Encoded in the large, highly evolved sensory and motor portions of the human brain is a billion years of experience about the nature of the world and how to survive in it. The deliberate process we call reasoning is, I believe, the thinnest veneer of human thought, effective only because it is supported by this much older and much more powerful, though usually unconscious, sensorimotor knowledge. We are all prodigious olympians in perceptual and motor areas, so good that we make the difficult look easy. Abstract thought, though, is a new trick, perhaps less than 100 thousand years old. We have not yet mastered it. It is not all that intrinsically difficult; it just seems so when we do it.
When you put it that way, my doofus moments sound almost forgivable.
(To which Denny might have said, "Almost...")
I have a couple of reactions to that. I read something awhile back that possibly the biggest challenge in automated manufacturing is sewing. Sewing? you say; kids learn that at an early age. Robots have been welding for decades, people don't master welding till they're in their 20's. But it comes from what's quoted above. Fabric is not uniform. It bunches and stretches, while metal is rigid. And people have evolved to deal with soft stuff, while the combination of AI and machines haven't evolved to be able to deal with that.
A few weeks ago, Dilbert had a week on Dilbert's attempt to make a robot that could mimic human intelligence. He was unsuccessful till he discovered it was too intelligent to mimic a human. So he made it a little dumber.
Charlie Whorfin Woods
"Our work puts heavy metal where it belongs -- as a music genre and not a pollutant in drinking water." -- Prof Ali Miserez.
This thread got me to the original "He's your son" posting, which I never had actually read. Of all the posts on C&F I for some reason never felt the urge. Thanks for the nudge. It may take me a few months to digest all 122 pages! Great stuff.
chas wrote:A few weeks ago, Dilbert had a week on Dilbert's attempt to make a robot that could mimic human intelligence. He was unsuccessful till he discovered it was too intelligent to mimic a human. So he made it a little dumber.
Some people say that investigations into artificial intelligence shed light on the human condition..... but I think Dilbert is (as usual) right. We need research into artificial stupidity.
Phill
One does not equal two. Not even for very large values of one.
chas wrote:I read something awhile back that possibly the biggest challenge in automated manufacturing is sewing. Sewing? you say; kids learn that at an early age. Robots have been welding for decades, people don't master welding till they're in their 20's. ... Fabric is not uniform. It bunches and stretches, while metal is rigid. And people have evolved to deal with soft stuff, while the combination of AI and machines haven't evolved to be able to deal with that.
This is something that's been on my mind in this thread. To preface, I'm an armchair quarterback, and not even an informed one. That out of the way, if you're after true AI it seems to me that the one fundamental thing that would be essential to program into such a system is the flexibility to deal with the opposing yet ever-harnessed principles of change and predictability. Perhaps chaos would be another word for it.
chas wrote:A few weeks ago, Dilbert had a week on Dilbert's attempt to make a robot that could mimic human intelligence. He was unsuccessful till he discovered it was too intelligent to mimic a human. So he made it a little dumber.
Crusty.
"If you take music out of this world, you will have nothing but a ball of fire." - Balochi musician
