244 réponses à ce sujet

[Enhanced]

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Of course an AI is life. It is so by definition.


If the AI is sentient and self-aware then it has exactly the same rights as any other organism.

Anybody who claims an AI isn't a form of life doesn't understand what the definition of life actually is.

What defintion are you refering to?  An artificial intelligence is a fake, unnatural, imitation of life. Not an organism.

Life (cf. biota) - is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not.
An organism - is any contiguous living system . In at least some form, all types of organisms are capable of response to stimuli, reproduction, growth and development, and maintenance of homeostasisas a stable whole.

Nowhere in the definition of life, nor organism, is there a pre-requisite of being made from organic material.

Thinking as such is backwards thinking and is the kind of attitude which causes racial prejudice and discrimination.

A.I. can't reproduce or grow

The geth reproduced. They copied themselves and differentiated into new organisms. Growth is simply getting bigger/larger. Geth can do this too.

You were just flat out wrong there.

I'm sorry I thought we were talking about real life.

[IscrewTali]

Grimwick wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

As to AI having the rights of a human. Let's see if you still feel that way when your precious AI begins a galaxy wide extinction cycle that will repeat for millions of years.

Sigh.

Got any actual points to raise or are you just trolling?

It is a very valid concern, mind you. AI dont share the needs of organics. It would not surprise me if one of them decided they dont need us, whiping us out from the equation.

[Grimwick]

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Of course an AI is life. It is so by definition.


If the AI is sentient and self-aware then it has exactly the same rights as any other organism.

Anybody who claims an AI isn't a form of life doesn't understand what the definition of life actually is.

What defintion are you refering to?  An artificial intelligence is a fake, unnatural, imitation of life. Not an organism.

Life (cf. biota) - is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not.
An organism - is any contiguous living system . In at least some form, all types of organisms are capable of response to stimuli, reproduction, growth and development, and maintenance of homeostasisas a stable whole.

Nowhere in the definition of life, nor organism, is there a pre-requisite of being made from organic material.

Thinking as such is backwards thinking and is the kind of attitude which causes racial prejudice and discrimination.

A.I. can't reproduce or grow

The geth reproduced. They copied themselves and differentiated into new organisms. Growth is simply getting bigger/larger. Geth can do this too.

You were just flat out wrong there.

I'm sorry I thought we were talking about real life.

In real life you say?

Well from what i've heard no true AI has ever been invented/created. You are just speculating.

[Rasofe]

I think they're a bloody nuisance, coming here, taking our jobs...

[Grimwick]

IscrewTali wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

As to AI having the rights of a human. Let's see if you still feel that way when your precious AI begins a galaxy wide extinction cycle that will repeat for millions of years.

Sigh.

Got any actual points to raise or are you just trolling?

It is a very valid concern, mind you. AI dont share the needs of organics. It would not surprise me if one of them decided they dont need us, whiping us out from the equation.

So what's the difference there between that AI and, say, China deciding that they don't like everyone and nuking us?

That 'valid' concern doesn't apply only to synthetics...

[mauro2222]

IscrewTali wrote...

It is a very valid concern, mind you. AI dont share the needs of organics. It would not surprise me if one of them decided they dont need us, whiping us out from the equation.

I don't need gold, that doesn't mean I have to wipe it out.
I don't need you, that doesn't mean I have to kill you.

Modifié par mauro2222, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:16 .

[mauro2222]

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

I'm sorry I thought we were talking about real life.

In real life you say?

Well from what i've heard no true AI has ever been invented/created. You are just speculating.

Even if they don't exist yet, it's a valid example of reproduction.

[Grimwick]

o Ventus wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

The 'study of matter' is a generilisation on your part.

No it isn't.

Dictionary.com wrote...

The science that deals with the composition and properties of substances and various elementary form of matter.

Merriam-Webster wrote...

The science that deals with the composition, structure, and properties of substances and with the transformations that they undergo.

Oxford wrote...

The branch of science that deals with the identification of the substances of which matter is composed.

Again, it's literally defined as the science of studying matter.

To come back to the point, whether or not other interactions are involved than electrons is of lesser importance - and is of interesting debate. The point being is that the human body is a series of self-sustaining chemical reactions that results in consciousness.

An AI computer is an array of electrical stimulation and reactions that leads to a conscious. the means is almost identical. Electrical stimulation in the brain, or electrical stimulation in the CPU? It's indisinguishable as different 'forms' of sapience.

[Enhanced]

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Of course an AI is life. It is so by definition.


If the AI is sentient and self-aware then it has exactly the same rights as any other organism.

Anybody who claims an AI isn't a form of life doesn't understand what the definition of life actually is.

What defintion are you refering to?  An artificial intelligence is a fake, unnatural, imitation of life. Not an organism.

Life (cf. biota) - is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not.
An organism - is any contiguous living system . In at least some form, all types of organisms are capable of response to stimuli, reproduction, growth and development, and maintenance of homeostasisas a stable whole.

