Definition of flaming:
Flaming is a hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users, often involving the use of profanity.
I did not flame you.
Whats wrong with a world full of people driven by purpose?
Nothing. But a resource based economy is far more than just people driven by purpose. Since you seemed to ignore my links, I'll post them again:http://rationalwiki....e_Venus_Projecthttp://m.youtube.com...h?v=-cBdbw3hsUE
Wow, such flames over a resource based economy? Whats wrong with a world full of people driven by purpose? Whats wrong with nanotehnology and quantum computing? they are very VERY real things. I mean look at what nanotechnology has created so far. There are materials made from nanotechnology that are rigid but dissolve when in contact with water. Biodegradability there is a huge bonus.
and quantum computing has also made quite good leaps in the field of wireless comunication. They transfered what im pretty sure was a kilobyte of information across a room.
Nothing is wrong with those technologies. What is wrong with them is that people like you use them as cure-alls. For example, nanotech has amazing applications in medicine, fuel, information tech, and materials science. It won't be used in industry, nor can you say that it will give us superpowers. Learn more here:http://www.stardestr...s/Nanotech.html
Evidence man, show evidence. All your other points were just claims.
All my points were claims? Um.....yes. Your points are claims too. I have put up two links as evidence which nobody seems to be looking at.
Why not? Creativity is nothing more than the result of neural activity in our brains, just like motion, or breathing, or thinking. Everything we do is nothing more than electric signals and chemicals, so it can be replicated.
I agree with you, it's just that I posted something on another thread that deals with the same topic but he hasn't replied. I didn't want to copy down my whole argument again.
You're mixing natural language processing (NLP) with AI general intelligence. NLP is your basic chat bot that uses algorithms to give an appropriate response. The Chinese Room thought experiment seems centered around the criticism of the Turing test which I have to say, it is a shit test to evaluate AI intelligence.
It was designed to criticize the Turing Test, but it applies to all artificial intelligences.
Now, according to this textbook (pdf here) the main attributes of AI general intelligence are:
- Reasoning, strategy, solving puzzles, that sort of thing.
- Knowledge representation & Commonsense knowledge representation
- Natural Communication
- Ability to use skills listed above towards goals
Doesn't matter, because they have no idea what they are doing. There is no evidence presentable that they do.
Then there are the big traits everyone throws around without knowing what they mean because we don't exactly know what they mean as in, they exist strictly in philosophy. But advances in neural researching are uncovering these overrated traits people attach to their brain. These traits are:
- Anything else that has to do with you realizing that you are you.
- Sapience: "the quality of being wise or showing wisdom"
- Consciousness: "the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings"
- Self-Awareness: "the ability to recognize oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals"
- Sentience: "able to perceive or feel things"
Those are overrated traits. I'm sure AI have already accomplished them. However, the biggest one of all is understanding what they are doing. AI is programmed. It follows a set of instructions given to it. That's all. We on the other hand are not programmed. We learn through experience.
There are two methods of creating artificial intelligence: the top-down approach and the bottom-up approach. The top-down approach programs all of the intelligence from the beginning. Thus, the AI follows all of the programming. Since all it is doing is following instructions, it is not understanding anything in the human sense. A top-down approach AI is:
Input -> Data Processor -> Output
The bottom-up approach is a neural network, following Hebb's rule. Hebb's rule means that it changes the strength of electrical connections between neurons every time that it completes a task, constantly rewiring itself.
The brain is not a computer.
Only a neural network can understand and learn like a brain can. Thus, to make an AI actually able to compete with a human, you need reverse-engineer the brain: build an artificial neural network.
Robots with ANNs will not be mainstream, as firstly they need time to learn. Whereas programmed robots can just be factory equipped with all the information they need, ANN robots need to learn like a human child. This is time and cost ineffective.
Secondly, there is nothing to stop them from going on a rampage and killing people. Whereas in standard robots you can just program in life preservation programming (such as the Three Laws of Robotics), you can't program an ANN.
You would also need memory storage 500 times the size of the current internet, but I don't actually think that will be a problem in the future.
I'm not saying that ANN robots won't exist. Just that they won't be the mainstream ones. And it's the mainstream ones that will take our jobs.
Reference: Physics of the Future
Strong AI doesn't exist merely because we don't understand how our brain works. EU and USA are currently working hard on fixing that and simulating the brain by 2023. Once you're able to fully understand the brain and simulate each and every function, you're also able to replicate it. As long as it's a finite system, it is possible to simulate it. Second, photorealistic CGI and virtual reality could replace modern porn altogether. It's just an example. Use some imagination when you think about these things. Have you read the timeline at all?
Hm, referring to the timeline as it's an all-knowing precognitive god, eh? The mistake that everyone makes. Another problem that the community on this forum has.
Yep, simulating brain function shall create strong AI. But programmed robots won't. And it's programmed robots that will be mainstream, not ANN robots.
Also, I'm positive that am any rational person would prefer to see real people fucking than "photorealistic CGI".
I studied economics for a bunch of years, capitalism failed multiple times, like for instance in 2008 and in 1929. Also, it's failing even now because most money belong to a very small elite, while the rest of the world is poor. That counts as failure. Also, I don't hate capitalism, I just see it rationally for what it is: an old, hence obsolete system, built by a completely different society
Capitalism is obsolete? Ok, tell me why private ownership of goods and private enterprise is obsolete. The wealth gap is not a problem of capitalism, it is a problem of shitty tax laws. The only downside to capitalism is, yes, the economic downturns. However, that's the price we pay for this system.
You studied economics? Where, the Soviet Union?
Why will humans play to rules against their nature? Avarice isn't going to go away with money. Resources cause avarice. War will continue in the future, whether or not you want it or believe it.
How can a large industrialized economy be centrally planned? Oh, your answer to this is AI? Well, here's a debunk: http://rationalwiki....e_Venus_Project
Also thought this was funny, but you people won't: http://gunsandelmo.t...e-a-singularity
COMMUNISM AND A RESOURCE BASED ECONOMY:
All of the following quotes are from Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. I think it's funny that the resource based economy wankers basically say the same thing.
"Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells."
"Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce."
"Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie and proletariat."
Hey look, it's just what FutureGuy said as an argument against capitalism.
"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."
"Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
"Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state."