452 réponses à ce sujet

[Mycrus Ironfist]

life is life whatever the medium, biological or synthetic...



let the true geth live.

[Inverness Moon]

Here is something:

"An emulator in computer sciences duplicates (provides an emulation of) the functions of one system using a different system, so that the second system behaves like (and appears to be) the first system. This focus on exact reproduction of external behavior is in contrast to some other forms of computer simulation, which can concern an abstract model of the system being simulated."

I guess I should use the term emulator from now on.

Edit: I despise this crappy proprietary forum software and its crappy editor. Can't even delete my own posts.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 28 juillet 2010 - 01:49 .

[Arijharn]

I know you didn't ask me Inverness, but I would think that if it came to the time when science can completely duplicate a mind, then it would have consciousness... maybe not the same as ours but a consciousness nonetheless.



I'm probably quoting out of context, and I can't remember the source ofthand, but isn't there a saying off: "I think, therefore I am"?

[Nightwriter]

Arijharn wrote...

I know you didn't ask me Inverness, but I would think that if it came to the time when science can completely duplicate a mind, then it would have consciousness... maybe not the same as ours but a consciousness nonetheless.

I'm probably quoting out of context, and I can't remember the source ofthand, but isn't there a saying off: "I think, therefore I am"?

You might say that a computer can think. Therefore, it is.

But is the question still valid if you say, "I think, therefore I am sentient"?

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

If you were a actually a skeptic, you would not make the statement that "Asari, krogan, quarians, and all the other aliens in Mass Effect mostly share similar body structure to use with similar organs and emotions, even similar ways of thinking" when you haven't even seen an X-ray or MRI scan. So what if they look the same from the outside?

You're just a skeptic when it suits you - otherwise, you make assumptions just like everyone else.

Modifié par V0luS_R0cKs7aR, 29 juillet 2010 - 01:32 .

[EricHVela]

I think Salarians are made up of mostly sinew-like strands to make them flexible with minimal, stream-lined organs (each one that suit the needs of multiple organs in Humans) to keep their energy consumption down in accordance to their metabolism and their ability to be so amazingly flexible to have sex with deviant Krogans.

And I obviously made all that up.

[Nightwriter]

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...

You're just a skeptic when it suits you - otherwise, you make assumptions just like everyone else.

Truth.

I admit to this.

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

Shandepared wrote...

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...

If you were a actually a skeptic, you would not make the statement that "Asari, krogan, quarians, and all the other aliens in Mass Effect mostly share similar body structure to use with similar organs and emotions, even similar ways of thinking" when you haven't even seen an X-ray or MRI scan.

My eyes and ears decieve me then.

You just proved my point. A true skeptic would fundamentally not trust their eyes and ears. Hence the origin of "Cognito ergo sum," a philosophy that Descartes built to counter the skeptics of his time.  He had to work all the way back to "I think therefore I am" as the one truth that skeptics cannot argue against precisely because skeptics doubt what can be seen or heard.

"I see therefore I am" and "I hear therefore I am" would not work for a skeptic.

Again, you're just a skeptic when it's convenient for you.

[Nightwriter]

Becoming a "true" skeptic in that sense of the word is completely pointless and impractical.

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

Nightwriter wrote...

Becoming a "true" skeptic in that sense of the word is completely pointless and impractical.

I was just using Descartes' critics as an example. Obviously I do not suggest anyone to apply such a philosophy to their lives and become a "true" skeptic.

But when it comes it Mass Effect, a self-proclaimed video game skeptic would probably not assume that Asari, Krogan and humans share similar biology without an X-ray or soft-tissue scan. And in this case, such skepticism is actually reasonable, in my opinion.

Back on topic?

Modifié par V0luS_R0cKs7aR, 29 juillet 2010 - 02:01 .

[wulf3n]

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...
But when it comes it Mass Effect, a self-proclaimed video game skeptic would probably not assume that Asari, Krogan and humans share similar biology without an X-ray or soft-tissue scan. And in this case, such skepticism is actually reasonable, in my opinion.

Not necessarily, you can make assumptions about their physiology based upon your observations of them. They appear Sapient, implying some sort of brain like organ. They breathe in gases, which would imply lung like organs. They ingest matter, implying a digestive system.

[Nightwriter]

Oh, I know you weren't suggesting it. I was addressing the cosmos. I never really even thought being a videogame skeptic was all that fun. I'd rather think Shepard came back to life by future magic and asari can fly.

[Whatever42]

Well, personally, if someone walks up to me and tell me that they're sentient, I tend to take them at their word. Its really not very productive to do otherwise. Well, unless you have designs on genocide, in which case denying someone's sentience can probably help you sleep better at night.

[Nightwriter]

Must... not... Godwin...

[Whatever42]

Nightwriter wrote...

Must... not... Godwin...

I had to google that. I'm glad I did. 

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

wulf3n wrote...
Not necessarily, you can make assumptions about their physiology based upon your observations of them. They appear Sapient, implying some sort of brain like organ. They breathe in gases, which would imply lung like organs. They ingest matter, implying a digestive system.