Nowhere in the definition of life, nor organism, is there a pre-requisite of being made from organic material.

Thinking as such is backwards thinking and is the kind of attitude which causes racial prejudice and discrimination.

A.I. can't reproduce or grow

The geth reproduced. They copied themselves and differentiated into new organisms. Growth is simply getting bigger/larger. Geth can do this too.

You were just flat out wrong there.

I'm sorry I thought we were talking about real life.

In real life you say?

Well from what i've heard no true AI has ever been invented/created. You are just speculating.

Exactly. Geth, Reapers, EDI, it's all science fiction/fantasy. Nothing like them will ever exist in real life. 

[IscrewTali]

Grimwick wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

As to AI having the rights of a human. Let's see if you still feel that way when your precious AI begins a galaxy wide extinction cycle that will repeat for millions of years.

Sigh.

Got any actual points to raise or are you just trolling?

It is a very valid concern, mind you. AI dont share the needs of organics. It would not surprise me if one of them decided they dont need us, whiping us out from the equation.

So what's the difference there between that AI and, say, China deciding that they don't like everyone and nuking us?

That 'valid' concern doesn't apply only to synthetics...

They wont, because it would lead to China being nuked aswell. It may have been the case in old times, before WMD's. The only thing Synthetics would need to do is spread a plaque killing all organics, and what could we do? Attempt to infect a virus into a system that is constantly evolving, and most likely more advanced than your own tech at the moment of the attack.
So no cant be compared to China.

[Ender99]

Reorte wrote...

If it's self-aware and intelligent then it's alive. Origins and the nature of the bits are irrelevent.

Pretty much this.

Although, I have to note, that it would be incredibly stupid to create any form of true AI.

[o Ventus]

Enhanced wrote...

Exactly. Geth, Reapers, EDI, it's all science fiction/fantasy. Nothing like them will ever exist in real life. 

I wouldn't go so far to say they would never exist (Well, maybe the Reapers). Definitely not within our lifetime or the next generation, but true artificial intelligence isn't that far fetched, just difficult, not to mention incredibly risky and possibly resource intensive.

Modifié par o Ventus, 02 juillet 2012 - 09:19 .

[Baronesa]

Enhanced wrote...

Exactly. Geth, Reapers, EDI, it's all science fiction/fantasy. Nothing like them will ever exist in real life. 

That phrase has been said so many times in human history...

Also you may want to check some advancements on the development of AI. We are far from developing a true AI... but there are many advances pointing in that way already.

[IscrewTali]

o Ventus wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Exactly. Geth, Reapers, EDI, it's all science fiction/fantasy. Nothing like them will ever exist in real life. 

I wouldn't go so far to say they would never exist (Well, maybe the Reapers). Definitely not within our lifetime or the next generation, but true artificial intelligence isn't that far fetched, just difficult, not to mention incredibly risky resource intensive.

I'd say the Reapers' existence has a higher propability than EDI.

[AnImpossibleGirl]

mauro2222 wrote...

Poshible wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

We have a purpose, to reproduce. That's the objective of all living things, to ensure their continued existence.

As stated so in the bible?
Our life is nothing but to ensure we go on as a species? We have failed our existence if we do not reproduce? Your opinion is still subjective. A matter of your opinion. We have all seen AI...Gigolo Joe had a distinct purpose he was made for. We, as organics can not say that. I believe that to be an advantage that they have over us. We search for answers; that is how we found religion and fuel fires that need to be extinguished.

What you make of your life, or life itself is different to the basic instinct that every living being has.

I think you missed my point...
We are not created for any specific purpose. We are genetic mutations that adapt to survive, yes. There is no sole purpose behind one person's birth. 
If I make an AI, I made it for a purpose, it would be much like Rosie, from The Jetson's because I want a maid I do not have to pay. Me, I was not created to serve a purpose. Sure, I have goals--but alas I was not created for that purpose, I searched for a purpose. As organic's that is what we do.

[mauro2222]

IscrewTali wrote...

They wont, because it would lead to China being nuked aswell. It may have been the case in old times, before WMD's. The only thing Synthetics would need to do is spread a plaque killing all organics, and what could we do? Attempt to infect a virus into a system that is constantly evolving, and most likely more advanced than your own tech at the moment of the attack.
So no cant be compared to China.

I can say that China nuked everyone because they were slow to react, that doesn't change the fact that the motive is illogical. Just like an AI killing everybody because they don't need them.

[Toki]

Depends on how advanced it is. If it has a concious, if it can feel, if it can think, if it is self aware, it is definitely alive to me. I have always considered advanced AI alive. They may have been constructed as tools, but if they end up or start with emotions and memories and feelings then definitely.

Legion is alive.
R2-D2 is alive.
Cortana is alive.

Would you consider them not alive because they don't breath? I don't care if they are made out of blood and bone or oil and wires, if it has a mind of it's own and feelings it's alive to me and would view it as equal to organics. I consider Geth as a species, equal to all of the other races (I actually think they're a bit better), but just because they have adorable flashlight heads, are made of metal and wires, how does that not mean they're alive? Those are not the qualities that make somebody alive.

