Quantcast
≡ Menu

Welcome to Singulati: Our Singularity Weblog Forum

Singulati is a free digital forum open to both singularitarians and skeptics who come together to discuss, debate, collaborate, learn and network within a friendly, informal and rewarding atmosphere. Join us today: together we can build a better future, better you!

A A A

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In

Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Will the Singularity be partying and fun? "What happens in the Event Horizon stays in the Event Horizon!"
April 25, 2011
2:00 pm
KimSolez
Guest
Guests
April 26, 2011
4:38 pm
CMStewart
Guest
Guests

Only if Ray and Ramona are there, in which case, all bets are off. [Image Can Not Be Found]

April 27, 2011
1:53 am
Nikki Olson
Guest
Guests

Have you seen the film 'Event Horizon'? It was not a party. But I think there will be more and more partying leading up to the Singularity... I celebrated the night that Watson won Jeopardy. I plan on celebrating when a computer passes a Turing Test...

April 27, 2011
1:56 am
Avatar
Socrates
Toronto
Admin
Forum Posts: 123
Member Since:
October 27, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I am not so sure we ought to celebrate or not...

Singularity Weblog

April 27, 2011
2:38 am
Nikki Olson
Guest
Guests

Many people having 2012 parties. If it's not the end of the world, it's ok because having a party is a good thing in and of itself. And if it is the end of the world, well then, may as well end on a high note?[Image Can Not Be Found]

April 27, 2011
8:56 am
Avatar
Socrates
Toronto
Admin
Forum Posts: 123
Member Since:
October 27, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree that we may as well end up on a high note. However, I am concerned with the validity of the Turing Test, that's the problem. In the end of the day it is a very non-scientific, highly subjective and perceptual test. Say, for example, there is a committee evaluating the intelligence of rocks. And, say that for some strange reason 30% of the judges somehow conclude that the rocks have gone intelligent. Now, does that mean that they truly have become intelligent? The fact of their potential or actuall intelligence is independent from our perception just like other people may or may not perceive a person to be intelligent or not. The problem is that our perception of things doesn't make them so. We perceive that earth is flat but we now know better than that. Our sense of perception is not reliable. Thus what is needed is an updated version of the Turing Test which needs to more scientific way to evaluate the potential AI candidates... This, on the other hand, opens a whole other can of worms...

Singularity Weblog

April 27, 2011
1:58 pm
Nikki Olson
Guest
Guests

I agree. Not only is the Turing Test a 'subjective' measure of intelligence, it says nothing about the subjective experience of the computer passing it. And like I wrote in the blog "A Turing Test Point of View: Will the Singularity Be Biased", the 'Turing Test' being passed is pretty insignificant when you realize that all it really has to do is mimic intelligence as we expect to see it (praising the local team), and that we are fooled pretty easily already. 

 

But doesn't this thread now remind you of something Kurzweil keeps pointing out; that once computers start to do things that we originally deemed fantastic, we then downgrade and undermine the significance of the computer's accomplishment? 

 

I know a lot of the scientists behind things in the Singularity community get annoyed with Goertzel's slightly 'post modern' perspective on things, but I agree with him on most things concerning perception and subjectivity, especially as they apply to AI. Our expectations shape our definitions, and our experience of how things really are (as in, whether or not a rock is intelligent) has a lot to do with the frameworks from which we are approaching the subject. In a recent podcast interview he admits that he is tired of debating the Chinese Room type issues surrounding AI; he thinks that as we begin creating very intelligent machines these details will become less significant. 

 

The only place I see this line of thinking really mattering (where we have to figure out the details of machine intelligence and subjectivity) in the near future is with regards to robot/AI rights. And if those debates are anything like current animal rights work being done, I don't want much to do with those debates! 

Forum Timezone: America/Toronto

Most Users Ever Online: 70

Currently Online:
5 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 56

Members: 149

Moderators: 0

Admins: 3

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4

Forums: 27

Topics: 183

Posts: 571

Newest Members:

tex, wp, bella_hamilton, Jared Leidich, missfamily, tkbelmont

Administrators: Socrates: 123, zippykid: 7, davidaj: 0

Over 3,000 super smart people have subscribed to my newsletter: