

Create an AI on Your Computer - kkleiner
http://singularityhub.com/2009/05/28/create-an-ai-on-your-computer/

======
jimbokun
"Problems in chemistry, biology, physics, economics, engineering, and
astronomy, even questions of philosophy could all be helped by the application
of an advanced AI."

One of the indications of maturity in "artificial intelligence" research is
the emergence of more bounded and tractable sub-fields devoted to specific
A.I. problems. Machine learning, computer vision, robotics, etc. The tangible
success of these research areas make me wonder if simulating human brains is
the most useful approach. Which reminds of this Tom Mitchell quote:

"My late colleague Herb Simon used to talk about how aircraft are artificial
birds. In many ways aircraft exceed birds in their ability to fly, but in many
other ways they do not. The path to recreating human intelligence may deliver
a similar outcome. Just as birds and aircraft are similar but different, we
may create artificial intelligence in the future that mimics human brains, yet
also differs greatly in its implementation and capability in a variety of
arenas."

[http://singularityhub.com/2009/04/24/devices-that-read-
peopl...](http://singularityhub.com/2009/04/24/devices-that-read-peoples-
minds-are-you-thinking-what-im-thinking/)

Is simulating a human brain the shortest path to solving "problems in
chemistry, biology, physics, economics, engineering, and astronomy?" Machine
learning techniques that are very different from what a human brain does,
working in concert with the brains of human researchers, might turn out to be
the most productive path.

~~~
jameskpolk
You're absolutely right: simulating a human brain is the shortest path to
solving problems that relate... to the human brain. No other guarantees exist.

It's going to be difficult to make a computer architecture that approaches the
parallel ability of the human brain.

~~~
deutronium
Definitely, especially as its such an 'analogue' problem, maybe digital
computers aren't the right job for this.

------
anigbrowl
I think efforts along these lines are hopelessly misplaced; all it's going to
produce is a simulation of an autistic brain. It's not without scientific
value but it's not going to cross a threshold and say 'hi there!'.

When reading proposals for creating AI, few researchers discuss (at least
publicly) the idea of simulating hunger or pain. How are we going to create
intelligence without simulating qualitative experiences which give rise to the
basic drives of avoidance and desire, which intelligence helps to fulfill?

At the risk of stating the obvious, a cat brain is about 3 orders of magnitude
smaller than a human's, but most will agree that a cat has personality (maybe
mice do too, but I've never kept one). What we really want to create with AI
is something that has enough personality for us to form a relationship with it
which does not require us to pre-abstract our communication. So we would be
far better off building something about as capable as (and no more dangerous)
than a cat, and building 10 of them, which we can then play with and try to
train. We can probably dump a whole lot of brainspace since we don't need to
simulate the full complexity of an endocrine system etc etc; but we do need
our ACats to have enough autonomy to get itself into trouble. We are never
going to develop a machine that thinks if we don't give it something to think
about, and it will never have anything worth thinking about if it doesn't have
a sense of self, and it won't develop that without having to make decisions
which feed back its qualitative experience.

I am not an adherent of Searle's Chinese room argument, but on the other hand
asking the guy in the room whether he prefers noodles or rice is devoid of
meaning if he subsists on an endless supply of burgers and fries; all you get
int hat case is an expert system which parses Chinese but has nothing of note
to say in that language.

~~~
deutronium
When you refer to a machine needing a 'sense of self' it sounds as if you are
referring to consciousness. To an extent you could maybe say even a thermostat
has a limited form of consciousness in that it holds a belief that a room is
at a specific temperature and it is able to effect this through its own
output, functioning as a cybernetic system.

I think you could certainly give such a system the impression of having
feelings by implementing some kind of stimulus and reward process, but I think
that needs to come second to appearing intelligent first (albeit in a rather
emotionless fashion), but yes it would make the UI much more friendly.

I like the idea of trying to mimic the human brain as a path to AI, as it
would give the system the ability to theoretically cope with a massive set of
problems.

------
mapleoin
_Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind._

~~~
CodeMage
Come on, Butlerian Jihad? Please tell me that was a humorous quip and not a
real opinion ;)

------
geuis
It's interesting. I have a couple of spare machines lying dormant. But I'm
kind of thrown off by the commercial intentions. It was only a brief mention
but I need to read more about it before jumping in.