[Baronesa]

Poshible wrote...

I think you missed my point...
We are not created for any specific purpose. We are genetic mutations that adapt to survive, yes. There is no sole purpose behind one person's birth. 
If I make an AI, I made it for a purpose, it would be much like Rosie, from The Jetson's because I want a maid I do not have to pay. Me, I was not created to serve a purpose. Sure, I have goals--but alas I was not created for that purpose, I searched for a purpose. As organic's that is what we do.

I share you stance but...

Consider this: you create an AI for a purpose, but after some time, the AI informs you that it prefers to pursue a different purpose, maybe music... or painting... or astronomy, rather than being a maid.

The fact that the AI are made for a puspose does not mean they can outgrow that and be able to decide if they agree or not with that purpose... being then able to choose their own path.

[IscrewTali]

mauro2222 wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

They wont, because it would lead to China being nuked aswell. It may have been the case in old times, before WMD's. The only thing Synthetics would need to do is spread a plaque killing all organics, and what could we do? Attempt to infect a virus into a system that is constantly evolving, and most likely more advanced than your own tech at the moment of the attack.
So no cant be compared to China.

I can say that China nuked everyone because they were slow to react, that doesn't change the fact that the motive is illogical. Just like an AI killing everybody because they don't need them.

An AI's motives are beyond the comprehension of organics.

[Dean_the_Young]

IscrewTali wrote...

An AI's motives are beyond the comprehension of organics.

Not according to Mass Effect. We have survival, religion, basic programing, and priority list in the Geth, Heritics, EDI, and Reapers respectively.

[o Ventus]

IscrewTali wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Enhanced wrote...

Exactly. Geth, Reapers, EDI, it's all science fiction/fantasy. Nothing like them will ever exist in real life. 

I wouldn't go so far to say they would never exist (Well, maybe the Reapers). Definitely not within our lifetime or the next generation, but true artificial intelligence isn't that far fetched, just difficult, not to mention incredibly risky resource intensive.

I'd say the Reapers' existence has a higher propability than EDI.

What makes you say that?

[mauro2222]

Poshible wrote...

I think you missed my point...
We are not created for any specific purpose. We are genetic mutations that adapt to survive, yes. There is no sole purpose behind one person's birth. 
If I make an AI, I made it for a purpose, it would be much like Rosie, from The Jetson's because I want a maid I do not have to pay. Me, I was not created to serve a purpose. Sure, I have goals--but alas I was not created for that purpose, I searched for a purpose. As organic's that is what we do.

It's the same, you exist with a purpose but you choose to not follow, an AI can do the same.

Every little cell in your body is your creator, this universe is your creator, you are here to reproduce, if you don't want to do it, don't do it, if you say to an AI for what was made, is going to do the same, just change reproduce for whatever you want, that doesn't mean it's going to do it.

Searching for a purpose is an action taken by yourself to give a meaning to your life and existance.

[Krunjar]

I think that AI are alive and as such have to be handled carefully. I think that the big mistake highlighted in alot of sci fi is putting a new AI in charge of lots of high tech stuff and treating it like some kind of toy or slave. Even if an AI has more knowledge than any human wisdom and temperance are only learned through trial and error and repeated experience. To simplify a tad if you where presented with a three year old who you where assured had all the knowledge and skills to perform open heart surgery would you then be comfortable with it performing a triple bypass? Of course you wouldn't. I think if AI's where handled a little more like the children they are they would be far less dangerous. If they where taught slowly and assigned responsibility only as they proved themselves safe and responsible. They would be alot safer than is implied in ME. Of course no system is perfect and there would be rogue AI but they would hopefully be counteracted by the majority of good responsible AI.

[IscrewTali]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

An AI's motives are beyond the comprehension of organics.

Not according to Mass Effect. We have survival, religion, basic programing, and priority list in the Geth, Heritics, EDI, and Reapers respectively.

The Catalyst was created to be a peaceful AI to serve as a negotiator between organics and synthetics. Over time it had to change its approach to the subject because it was finding no solution. So began the extinction cycle. Can something like that be a valid motive for an organic? i certainly dont think so.

[mauro2222]

IscrewTali wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

IscrewTali wrote...

They wont, because it would lead to China being nuked aswell. It may have been the case in old times, before WMD's. The only thing Synthetics would need to do is spread a plaque killing all organics, and what could we do? Attempt to infect a virus into a system that is constantly evolving, and most likely more advanced than your own tech at the moment of the attack.
So no cant be compared to China.

I can say that China nuked everyone because they were slow to react, that doesn't change the fact that the motive is illogical. Just like an AI killing everybody because they don't need them.

An AI's motives are beyond the comprehension of organics.

My motives are also beyond your comprehension. My mind is not the same as yours, I perceive reality in a way you don't.