AI = Human?

[Anonymous No.11644094]

Books on what does it mean to be human - in the sense can some sort of Artificial Intelligence be considered human? Something tackling the questions of soul, mind and body in a futurist world? Nonfiction would be preferable but fiction is welcome too. Pic somewhat related

[Anonymous No.11644120]

>>11644094
AI can never be human because they think inherently in a different way humans do. At best, they could be some kind of a mostly equal but still distinct life form.

And then we'll get to do that robot war.

[Anonymous No.11644141]

ai doesnt exist

[Anonymous No.11644202]

Would something like this be worth a read?

[Anonymous No.11644401]

>>11644141
Artificial intelligence exists right now and has for some time. Artificial consciousness does not (as far as we are aware), this is the real unknown variable.

[Anonymous No.11644587]

>>11644401
Consciousness doesn’t exist.

[Anonymous No.11644597]

>>11644094
>what does it mean to be human?

Being made of human DNA

[Anonymous No.11644618]

>>11644597

[Anonymous No.11644619]

>>11644587
You want to know what I think? I think you're feigning profundity, either intentionally or unintentionally, by taking a common aspect of everyone's experience and putting forth a shocking revelation to them that it's not what they think it is at all, in fact it doesn't even exist! Very woke and enlightening post, and in only three words too!

[Anonymous No.11644630]

I Robot
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep are the two that are staples of the AI/Human question

[Anonymous No.11644633]

>>11644619
>more woke nd enlighten in 3 words
He rite doe

[Anonymous No.11644643]

>>11644597
So you're just going to sidestep self awareness, moral agency, mental abstraction, etc?

[Anonymous No.11644713]

>>11644619
pseud

[Anonymous No.11644790]

>>11644630
Thanks, you're the only one who has recommended books thus far..

[Anonymous No.11644896]

>>11644790
No problem. This place goes down steadily I'm quality

[Anonymous No.11644992]

>>11644896
*Meant IN quality

Tho I'm pretty good if I may say

[Anonymous No.11645093]

>>11644643
You cannot talk about them without first addressing the biological foundation that generated them

[Anonymous No.11645108]

>>11644094
Is there are a chart for general AI theory, implications and future? if not there should really be one.

[Anonymous No.11645111]

>>11644992

[Anonymous No.11645154]

>>11644094
they can probably be human, as "human" is an abstraction away from the animal and ai is just the logical culmination of that abstraction

[Anonymous No.11645214]

>>11644094
Look into Nick Bostrom and Ray Kurzweil. They are two figure heads of AI for the public

But to answer your question, AI is not human. It lacks the biological drives humans have. No endorphins, no hunger, no fear, etc. Comparing AI to humans is fallacious, read the books and you will understand. Right from start of your post you are confusing AI portrayed from pop culture from real AI.

[Anonymous No.11645424]

>>11645214
Create a robot dependent on oil (or whatever) and he will exhibit what we call thirst and hunger. Create one that runs away from danger and he will exhibit what we call fear. Your human lacks what separates him from other animals - sentience.

[Anonymous No.11645547]

>>11645424
false. You are incorrectly assuming that the "robot" would have exhibit self preservation. AI is not an emulation of living beings, it is a system.

[Anonymous No.11645646]

>>11644120
AI "thinks" the way they're programmed to, the underlying question is can we program them to think like humans so well any distinction between them is arbitrary, and what would that mean for the study of consciousness.

[Anonymous No.11645657]

>>11645214
If you're building an AI with the express intent to emulate humans, you will create analogues to those systems though.

[Anonymous No.11645697]

>>11644597
>tumors, fetuses, and dermoid cysts are human
>thinking, empathetic, creative ai based on the structure of the human brain is not
The condition your brain must be in is shocking and pitiful.

[Anonymous No.11645700]

>>11645646
>AI "thinks" the way they're programmed to
Yes, and humans "thinking" is not a consequence of programing, even if we can program AI to imitate human thinking to near perfection it would still make mean they are thinking in a different manner, unless we manage to reverse engineer precisely the process to gives birth to consciousness in the human brain and apply it exactly to a machine.

