Quote:
Originally Posted by psyang
One nuance with the defender example is the AI was given the goal of surviving. The next step would be to put the AI in an environment, and let it come up with its own goals and attempt to accomplish them. But what would drive the need to come up with a a goal? How would it determine a "good" goal worth pursuing vs a "bad" goal that should be rejected?
I do think "flashes of brilliance" is running some sort sort of algorithm (whether a genetic algorithm, or something else) in our subconscious. How many times have you been stuck on a problem, then go to bed, and when you wake up, the solution hits you? Something was going on while you slept.
In many ways we are all just highly advanced pattern matching machines. That sudden sense of dread you get when you walk into some scenario is likely your subconscious pattern matching something in your environment with a past negative experience.
|
This is what I've been thinking about AI as well, they're just pattern machines. I don't like how some people's brains turn off when "AI" is associated with it. It's still only an advanced script. The difference is that a script starts from zero and then learns, improves and evolves. AI is given access to pools of "knowledge" which it can use as part of its learning process and improvements. This allows it to advance faster because it doesn't have to start from zero.
It's like the difference between wise and smart. (Learning from someone else's mistakes vs learning from your own). Currently assuming the knowledge pool that AI is drawing from is considered accurate, AI is considered both wise and smart. Advanced scripts with no outside data access is only smart.
But all it takes is faulty pools of knowledge and the AI is basically neither wise nor smart. Just like humans with higher level intelligence (ie: MBAs, PHDs etc.), they are still capable of GIGO type of outputs. (ie: 130 IQ person spouting inaccurate stereotypes like it's truth).