Human vs AI Intelligence

[Pete in Panama]

What do you imagine AI will look like in 2040?

Yogi Berra once said that making predictions was hard, especially the ones about the future.

So far the trend has been for technology to develop replacements for body parts, including parts of the brain. The thing is that what we know know is that the brain is far more complex than ever before imagined. We used to think of the billions of neurons as acting as switches --transistors. Now we know that each neuron itself is a programmable microprocessor so a brain is better described as a parallel processor array of billions of units but that itself is a horrible oversimplification. Along w/ those neurons comes a soup of enzymes that mold thought processes w/ adrenaline, dopamine, lots of other juices. Add to that all we may learn tomorrow about the physical brain functioning, as well as the programming that smart parents/society are teaching us.

Sure AI is improving fast. What I'm seeing is that real life is improving faster.

 

[Heyo]

Sure AI is improving fast. What I'm seeing is that real life is improving faster.

Not only real life, also "fake" life.
Human augmentation is a race between technology and biology. We can replace body parts with machines, but we can also edit genes or grow new organs.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Not only real life, also "fake" life.
Human augmentation is a race between technology and biology. We can replace body parts with machines, but we can also edit genes or grow new organs.

When you say "human augmentation" the impression I'm getting is that we're talking about some kind of improvement. To date, any change we make to the human body is not quite as good as what the original could have been --be it a prosthetic leg or false teeth. Not what I'd call "augmentation".

Then again, I do prefer wearing my glasses...

 

[Heyo]

When you say "human augmentation" the impression I'm getting is that we're talking about some kind of improvement. To date, any change we make to the human body is not quite as good as what the original could have been --be it a prosthetic leg or false teeth. Not what I'd call "augmentation".

Then again, I do prefer wearing my glasses...

True, the augmentation is mostly for those who aren't so fortunate to have "what the original could have been". But it at least augments the lifespan and the lifespan with relative health and fewer inconveniences.

 

[Truthseeker]

Yogi Berra once said that making predictions was hard, especially the ones about the future.

the fact that we remember the Yogiisms shows how old we are. Baha'is in general are old in America and Europe. I don't know about places like Panama.

 

[Truthseeker]

I’m referring to the integration of humans and AI such that we essentially become all knowing.

How big of an Ocean is the knowledge base? I believe it is infinite, but you can pick whatever size you want, and that's okay. But I think when we are certain we know everything, that's when learning stops.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Machines are not sentient, they are not consciously aware

They deal with data as opposed to experience

Therefore they are fundamentally not like humans

They are not sentient......yet. Since we don't know exactly where or how sentience occurs in human brains, I can't say that I am certain it can't happen using the technology (now and as it improves) involved in AI. I think that is worrisome, because there is nothing to say that if it did achieve sentience, it would also achieve human-like ethics and morals.

 

[blü 2]

Is it fair/applicable to compare human to computer intelligence?

It seems to be. The word is extremely common in this context and seems to be a good representation of what is intended, that is, the (human-postulated) goal that all the present experiments, prototypes, explorations are heading.

My "understanding" of human thought is based on my understanding of how computers process information.

Our explorations of how the human brain works are far from complete, but have nonetheless come a very long distance since better research tools became available in the 1990s. It doesn't seem implausible to me that the programmers will examine this information as it becomes available and better understood, to see what's useful.

For example, we know that the brain, when about to make a physical movement eg throwing a stone, 'rehearses' the intended action, in the sense of having already planned the necessary commands to nerve and muscle before executing them. And we have a variety of mechanisms for decision-making which if we stay at the physical level may involve catching a ball, which again involves instinctive brain activities of prediction, once again closely related to physical action.

Away from physical action, we also know a little about how we decide whether to have vanilla or strawberry, visit the department store or the supermarket first, &c &c.

All this material, and much more, in much greater detail (so my instinct tells me) is being closely studied and experimented with by AI professionals and amateurs as I type this.

So I dare say AI will be more like humans that perhaps you expect, rather than humans being more like AI.

 

[Eddi]

They are not sentient......yet. Since we don't know exactly where or how sentience occurs in human brains, I can't say that I am certain it can't happen using the technology (now and as it improves) involved in AI. I think that is worrisome, because there is nothing to say that if it did achieve sentience, it would also achieve human-like ethics and morals.

