Can Artificial Intelligence ever reach Human Intelligence?

StykFacE

1st time post here.... thought i'd post up something that causes much debate over... but a good topic. ;-) (please keep it level-minded and not a heated argument)

Question: Can Artificial Intelligence ever reach Human Intelligence?

please give your thoughts.... i vote no.

Pengwuino

I'm pretty sure my cell phone has more intelligence then some of the people I have met....

StykFacE

lol, funny.

so your cell phone can think on its own? that's a pretty smart cell phone you got there.

Pengwuino

No it can't think on its own. Now think of those implications.

StykFacE

whether humans make smart, or dumb, desicions, the level of complexity is far greater than a computer will ever be.

i think that's what makes the difference mostly.

pallidin

Though not strictly artificial intelligence, right now I am using a program called Dragon NaturallySpeaking version 8 to dictate my comment and have these words translated into text automatically.

StykFacE

so what is the point....? lol, i'm not sure i follow....
AI vs human intelligence is the issue at hand. ;-)

Pengwuino

I believe that program does have to make "decisions" on what your speech patterns mean and all.

StykFacE

no, a program is.... "programmed". lol, it only does what it was programmed to do. there is no decision making process. a computer merely calculates numbers, and that's all a computer will ever do, no matter how advanced. ;-)

Pengwuino

Using that definition, AI is undefinable. Your thread is thus, useless.

StykFacE

how so? please comment...

Pengwuino

Most people who deal with AI have better definitions then this when it comes to AI. Your basically saying the only platform AI is going to be used with is intrinsically incapable of using AI.

kishtik

How do you know that we do not do the same thing? As Pengwuino stated, your definition is useless.

What is a decision making process? Think of it as you are studying,
OR
One way of thinking of AI (and making so-called intelligent robots) is that taking a `pleasure function` as a base and letting the machine decide which action avbailable makes it increase the most. This places `instincts`. For example a robot's bumping into a wall decreases its p. function but recharging its battery increases it and so on. What would you get? Robots addicted to charge, as we may be addicted to sex etc.

neurocomp2003

sure can if you can code 100billion neurons and 10000synapse on average per neuron and given it the sensory/motor skills of a human. It might work a bit slower sorta like a child....but there are movements in california and colorado to build hardware...and i already think colorado has a machine thats like 3-4 years old can't remember what its called though. ohoh did i forgot to mention you gotta raise it for like 10-15 years.

Zantra

If you mean "raw intelligence", computers can already beat the best chess champions in the world, so I'm certain that surpassing human intelligence in complexity (think multi-tasking to the extreme) is inevitable. But programming it with emotions and intuitiveness could prove to be much more complexed. You're trying to teach a computer to ignore logic based on a "feeling". In that sense it would be very difficult to emulate us.

However the deeper question I think, isn't weather or not we CAN do this, but if we SHOULD. Machines with superior intelligence who are self aware may constitute a threat if they are given sufficient power and control. The counter to this of course, is that we simply keep them in the box and don't give them arms and legs to pummel us with. However society craves simplicity and convenience- the draw of a robot nanny may be too much to resist.

neurocomp2003

if you keep them in a box and take off the limbs how are you they going to grow =]..i mean what if we were to do that to a baby.

Blahness

Humans can be creative; Computers cannot.

Creativity makes Humans different from Computers.

It's possible, but what'll the telltale difference between AI and Real I be?

That, and if computers had free will, what makes us so sure of no revolt?

Above the above poster's post, shortened into 3 sentences, and agreed with.