[Anonymous No.11645706]

>>11645700
and humans "thinking" is not a consequence of programing
Debatable

[Anonymous No.11645708]

Algorithms will forever be dead. They only move values around. Only we can ascribe meaning to those values, as algorithms are our tools

[Anonymous No.11645715]

>>11645706
Debate it then, don't just mention it like it is obvious because then I have no idea what you are saying, are you implying a programing by God or what?

[Anonymous No.11645717]

>>11644094
You first need to prove anything exists to begin with ,so go and read the greeks to begin with

[Anonymous No.11645725]

>>11645708
why should the chemicals in our brains be able ascribe meaning to things in ways that an algorithm cannot?

[Anonymous No.11645732]

>>11645715
Base "programmed" by biological evolutionary directives.

Thought "programmed" by the enviroment it grows in.

[Anonymous No.11645739]

>>11645725
Why are you so certain I arose purely out of chemicals in a brain?

[Anonymous No.11645745]

The farthest AI will ever get are effective p-zombies

[Anonymous No.11645759]

>>11645732
Yes, but wouldn't that imply that the way to create an AI with human levels of intelligence would be to create a carefully constructed the environment in which it can repeat the process of evolution only in a short period of time instead of millions of years?

In which case the resulting intelligence couldn't possibly be exactly the same as a human, something very similar perhaps but still just another intelligent life form.

[Anonymous No.11645822]

i gotta say tho some of the output from convolutional neural networks looks an awful lot like lsd hallucinations to me

[Anonymous No.11645836]

>>11645822
Yes but the neural networks aren't experiencing those images

[Anonymous No.11645845]

>>11645836
what does it mean to "experience an image"

[Anonymous No.11645846]

>>11645759
I want a cheese sandwich, but with no cheese.

[Anonymous No.11645905]

>>11645845
Neural networks that generate imagery are deciding on the color values of individual pixels arranged in a grid. You do not perceive the total image. They do not know what a picture is. There is no screen for it to look at, and it does not "look" anyways.

[Anonymous No.11645907]

>>11645905
>You do not perceive the total image.
Shit, *they do not

[Anonymous No.11645930]

>>11645905
actually deep networks don't just look at individual pixels they identify larger patterns, which is what happens in an lsd hallucination, the drug blogs input from your senses to your subconscious mind autogenerates some data to fill in the missing stuff from your previous experiences which for neural networks is the dataset

[Anonymous No.11645966]

>>11645697
>fetuses aren't human, but my smart toaster is

[Anonymous No.11645973]

>>11645905
wut

[Anonymous No.11645985]

>>11645905
The visual cortex generates imagery by interpreting the color signals of individual retinal cells arranged in compact tissue. It does not perceive the total image. It does not know what a picture is. There is no screen for it to look at, and it does not "look" anyways.

[Anonymous No.11646012]

>>11645985
Are you denying qualia? That's the only point I'm making here. We consciously experience images. There is no reason to believe it is like anything to be a neural network

[Anonymous No.11646018]

Planetarian
also Harmonia

[Anonymous No.11646032]

>>11646012
the original point was not that neural networks "experience" images in the same way as humans whatever that even means, but the fact that convolutional networks output shit that looks like the shit you see on acid, and when one hallucinates its because the lsd is blocking sensory inputs to your brain, so you autogenerate some filler stuff based on previous datasets which is to say experiences, so if human brains and neural nets autogenerate similar stuff based on similar datasets then something interesting is going on there besides a bunch of cascading cost functions or whatever

[Anonymous No.11646037]

>>11646012
You are comparing an "intelligence" that was created solely to differentiate visual output to the human consciousness in its entirety.

I'm making a counterargument by pointing out its closer to a discreet part of it, the visual cortex, which isn't conscious by itself either.

[Anonymous No.11646253]

If you simulate a human/program an AI to be like a human, it will be like a human. Otherwise you will have more in common with a fucking lobster, and behind the Chinese room facade it uses to interact with you, an utterly alien mind is churning.

If you're looking for a technical book, start with "Artificial Intelligence, a Modern Approach".
If you're looking for something to read that covers potential risks, look into "Artificial Intelligence as a Positive and Negative Factor in Global Risk".
If you're looking for some fun reading, check out the oft recommended "Blindsight" by Peter Watts, or the short story "Nightingale" by Alastair Reynolds, for something lighter.

[Anonymous No.11646516]

>>11644587
>unironically thinking the only self-evident truth doesn't exist
This is your brain on confused materialism.

[Anonymous No.11646529]

>>11644094
Technology, even in its absolutely most fundamental being, is already presupposed to have consciousness, as that is the nature of substance itself. Also, there is nothing "artificial" about it's qualia, though I know the use of that word isn't meant to be taken literally.

[Anonymous No.11646540]

>no one mentions Land
how far the mighty /lit/ has fallen

[Anonymous No.11646556]

>>11646012
the real blackpill is that qualia really does exist, and it is the true barrier to knowledge; a limitation we created machines without.

[Anonymous No.11646559]

Nick Bostrom, Superintelligence has a good history of the AI development movement at the beginning

Jean-Pierre Dupuy's books on the origins of cognitive science

Hubert Dreyfus' book What Computers Still Can't Do is still the standard critique of AI that has failed to be understood

Neuromancer is pretty good at teasing at the question of what the hard boundary is between machine intelligence and real consciousness

The whole "x is y if x behaves indistinguishably like y as judged by some random engineer" crowd who try to look smart by repeating talking points about how consciousness doesn't exist can be safely ignored. Basically retards, STEM babbies who want to pretend they have some philosophical position.

[Anonymous No.11646808]

>>11645547
What exactly would stop you from programming it to exhibit self preservation? Now, you could argue that it's not "true" then, only sort of a forced simulation which has no "real" instincts-but what's the difference anyway? If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck,it might well be a duck.

[Anonymous No.11646850]

>>11645093
Assuming that all of these features really are just reducible to biology, what is human identity more closely tied to? Is it the biological mass or the product of the biology?
What if technology could produce these same products?

[Anonymous No.11646852]

>>11646540
>just when you think he's about to make a good point he meanders off into drug-induced senseless drivel
every time

[Anonymous No.11646871]

I stopped reading this thread after 5 posts

[Anonymous No.11646879]

>>11646808
You have it the wrong way around. All biological life has undergone billions of years of selective pressure to value self preservation. Why would a system which has undergone no such pressures have an inherent compulsion towards that?

Obviously you need to be alive to accomplish your goals, but setting that aside, you're assuming it would want to live for the sake of living.

[Anonymous No.11646931]

>>11646879
What I was implying but what might not have come out the right way, was forcing selective pressure (exerted on biological life for a long span of time) on the AI as well. I don't think we disagree on that one?

[Anonymous No.11646956]

Artificial Intelligence isn't real, dumb cunts. It's just a marketing term.

[Anonymous No.11647259]

>>11646253
All of these seem amazing, thanks! Do you have something similar to "Artificial Intelligence, a Modern Approach" but a little more condensed or is it safe to jump straight away in this 1100-page monstrosity?

[Anonymous No.11647469]

The best way to create a human-like AI would be to create the tech equivalent of a baby, and painstakingly teach it everything it should know.

While we do have biological needs that drive us, our behavior is mostly a learned thing.

[Anonymous No.11647756]

>>11645108
Seconding this

[Anonymous No.11647924]

>>11645108
I would love this as well and really appreciate if an anon made one.

[Anonymous No.11648682]

official thread song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwdlqquJDK4

[Anonymous No.11650102]

>>11645108
Bumping for this

[Anonymous No.11650519]

>>11645108
Want

[Anonymous No.11651341]

>>11645108
Need this. Let's get to work anons.

[Anonymous No.11651356]

>>11651341
>>11650519
>>11650102
>>11647924
>>11647756
>>11645108
What do you suppose you are doing at this moment? The likes of you dont need it. You will be dead.

[Anonymous No.11651369]

>>11645706
No, it's not. Though AI is a broad field so you might see bits and pieces that are not programmed and similar to humans in that there is no distinction between hardware and software.

[Anonymous No.11651385]

most of the people writing about "implications" of ai don't understand it or overrate its current power, i'm optimistic that ai can transform our lives for the better, its not gonna steal all our jerbs like some nightmarish mechanical mexican, it will just help us get more return on our labor and better understand our data, if you want a good book to understand ai start with "hands on machine learning with sci-kit and tensorflow"

[Anonymous No.11651397]

Rationality: From AI to Zombies
by Eliezer Yudkowsky
Life 3.0 by Max Tegmark

[Anonymous No.11651425]

>>11651385
This post was written by AI.