I think that a thing needs a soul to be sentient

Could a machine ever have a soul?

I doubt it

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think that a thing needs a soul to be sentient

Could a machine ever have a soul?

I doubt it

I don't know what a "soul" is. Never seen one. Never heard of any evidence for such a thing. Perhaps if you could explain what it is....

 

[Eddi]

I don't know what a "soul" is. Never seen one. Never heard of any evidence for such a thing. Perhaps if you could explain what it is....

It is a word used for something that is ineffable and that we don't understand and cannot understand

Yet look another straight in the eye and you will feel in your heart that they too have a soul

It is not necessarily supernatural although I personally think it is

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It is a word used for something that is ineffable and that we don't understand and cannot understand

Yet look another straight in the eye and you will feel in your heart that they too have a soul

It is not necessarily supernatural although I personally think it is

But I don't "feel that in [my] heart" at all. I intuit that they have a mind, like I do, and I accept that mind as being the product of the brain.

I note, for example, that every time I have been put under a general anaesthetic for surgery (where some of the working of my brain is essentially shut down), this thing I think of as "I" disappears. It's not there -- nowhere to be found. That's how I manage to avoid the pain of having my body cut open and my guts fiddled with.

If stifling my brain can extinguish entirely my sense of myself, then I must accept that my brain is where that self is located, and nowhere else.

 

[Eddi]

But I don't "feel that in [my] heart" at all. I intuit that they have a mind, like I do, and I accept that mind as being the product of the brain.

I note, for example, that every time I have been put under a general anaesthetic for surgery (where some of the working of my brain is essentially shut down), this thing I think of as "I" disappears. It's not there -- nowhere to be found. That's how I manage to avoid the pain of having my body cut open and my guts fiddled with.

If stifling my brain can extinguish entirely my sense of myself, then I must accept that my brain is where that self is located, and nowhere else.

Cool

You do you

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Cool

You do you

You too. Next time you're under a general, try to remember what you were doing while the surgeon was slicing you from sternum to navel. Then we'll discuss your "soul."

 

[Eddi]

You too. Next time you're under a general, try to remember what you were doing while the surgeon was slicing you from sternum to navel. Then we'll discuss your "soul."

I don't see what you're getting at

When you were being operated on you were unconscious not insentient

Your soul had nothing to be conscious of when you were under but it still existed

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I don't see what you're getting at

When you were being operated on you were unconscious not insentient

Your soul had nothing to be conscious of when you were under but it still existed

Really? Where was it? What was it doing?

 

[Eddi]

Really? Where was it? What was it doing?

A bucket with no water in it is no less a bucket than a bucket that is full of water

Due to the anasthetic you had zero sensory input and zero self awareness

Your soul was effectively dormant

Your consciousness was effectively turned off but it still existed, in a dormant state

I reslly don't see how that leads to the conclusion that you don't have a soul

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

A bucket with no water in it is no less a bucket than a bucket that is full of water

Due to the anasthetic you had zero sensory input and zero self awareness

Your soul was effectively dormant

Your consciousness was effectively turned off but it still existed, in a dormant state

I reslly don't see how that leads to the conclusion that you don't have a soul

And I don't see what leads you to the conclusion that you have one! You can't tell me what it is, nor what it's for, nor what it does, or anything else about it -- except you have one.

What would you be like if you didn't? And how would you know?

 

[Eddi]

And I don't see what leads you to the conclusion that you have one! You can't tell me what it is, nor what it's for, nor what it does, or anything else about it -- except you have one.

What would you be like if you didn't? And how would you know?

This is interesting but I am going to bed now, will reply in the morning

 

[Pete in Panama]

the fact that we remember the Yogiisms shows how old we are. Baha'is in general are old in America and Europe. I don't know about places like Panama.

You may be hanging around a lot of old Baha'is in the U.S. but my community in Panama is almost all youth. We spend out time scrambling to furnish houseing/meals for overnights/conferences + transportation for other meetups. This afternoon (for example) I spend a few hours helping an indigenous young man begin his university careen by getting him a working phone, an old laptop, plus all the apps that will let him do homework.

A lot of work to be done, just requires being "a servant of a servant".