Current AI programming techniques are incompatible for creation of human intelligence
When artificial intelligence
first came about in the first computing machines, computing was restricted by technology
and computing power. The easiest way to get around giving intelligent functions
to a machine was to give it basic sets of rules. These finite set of rules took
up small amounts of memory, and could be used dependent on the input and goal.
The rules could be combined to create more complex functions, exponentially
increasing the amount of total functions available.
The current computing grew from
these beginnings, now using complex algorithmic and recursive functions using
basic rules to further increase the amount of computing possibilities. The
search for true artificial intelligence, one comparable to our amount of
intelligence and conscious awareness, is in the works. A robotic creation using
transistors and circuits and algorithmic programming whilst having the
conscious and cognitive abilities that humans possess is the end goal. We know
so far that even the most advanced artificial intelligence makes semantic and
perceptual errors about the physical world.
The problem with creating an artificial
intelligence like our own is the rule-based computing which is the seed of
modern computing intelligence. The seed planted was a rule-based one, and since
we used these seeds to grow modern computing, we now have this type of
computing available. I strongly believe this rule-based computing will never
allow for true human-based artificial intelligence to be used. Human cognition and
consciousness is not a rule-based system, and rule-based systems are not able
to perform the amount and type of processing that the human mind does.
The human mind processes information
in bottom-up and top-down processes by integrating sensory info and semantic
knowledge in integration centers of the brain. The mind can take this info and
again reanalyze in in a seemingly subjective fashion, or by applying further
conscious reason to perform a reaction to the input info. The mind has the ability
to consciously engage ideas in the brain in a way that doesn’t seem to obey
Humans can be argued to be mostly
a tabula rasa (blank slate) at birth,
with arguably some innate abilities; perhaps there are some undefined “rules”.
To create a “fully grown” and “mature” robot instantaneously, as well as endow
it with all the knowledge of the world and processing an adult human would
possess is a disastrous thought. We can’t program a mature robot, we need to
grow it. Create a robot with the ability to learn, and to perform connections
by repeated pairings of stimuli. A robot would be endowed with the learning
abilities of which humans possess, so that it may learn connections in the
world and be endowed with human-type knowledge and ability. The way we “program”
robots now with artificially intelligent algorithms does not begin to scratch
the surface of human knowledge ability.
A robotic creation as a “newborn” with
very few programmed rules besides rules for stimuli pairing, feature detection,
whilst integrating the perceptual info similar in fashion to how the info bonds
and integrates in the human brain is essential. No need for large highly
complex algorithmic programs, we set a few basic algorithms, and allow the
robot to “learn” the world on its own. While this is a long process, I believe
it is the closest approximation to a human-like artificial intelligence. We
bare the robot, and allow it to grow and mature in the human world by
interaction with the world and gaining knowledge in the fashion that we do. This is the only way to create a robot which can be perceptually and semantically comparable to a human.
The computer programmer is a creator of universes for which he alone is the lawgiver. No playwright, no stage director, no emperor, however powerful, has ever exercised such absolute authority to arrange a stage or field of battle and to command such unswervingly dutiful actors or troops.
A term I’d always found intriguing, mostly because it’s such an unusual word. It’s a concept from mathematics and computer science but can be applied more generally—not that it often is. Basically, it’s an operation that, no matter how many times you do it, you’ll still get the same result, at least without doing other operations in between. A classic example would be view_your_bank_balance being idempotent, and withdraw_1000 not being idempotent.
The most poetic introduction to computer science I’ve seen
Computational processes are abstract beings that inhabit computers. As they evolve, processes manipulate other abstract things called data. The evolution of a process is directed by a pattern of rules called a program. People create programs to direct processes. In effect, we conjure the spirits of the computer with our spells.
A computational process is indeed much like a sorcerer’s idea of a spirit. It cannot be seen or touched. It is not composed of matter at all. However, it is very real. It can perform intellectual work. It can answer questions. It can affect the world by disbursing money at a bank or by controlling a robot arm in a factory. The programs we use to conjure processes are like a sorcerer’s spells. They are carefully composed from symbolic expressions in arcane and esoteric programming languages that prescribe the tasks we want our processes to perform.
- From Chapter 1 of The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, by Harold Abelson and Gerald Jay Sussman with Julie Sussman (MIT Press 1996, 2nd edition).
[Refer to Clarke’s Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.]