Robots to achieve human intelligence in 2029

I must make a correction on this:
Robots are predicted to equal the intelligence of a Daily Mail reader by 2029. Using Moore's Law, they would achieve human intelligence by mid-2030.
 
i've heard that around 2024 machines will be so intelligent, that they can turn themselves on and it would be impossible to shut them down
 
That's awesome! I won't ever have to lean down to the power button again!
 
That's cool, I've got a RAID system hooked up.
 
Yeah and the Geforce 3 was going to provide Toy Story graphics.... too late!
 
So when do i get to buy the new intel brain 4 to install in my new pc that plays with me.

Not fantasy but far from us!
 
Druckles said:
You never know. There's actually a lot more than you think you know going on behind the scenes in terms of research ;)
Click to expand...

I am quite well aware of the research, but right now the biggest problems center around extremely simple problems like balance and motor coordination, navigation, understanding speech, recognizing faces and familiar objects.

Serious progress is being made in these areas, such as MIT's COG or Honda's ASIMO, but I doubt such progress will result in a robot with human intelligence in 2029. I do believe they will result in fairly capable home robots in the 2030s though.
 
alehm said:
Yeah and the Geforce 3 was going to provide Toy Story graphics.... too late!
Click to expand...

But... it does provide Toy Story graphics.

I put in the movie on my computer and it doesn't look bad at all. In fact it looks damn good.

I don't understand?




<waits>
 
ou're kidding right?

I'm going to be minoring in artificial intelligence and robotics next year. I sure hope my degree won't be one in "fantasy".
Click to expand...

The qualification wont, but the idea that we can create AI is.

Sorry, just not going to happen.

If we do create AI somehow I can assure you it will be more like to a biological being then a computer.


I don't know what you listen to or read...
Click to expand...

Logic, reason, and an understanding of science, go figure.

Don't get me wrong, we'll be able to make some pretty advanced and interesting machines and technologies...eventually, but don't count on a super-computer being able to dwell on the meaning of life with you in a meaningful way anytime soon.

Edit: Forgot to mention, we still can't entirely explain human sapience let alone recreate it.

For all a computers computational power it still is no-where even approaching close enough to be able for a second to contemplate on itself.

Computational power is different from intelligence, and so far all advances in computers has been just that, a computer.

It computes things.


The human brain on the other hand is extremely complex, its taken billions of years of evolution of life to reach the point where the human brain is complex as it is. There is not a slither of evidence at all that the structures and interactions of the human brain that have given us sapience is even possible in inorganic constructs.


So yes, I stand by my current point. AI as we understand it is pure fiction and there is no basis in reality to expect it to ever exist, and if it did, it would be organic, and it would most likely be geneticists and biologists/chemists that built it, not an engineer.

Stop watching Star Trek and masturbating to Lieutenant Data. He is a character in a TV series. ;)


You want to figure out how to create "Neural networks"?....look inside your own head, they already exist.



Buuut....the future is the future, and laws of physics dictate that its just not possible to predict the future with any strict certainty, and it only gets more difficult as the time between now and the future increases so, who knows, I could be proven wrong.

But I think I'll stick with my original position all the same. :)
 
Your wrong!

Um... yeah...

Creating neural networks is Artificial Intelligence. Even if we just replicate a brain, it's technically AI, because we can program it to tell it exactly what to do.

So you're saying that we can't create AI? So how the hell are we alive? We're a fine example of AI! Just... not so much A, and a bit more N
 
nurizeko said:
<snip>
Click to expand...
This is a weak position to adopt, especially since you don't seem to be basing it on much more than the popular skepticism surrounding AI. The brain is a type of computer. It's spurious to draw some kind of imaginary line between an organic and an inorganic computer - there's no 'slither' of evidence suggesting that sapience comes as a result of some mysterious property of organic material either, unless you believe in some kind of alchemy or you're an Xian saying humans can never recreate the majesty of God's creation etc etc. Admittedly, it's likely that we don't have the kind of computational power needed to create Strong AI any time soon, but Moore's law suggests that won't be a problem for too long.

It was the late 90's before I owned my first PC, which I used to play and talk about HL1 exclusively. In newsgroups then, I remember discussions as to whether the possibility of a 1Ghz CPU was just a highblown fantasy or not. Technology tends to overtake us and leave us eating its dust in a very short space of time. That old trivia chestnut you hear regurgitated on adverts sometimes, that 'the human brain is many times more powerful than the most powerful computer' or whatever - that won't be true forever. You can also count on humanity to succeed in reverse engineering the brain at some point.

This skepticism in AI, you may be interested to hear, is something of an artifical construct in itself, in that it arose mainly as a disappointed response to the overblown expectations of mid-20th century AI researchers, who massively underestimated the difficulties inherent in creating Strong AI. Industry had high hopes and big bucks riding on AI, neither was satisfied quick enough, and funding dried up. There's since been a resurgence in interest in AI, but the perception has stuck since the first few big rounds of disappointments that it is a hopeless fantasy for Star Trek fans. The fact that there is a popular skepticism about something, however, does not at all mean that it is a pipe dream.
 
*false beard, moustache + top hat*

YEAH LAIVASSE IS A GENIUS!
/sidles away
 
nurizeko said:
Its not gonna happen because I say so. I have no evidence what soever, and claim to use scientific evidence despite the fact that many scientists support AI.
Click to expand...

Fixed. Good job completely closing your mind to something based off nothing.
 
I'm still upset he quoted me when he cited that crap. How the hell did he know I masturbate over Data?! D:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top