FFFFUUUUUUUUUU

[NotPublished]

Maybe thats how we were written :O

[The Fundamentalist]

If stress and so on were unneeded, then we probably wouldn't have them.  They'd be selected against in evolution.

Although, that might not be relevant in the modern world, I don't know.

Out of my interest, I have a question... what are possible fields that thinking machines can be used for, aside from mad science?

[Elder Iptuous]

Iptuous, what beliefs are you talking about? The sentence needs more careful wording fore to give a good answer.

well, i was thinking of any belief in general, but specifically the belief that it was conscious....
i was wondering if you thought it was possible to make a machine that was not conscious, but believed that it was.
I'm sure that's been a crappy sci-fi story many times, but...

[Jasper]

The point of emotion experiencing robots would be that killing all the humans would be a horrifying thought. Just like any sane person thinks genocide is horrible. It may be appealing at times, but the act of doing so would cause too much psychological distress to bear.

[Jasper]

well, i was thinking of any belief in general, but specifically the belief that it was conscious....
i was wondering if you thought it was possible to make a machine that was not conscious, but believed that it was.
I'm sure that's been a crappy sci-fi story many times, but...

then sadly it would probably fool me, unless by then I knew what to look for in a conscious brainlike organ.

[BabylonHoruv]

So we have to make robots that can lie.

Yes, I think that AI research is the place to be for mad science.

We already have that.

Altruism too

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jan/robots-evolve-and-learn-how-to-lie

[The Fundamentalist]

i was wondering if you thought it was possible to make a machine that was not conscious, but believed that it was.
I'm sure that's been a crappy sci-fi story many times, but...

#include <iostream>

int main()
{
   std::cout << "I am a conscious program!\n";
   return 0;
}

Sorta like that?

The point of emotion experiencing robots would be that killing all the humans would be a horrifying thought. Just like any sane person thinks genocide is horrible. It may be appealing at times, but the act of doing so would cause too much psychological distress to bear.

...interesting.

...

We should give UAVs souls?

[NotPublished]

If stress and so on were unneeded, then we probably wouldn't have them.  They'd be selected against in evolution.

Although, that might not be relevant in the modern world, I don't know.

Out of my interest, I have a question... what are possible fields that thinking machines can be used for, aside from mad science?

Assistance in Research and Development, Machines would have the ability to work logically and can produce some results faster.
Could make for a good PA
Exploration
Repetitive tasks!

Or for every human baby a machine is made and that machine does all the boring stuff (Ok bad idea I know but its fun imagine)


@Felix - what about the potential for 'viruses' to overwrite some of their behavioural patterns. Just like how we have those little bugs and worms that re-write some animal behaviour making them prone to killing themselves so the worm can continue its cycle.

[The Fundamentalist]

So we have to make robots that can lie.

Yes, I think that AI research is the place to be for mad science.

We already have that.

Altruism too

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jan/robots-evolve-and-learn-how-to-lie

Oh duh.  I already read about Avida disguising its intelligence to avoid artificial selection by examiners, how did I forget that?

[Jasper]

I really doubt that is possible.

Not that it is not possible to make a machine that feels hungry, but it is impossible to know it feels hungry and doesn't just inform you that it feels hungry because that is how it was programmed.

I didn't say it was going to be easy, shit. It's the hardest problem I could think of for neuroscience to address. However we know THAT it happens, and it almost definitely happens without God, souls, fairy dust, or dualism, so it PROBABLY doesn't matter what the medium is. Whether you make a brain out of fatty tissue or some synthetic contrivance, what is the difference if they behave the same ways?

[The Fundamentalist]

If stress and so on were unneeded, then we probably wouldn't have them.  They'd be selected against in evolution.

Although, that might not be relevant in the modern world, I don't know.

Out of my interest, I have a question... what are possible fields that thinking machines can be used for, aside from mad science?

Assistance in Research and Development, Machines would have the ability to work logically and can produce some results faster.
Could make for a good PA
Exploration
Repetitive tasks!

Or for every human baby a machine is made and that machine does all the boring stuff (Ok bad idea I know but its fun imagine)

Machines would have the ability to work logically

I think that it's been pretty well established that consciousness precludes logical thinking.  Just because you're using a logical machine (the computer) to run it, that doesn't mean the thing itself is logical.

Repetitive tasks!

Then why would you be making it conscious?

[BabylonHoruv]

I really doubt that is possible.

Not that it is not possible to make a machine that feels hungry, but it is impossible to know it feels hungry and doesn't just inform you that it feels hungry because that is how it was programmed.

I didn't say it was going to be easy, shit. It's the hardest problem I could think of for neuroscience to address. However we know THAT it happens, and it almost definitely happens without God, souls, fairy dust, or dualism, so it PROBABLY doesn't matter what the medium is. Whether you make a brain out of fatty tissue or some synthetic contrivance, what is the difference if they behave the same ways?

Sure, but I have no way to verify that you are really feeling hunger and aren't just acting as you are programmed to do.  I only know that I have feelings.

A machine that acts like it has feelings is just as good as one that does, for all intents and purposes except the machine's.

[The Fundamentalist]

I agree with Babylon.

Another thing that may be of interest in consciousness: I'll dig up the story, but apparently neuroscientists found that people make their decisions before they're aware of them.  That is to say, our theory of mind of ourselves is slower than the brain, and so what you think of as your self is not yourself.

I guess that means that they proved the subconsciousness exists?

[NotPublished]

Repetitive tasks!

Then why would you be making it conscious?

God is harsh.

I think that it's been pretty well established that consciousness precludes logical thinking.  Just because you're using a logical machine (the computer) to run it, that doesn't mean the thing itself is logical.

Of course machines are inheritly made dumb its all the instructions we feed it, it might look logical to us but it was just made using another persons logic.

So for a machine to be self-conscious it would have to be able to learn ... I don't agree with a learning machine like that.

*eta* I missed a word oops

[Jasper]

I mentioned that I hate Descartes, right?

If you are willing to concede  that there is NOT some omnipotent demon creating a false world for you, and you are sure you are conscious, then it follows that the other things that are your species, act as smart or smarter than you, and have roughly the same genetic makeup as you, they are VERY likely to be conscious.  Beyond reasonable doubt.   That said, how do you prove beyond reasonable doubt that a non-human, let alone a non-animal, is conscious?