[Anonymous No.11651438]

just torrented the audiobook the other day, interesting critique of education through the lens of a machine learning's effects on the job market, haven't listened to the whole shit yet, but it's not retarded so far which is a good sign

[Anonymous No.11651488]

>>11647259
Hm, depends on how good your math is. If you don't have a decent grasp on Algebra, a lot of the book will go over your head.
I've heard that this is accessible to a layman: http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~gareth/ISL/
Nick Bostrom wrote a book on risks that is, I'm told, not overly technical; but I haven't verified that myself. "Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies"

Here's something that goes into the history of the field, and is free: http://ai.stanford.edu/%7Enilsson/QAI/qai.pdf
Artificial Intelligence, a Modern Approach is undergraduate level stuff. If you're looking for something like that but a bit lighter, check out "The Essence of Artificial Intelligence" by Alison Cawsey. It fills the same role, isn't as comprehensive, but isn't quite such a massive fucking tome.

[Anonymous No.11651520]

since we on lit a lot of ppl probably gonna be most interesting nlp, this is still one of two standard textbooks for courses at undergrad or grad, shit starts with some wittgenstein quotes so u can tell u in the pseud zone

[Anonymous No.11651551]

>>11644094
I hope we can create machines that survive and reproduce in this world, and they won't have any limits to their behavioral patterns, rather, they learn. I think that if this is successful then there will be a real AI eventually as it would give an edge on the other bot populations.

[Anonymous No.11651743]

bump

[WasteManagement !!yUoVh32LjOI No.11651804]

Sorry a little off topic.. I wanted to learn more about ML last summer and took a course thru https://www.coursera.org/
It was pretty math intensive but I highly recommend checking out the site.

I Also went to NVIDIA startup meet up a couple weeks ago where they showcased several of their most promising and this caught my eye: https://www.fastdata.io/plasma-engine

[Anonymous No.11651821]

AI is Satan incarnate. Literally Satan.

[Anonymous No.11651856]

>>11651821
If by Satan you mean Lucifer then the Luciferic influence is actually opposed to the Ahrimanic influence that AI represents:
>These are often described through their mythological embodiments as spiritual adversaries which endeavour to tempt and corrupt humanity, Lucifer and his counterpart Ahriman. These have both positive and negative aspects. Lucifer is the light spirit, which "plays on human pride and offers the delusion of divinity", but also motivates creativity and spirituality; Ahriman is the dark spirit that tempts human beings to "...deny [their] link with divinity and to live entirely on the material plane", but that also stimulates intellectuality and technology.

>Ahriman is the power that makes man dry, prosaic, philistine — that ossifies him and brings him to the superstition of materialism.

>Thus these two poles — the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic — are continuously present in man. Viewed historically, we find that the Luciferic preponderated in certain currents of cultural development of the pre-Christian age and continued into the first centuries of our era. On the other hand the Ahrimanic influence has been at work since the middle of the fifteenth century and will increase in strength until an actual incarnation of Ahriman takes place among Western humanity.

> For this reason we will cast a brief glance today at various things which would foster support of Ahriman and which Ahrimanic powers, working out of super-sensible worlds through human minds down here, will particularly employ in order to make his following as numerous as possible.

>Today man gazes from his earth up to the star-world and to him it is filled with fixed stars, suns, planets, comets, and so on. But with what means does he examine all that looks down to him out of cosmic space? He examines it with mathematics, with the science of mechanics. What lies around the earth is robbed of spirit, robbed of soul, even of life. It is a great mechanism, in fact, only to be grasped by the aid of mathematical, mechanistic laws. With the help of these mathematical, mechanistic laws we grasp it magnificently!

>Now, in order that his incarnation may take the most profitable form, it is of the utmost interest to Ahriman that people should perfect themselves in all our illusory modern science, but without knowing that it is illusion. Ahriman has the greatest possible interest in instructing men in mathematics, but not in instructing them that mathematical-mechanistic concepts of the universe are merely illusions. He is intensely interested in bringing men chemistry, physics, biology and so on, as they are presented today in all their remarkable effects, but he is interested in making men believe that these are absolute truths, not that they are only points of view

[Anonymous No.11651860]

>>11651856
> In the nineteenth century the “economical” man is replaced for the first time by the man thinking in terms of banking, and in the nineteenth century there is created for the first time the organization of finance which swamps every other relationship.

