From: Dagon Gmail (dagonweb@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Feb 24 2007 - 02:33:56 MST
We make the assumption there isn't a soul, because there is not much
argument in favor of that. Plus if we assume there is one, there is not much
point in theorizing about it. It's transcendant, outside the realm of
meaningful dialogue.
Give our limited cognitive ability, what use is there to try and create AI
other than stitching together clusters of specialized subroutines? Sure, we
can go the road of loosely emulating the human consciousness, but as long as
doing so is expedient. As soon as we can avoid the useless white noise
trappings and artifacts left by evolution we can probably simplify a few
matters. Plus we will be unable to see a lot of the subtle inner harmonics
of the brain - for a while. So our models will be simplistic for the time
being.
I think within a few years the sophistication of subroutines will be enough
to get results from composites. Not very long after (no more than 15 years)
we should have the first "paradigm changing" versions of AI's (not
necesarily fully modelled after human minds) that will be economic effect.
I.e. displace jobs in substantial numbers. Cause legislation. Be used by the
military. Be of massive use in the sex industry.
You all know the cliche's.
>From then on it's counting down untill these things start becoming creative.
Years.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT