Robots are going to take over

Status
Not open for further replies.
Billy T said:
...pain does seem to me to be a qualia...
Click to expand...

What is a "qualia" as you relate it to pain.???

Edit:::
O... so i guess you'r thankin that pain is somptin that cant be duplicated in a "robot".!!!

Well it does seem dificult to emagine how a robot coud feel pain... but unless pain is a "magical" thang it seems even mor dificult to emagine that it coudnt be duplicated.!!!
 
Last edited:
cluelusshusbund said:
Well it does seem dificult to emagine how a robot coud feel pain... but unless pain is a "magical" thang it seems even mor dificult to emagine that it coudnt be duplicated.!!!
Click to expand...
The basic assumption in all non-physicalist philosophies of the mind seems to be that there is indeed some magic component to our minds (although they aren't likely to use the term "magic" to describe it).
 
Pete said:
A seldom asked question is why people want machines not to inherit the world.
Why would it be a problem if machines eventually "take over" in the same way that our children will one day take over?


Why is it so important to us that our intellectual descendants are biological humans?
Is it the same reason that some people want their descendants to be the same race or religion as them?
Click to expand...


What bothers me about it is... at almos 60 i prolly wont live long enuff to see evidence of what we refer to as "consciousness" bein duplicated in machines.!!!
 
Billy T said:
...it will be good development for intelligent "life" forms when their "IQ" can double each generation. I just wonder if there is a limit?
Click to expand...

I suspect ther is a limit an that limit is when "all" is known.!!!

Nasor said:
The basic assumption in all non-physicalist philosophies of the mind seems to be that there is indeed some magic component to our minds (although they aren't likely to use the term "magic" to describe it).
Click to expand...

Mayb the word quaila is a kinder an gentler substitute for the word magic.!!!

I suspect that machines coud be designed to esperience pane... but i dont see any need for machines to feel pane as humans do.!!!
 
cluelusshusbund said:
...I suspect that machines could be designed to experience pain... but i dont see any need for machines to feel pain as humans do.!!!
Click to expand...
You need to distinguish between feeling pain and responding to things that produce pain in humans (and other sensate creatures, including machines if that is possible.)

Certainly it is conceptually possible for a non-sensate robot to scream, shed tears, quickly withdraw hand, etc. from blow torch suddenly activated to injure the hand without any feeling of pain. I.e. "pain behavior" is not evidence of felt pain. This is the "other minds problem" in that I cannot be sure you are not just a biological robot, lying to me when you tell me that you “feel pain" and exhibit "appropriate pain behavior." In fact it is even conceptually possible that I am deluded and do not really feel pain either, but that seems essentially the same as "feeling pain" as the delusion is so perfect. Somewhat the same as the possibility that I do not have free will but only am deluded to think I do. - This seems to be quite probable as we learn more about how the decisions we think we make are actually made before we even know that we are going to decide. See thread beginning at:

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2227485&postcount=1

For me the ability to "feel pain" (or experience other qualias) is the litmus test for the presence of a mind, and not just a "philosophical zombie." Not possible now, but the construction of a machine which is a philosophical zombie seems conceptually possible although I doubt man can ever make it as compact as evolution has made man. I do not know if a "mind" in the sense of feeling pain and other qualias can be constructed even in principle, in a machine, but since humans probably are just very complex biological machines, IMHO, I tend to think that hundreds of years from now that may be possible. Before doing this, we will need to understand how, if at all, a truely sensate construct would be more desirable / "better" than a philosophical zombie. I.e. is there any purpose or advantage to having qualia?

Poets probably think there is, but I am not sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy T said:
This is the "other minds problem" in that I cannot be sure you are not just a biological robot, lying to me when you tell me that you “feel pain" and exhibit "appropriate pain behavior." In fact it is even conceptually possible that I am deluded and do not really feel pain either, but that seems essentially the same as "feeling pain" as the delusion is so perfect. Somewhat the same as the possibility that I do not have free will but only am deluded to think I do.

I do not know if a "mind" in the sense of feeling pain and other qualias can be constructed even in principle, in a machine, but since humans probably are just very complex biological machines, IMHO, I tend to think that hundreds of years from now that may be possible.
Click to expand...

If such constructon in a "machine" ant posible then quaila mus be som sort of a "magical" thang... an im oK wit that... ive jus never seen any evidence that "magic" esists.!!!

Before doing this, we will need to understand how, if at all, a truely sensate construct would be more desirable / "better" than a philosophical zombie. I.e. is there any purpose or advantage to having qualia?

Poets probably think there is, but I am not sure.
Click to expand...

Well in a way the "poets" mite win-out... because the machines we evolve into mite create qualia in a near infinite variety.!!!
 
Billy T said:
Before doing this, we will need to understand how, if at all, a truely sensate construct would be more desirable / "better" than a philosophical zombie. I.e. is there any purpose or advantage to having qualia?

Poets probably think there is, but I am not sure.
Click to expand...
As someone from The Simpsons once put it, "Can robots feel pain? If so, we're all horrible, horrible people."
 
cluelusshusbund said:
...quaila must be some sort of a "magical" thing...
Click to expand...
There is no reason I know of to conclude magic is required or that qualia must be indentical with magic.

Qualia are just perceived experiences and one can perceive things that do not exist. All halucinations are examples.

Aslo the arguement I present for the possibility of genuine free will existing (without conflicting to the physical laws) also permits qualia to be non-magical in a being which is completely ruled by the physical laws.

I.e. I think the parietal brain can and does create and run a Real Time Simulation, RTS, when body is not in deep dreamless sleep. The RTS creats you*, all your experiences, all your perceptions, and a reasonable accurate simulation of the physical world that you have senses to detect. (The RTS does not simulate the multitude of radio waves passing thru your body as they are not sensed. etc.)
--------------
*In this POV, you are not a physical body, but just information in the RTS. Simulations can follow rules that differ from the physical rules. A simulated fire can burn you (again the you that is only information) without requiring oxygen, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nasor said:
As someone from The Simpsons once put it, "Can robots feel pain? If so, we're all horrible, horrible people."
Click to expand...
Yes. the computer I was using about a year ago, rebelled, I was so horrible to it. It would not do my commands, no matter how hard I banged on the keyboard. :eek:
 
It will be strangely like this:

android_girlfriend.png


We will have amazing robots that do everything we want, except in slightly the wrong way.
 
Pandaemoni said:
We will have amazing robots that do everything we want, except in slightly the wrong way.
Click to expand...


The future "us" will be amazin robots... atemptin to do esactly what they want... same as us humans atempt to do now.!!!


PS
Not all humans do thangs the "right-way".!!!
 
I like the AI convos. People keep saying that a computer program can never feel emotions...and I would probably agree. But AI, the kind that I believe will work, is from the ground up, not top down. As in, we don't program a computer to act like a human, we try and make a human from computer parts.

It's a long way away, but if we can reconstruct all the electric and chemical actions going on in a human brain, we've creating a thinking machine.

But, humans will be the dominant servant for ages to come. I truly believe it's going to be a long time before humans can, from scratch, come up with an engine as efficient as a human being. Sure, we can make a robot do stuff, but we already have a very large interest in making human food (to put it mildly), so economically, it would be easier to make more food, than make fuel. Humans are versatile, self-repairing (to an extent), etc. I mean, our intelligence is young, and evolution has had millions of years fine-tuning us. So we have some catching up to do before we can up one up.

Either way, I'm not dreading the future robot invasion. If they're smarter, deeper, and stronger than us, and they evolve themselves faster than we can evolve ourselves, they deserve to take the world from us. They will be the superior species
 
Machines are not going to take over the world as far as I'm concerned.

Robots have computers as their brain but computers cannot really emulate the human mind, that is why we are not replaced by them. Can a computer drive a car instead of a human driver or peform other menial activities?
 
Computers are going to become more like us, and we're going to become more like computers. But in the end, our flesh and blood are going to be obsolete. We may still exist, but in a more humble state, perhaps somewhere far underground, while the machines replicate themselves throughout the galaxies.
 

Why can not we be us robots who have take over? :rolleyes:
(Robots based on hydrocarbon technology instead of silicon and metal) :scratchin:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top