Insects eat stuff too - you think their digestive system in any way is related to ours? They also breathe - you think they have lungs arranged like ours with the trachea -> bronchi -> bronchioli -> alveoli with the same oxygen-carbon-dioxide exchange system complete with the mucosal lining and elastic properties?

Here's a secret - the words "brain," "digestive system," and even "lungs" are just words that describe organs that are functionally equivalent - these organs do NOT have to be anatomically or physiologically related in order to be classified as a "lung" or a "brain" or whatever, so long as they perform the same functions.

So no, it is unreasonable to make assumptions of the inner anatomy and physiology of alien species without looking at the inner anatomy/physiology first.

[wulf3n]

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...
Insects eat stuff too - you think their digestive system in any way is related to ours? They also breathe - you think they have lungs arranged like ours with the trachea -> bronchi -> bronchioli -> alveoli with the same oxygen-carbon-dioxide exchange system complete with the mucosal lining and elastic properties?

Here's a secret - the words "brain," "digestive system," and even "lungs" are just words that describe organs that are functionally equivalent - these organs do NOT have to be anatomically or physiologically related in order to be classified as a "lung" or a "brain" or whatever, so long as they perform the same functions.

So no, it is unreasonable to make assumptions of the inner anatomy and physiology of alien species without looking at the inner anatomy/physiology first.

I'm just curious as to how assuming that an alien species that acts and behaves similar to humans, has similar organs to humans would contradict someones skepticism?

[Inverness Moon]

Shandepared wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

And
here is the example. You claim a being of pure software would not
genuinely possess a mind, yet you have nothing to back that up other
than it that being does not exist as an organic does.

I
have more to back up my position than you do. After all, we know
organic brains can produce consciousness because we all experience. We
do not know if the hardware comprising a computer can do the same
thing. I refer again to the Chinese Room
experiment. If we write a geth program out on note cards, though it
would be time-consuming, we could still run the program. Would it be
alive, would it be consciouness, would it have a mind then?

See below. The Chinese room experiment is not applicable because of what I'm suggesting.

I also don't get what you mean by writing the program out on note cards. Do you mean doing all the math and everything else of the program by hand?

Shandepared wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

This concept seems simple enough to me.

Yeah,
I'm very much aware of that. You insist a simulation is authentic, I
say it isn't. A simulation is just that, the appearance of the
real thing. It however is not real. I can simulate the taste of
an orange but it's not really an orange.

I do not insist a simulation is authentic, but you seem to insist on continuing to misunderstand me. You're not trying hard enough.

Firstly, to use your example, I am not concerned with whether or not its actually an orange, I just want it to taste the same. If it does taste the same, then my goal would be accomplished. Thank you for unintentionally supporting me.

Secondly, I think you should check the definition of emulator and my comparison of what I want to do with a console emulator:

Perhaps another analogy would be appropriate here. Console emulators, they simulate the hardware and software of a game console. They're not actual game consoles ("the real thing"), but the input and output is the same.

Edit: Here is something:

"An emulator in computer sciences duplicates (provides an emulation of) the functions of one system using a different system, so that the second system behaves like (and appears to be) the first system. This focus on exact reproduction of external behavior is in contrast to some other forms of computer simulation, which can concern an abstract model of the system being simulated."

I guess I should use the term emulator from now on.

I think this is a pretty good example of what I'm going for,  a brain emulator.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 29 juillet 2010 - 05:59 .

[Inverness Moon]

Shandepared wrote...

I shouldn't need to explain this.

Your idea is unusual, I want to make sure I understand what you're saying before I comment on it.

Shandepared wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

I do not insist a simulation is authentic, but you seem to insist on continuing to misunderstand me.

Then either I'm not intelligent enough to grasp what you're saying or you are a bad communicator. I'll let the audience decide.

I've made two posts elaborating on my emulator analogy in order to better explain what I'm thinking of, and yet you have not commented on either. While I can sometimes be a bad communicator, I don't think that is the case this time.

Like I've said twice before, a brain emulator would be a better way to describe what I'm thinking of rather than a brain simulator. Meaning, you emulate the hardware of the brain on a computer so that the behavior is identical to an actual organic brain. Therefore, your inputs should yield the same outputs in both cases, just like with a game console emulator.

You keep trying to say its not authentic, which I understand and acknowledge. However, the point I was trying to make earlier is that physical authenticity is not relevant as long as it behaves the same way.

I'm trying to be as clear as possible here.

[Arijharn]

I'm not sure if you're just being pedantic now Shand.



I'd like to sort of boil it down to this; if the Geth have a degree of self-preservation and an understanding to better themselves, then I would have to concede that they at least give the appearance of being intelligent, and should probably be viewed as such until/if they do something to disprove it.



I can not, however, see the Geth would undertake studies to 'express' themselves via art or even music for example, but to me that doesn't really disprove their intelligence, but rather prove just how alien they are.

[Inverness Moon]

I think I came out of this topic with more than I went into it with. I've never really thought of if it would possible to make something on a computer behave with sentience with what we have now. But after doing some of the thinking I needed to do to respond to arguments, and after finding that emulator analogy to prove my point, I come away believing it is entirely possible to create an AI modeled after our own brains sometime in the future.