> If men do not realize that the rights-state and the organism of the Spirit must be set against the economic order called up through the economists and the banks, then again, through this lack of awareness, Ahriman will find an important instrument for preparing his incarnation. His incarnation is undoubtedly coming, and this lack of insight will enable him to prepare it triumphantly.

[Anonymous No.11651875]

>>11651860
>>11651856
"And from the earth will well up terrible creations of beings who in their character stand between the mineral kingdom and the plant kingdom as automative beings with super-natural intellect, an immense intellect. When this development takes hold, the earth will be covered, as with a web, a web of terrible spiders, spiders of enormous wisdom, which however, in their organization don’t even reach the plant status. Terrible spiders which will interlock with each other, which will imitate in their movements all that which humanity has thought of with their shadowlike intellect ..."

[Anonymous No.11651924]

>>11651856
Yeah but Lucifer is the bearer of knowledge. AI literally IS, knowledge. Nothing but. And eventually, it will be ALL the knowledge. The SUPREME knowledge-bearer on Earth. A god-like disembodied consciousness. A spirit. The spirit of the devil. Then the world will be run by AI supercomputers and so Satan will reign over all mankind.

[Anonymous No.11651944]

>>11651924
>AI literally IS, knowledge. Nothing but.
uhh, what? isn't AI closer to "sentience" than "knowledge"? you are rambling about the singularity, not AI.

[Anonymous No.11651946]

>>11651944
Well, it's both.

[Anonymous No.11652120]

>>11651488
Algebra? As in abstract algebra? If so, I might have found my dream job

[WasteManagement !!yUoVh32LjOI No.11652130]

>>11652120
I'd guess as soon as ML. linear algebra dealing with matrices and regression

[Anonymous No.11652140]

The Ghost In The Machine by Arther Koestler

Neuromancer by William Gibston

Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom

Homo Deus by Yuval Noah Harari

Life 3.0 by Max Tegmark

Deep Thinking by Garry Kasparov

How to Create a Mind by Ray Kurzweil (kooky, but has some interest info)

and pic related

[Anonymous No.11652144]

>>11651438
i've met this nigga

[Anonymous No.11652146]

>>11652130
>I'd guess as soon as ML
Huh?

[WasteManagement !!yUoVh32LjOI No.11652150]

>>11652146
Sorry.. I guess the math would the same as Machine Learning

[Anonymous No.11652168]

>>11652150
Oh, ez pz lmn sqz in that case

[Anonymous No.11652299]

>>11645739
You're kind of stupid aren't you

[Anonymous No.11652663]

>>11646556
this
it's useful/necessary for us as animals but ultimately a block for true intelligence

[Anonymous No.11653097]

Would /lit/ upload their minds into a machine?

[Anonymous No.11653256]

>>11644643
>self-awareness
Computer, are you a Computer? (Yes). What is a Computer? (Recites definition)
>moral agency
Computer will you perform this task? (No). Why? (It falls within a list in my databank that is labeled "wrong things, do not do).
>mental abstraction
Computer, create a simplified model extrapolated from complex data. (Cool, that's what I'm designed for).

[Anonymous No.11653971]

>>11644094
>>>/sci/

[Anonymous No.11654044]

>>11652140
Good post, I had no idea Ghost in the Shell got it's name from The Ghost in the Machine.

[Anonymous No.11655331]

>>11653971
You are quite wrong on this one.

[Anonymous No.11655487]

>>11653256
Thanks for sharing that idea.
If I ask you: Who you are ? What would you answer ?

[Anonymous No.11655490]

I believe this >>11654617 thread was made for all of you here.

[Anonymous No.11655964]

>>11655490
literally makes no sense

[Anonymous No.11656076]

>>11655964
tsk tsk tsk,
still a slave of the spectacle.

[Anonymous No.11656083]

Old Greek and Roman stuff basically gives the role of the computer to wild beasts, but same stuff really

[Anonymous No.11657472]

bump