then the knowledge used in that creation must be valid. The computer for example.

Until we can manifest the physical reality of a theory, it remains speculation. However once we've manifested it, we have to accept the reality of it.

So yes, I speculate a lot, but won't claim the truth of something that hasn't been physically manifested.

 

[Curious George]

I don't see how any of that necessarily makes for superiority, but I also recognize that all claims of "better" and "superior" are always nested in personal or cultural values. A choice, as it were, or a matter of perspective. I'm not a hierarchical thinker, so I do not rank order things like you seem to be. I don't think any of this would make machine-life "better." It is simply different. Were I to call it "better," that would simply be a reflection of my personal values and nothing else but.

How about, better suited to nature...but I suppose that is idealism, they could be far worse suited to nature.

 

[Repox]

We have creativity. If we can create something, to physically exist in this world then the knowledge used in that creation must be valid. The computer for example.

Until we can manifest the physical reality of a theory, it remains speculation. However once we've manifested it, we have to accept the reality of it.

So yes, I speculate a lot, but won't claim the truth of something that hasn't been physically manifested.

Because this is a religious forum, why not speculate about the unknown, or unknowable? I claim with certainty God exists, and God created the universe. There is no material prove for a spiritual being. As for computers and robots, they are advance phases of human understanding about methods for utilizing materials and human intelligence for more control of our world. Everything runs its course, and then ceases to exist. If that is all there is, then we live temporarily. It is the way life is unless there is another world beyond our universe.

 

[Nakosis]

Because this is a religious forum, why not speculate about the unknown, or unknowable? I claim with certainty God exists, and God created the universe. There is no material prove for a spiritual being. As for computers and robots, they are advance phases of human understanding about methods for utilizing materials and human intelligence for more control of our world. Everything runs its course, and then ceases to exist. If that is all there is, then we live temporarily. It is the way life is unless there is another world beyond our universe.

And I, among other folks are here to question your certainty, as you'all question mine.