Artificial Intelligence for human evolution

  • #1
HyperTechno
135
7
Artificial Intelligence Technology can be used to develop intelligent Operation systems/ Management Systems for vehicles, buildings, factories, to control various systems.. etc.
We can make robots out of it... and make intelligent equipment that improves the comfort ability of our day to day life... There are lot of such applications for AI.

But all of them are like having various things, technologies for us... What about developing our selves as species, we being our technology, building the technologies into us..., developing our brain!

I wonder whether we can use Artificial Intelligence technology to develop our brain power, intellect, memory capacity, brain capacity.
Is there any possibility for this? :wideeyed:
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
Is there any possibility for this?

Probably.:biggrin:
Although I'd say AI is only one aspect of technology that we could use.
 
  • #3
WIN
50
10
interesting... in my opinion its yes and no.

yes if AI is used to teach the users the things that already known to human.

no if trying to use AI to teach human things that human don't know about. (at least that's for now and should be this way too)
 
  • #4
HyperTechno
135
7
interesting... in my opinion its yes and no.

yes if AI is used to teach the users the things that already known to human.

no if trying to use AI to teach human things that human don't know about. (at least that's for now and should be this way too)

Can you please explain it a bit?

Probably.:biggrin:
Although I'd say AI is only one aspect of technology that we could use.

Yep... but anything(computer/vehicle/factory/equipment...) with an AI or controlled by an AI would do the task better than without an AI...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
DiracPool
1,231
516
I wonder whether we can use Artificial Intelligence technology to develop our brain power, intellect, memory capacity, brain capacity.
Is there any possibility for this?

This is a good question and I think highlights some misconceptions about AI, neural network research, robotics, etc. My background is in cognitive neuroscience but I am currently working on more applied applications of neurally inspiring cognitive architectures. So, not to go into too much detail, as far as the future of where "artificial intelligence" is heading, we can very generally break it down into two camps. The first camp is the "hybrid" camp, which is what your post/concern is addressing. This camp is basically the camp of the "brain-computer interface," which sees technology as complimenting the native capacities of the human mind/brain. The second camp is that of pure "machine intelligence." This is the camp that says that the future of cognitive evolution is going to be entirely machine based and is not going to require, nor want, any old-fashioned biology to make it run.

I can almost assure you that the former camp, the "brain-computer interface" camp, which is currently in vogue, is going to fall by the wayside in the next decade or two and the latter camp will persevere. The future (in my opinion) is not going to one of us hooked up to brain-machine interfaces as you see in the sci-fi movies. Far from it. Biological neurons are much too slow, sloppy and crude to have much of a future in the rapidly evolving field of machine cognition. The future will be one where we have human-like robots with our cognitive architecture only running many times faster than the cable delays of our neurons allow, along with good old Homo sapien with his skull intact and not "cyborged" to some printed circuit board. Trust me on this.
 
  • Like
Likes Fooality, 1oldman2 and Drakkith
  • #6
WIN
50
10
Can you please explain it a bit?

i'm not an expert in AI research but my opinion is that:
AI is programmed and although some are able to learn but they're all programmed to collect certain data and analyse the pattern then added into their database. That's why i say AI can only teach users what is already known to human because they're programmed by us.
The latter opinion which i stated 'no if trying to use AI to teach human things that human don't know about. (at least that's for now and should be this way too)' because if they're programmed in a way that they are able to self upgrading in a way that doenst required human and self reprogrammed then it will be like in sci fi movies... there's no need for human to exist anymore
 
  • #7
HyperTechno
135
7
i'm not an expert in AI research but my opinion is that:
if they're programmed in a way that they are able to self upgrading in a way that doenst required human and self reprogrammed then it will be like in sci fi movies... there's no need for human to exist anymore[/QUO
.

Yep... which could result the end of the Human Race . Or the end of the human dominance on Earth... It's something that we must strictly consider

Biological neurons are much too slow, sloppy

hmmm. I too have read that the artificial neurons are much faster than the biological neurons...

highlights some misconceptions about AI

What kind of misconceptions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #8
HyperTechno
135
7
So, we all know that the existing artificial intelligence programs and AI assisted operating systems are developing slowly as they are programmed by humans... What if they are allowed to self evolve up to a particular extent... I meant allowing them to self evolve within a given limit in which human can fully control and understand the AI...
Because the AI is so intelligent by then, we can teach it as we teach a human... we can teach it to perform numerous tasks like driving cars, controlling industries, management systems and being our personal assistants!
 
  • #9
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
What if they are allowed to self evolve up to a particular extent...

We don't know. We don't know how to do that yet.

Because the AI is so intelligent by then, we can teach it as we teach a human... we can teach it to perform numerous tasks like driving cars, controlling industries, management systems and being our personal assistants!

What if it doesn't want to do any of that? o_O
 
  • #10
rootone
3,393
946
What if it doesn't want to do any of that? o_O
Then I guess depending on the politics of the time, we would have to either have robot prisons, or else a robot social welfare system.
 
  • #11
jerromyjon
1,244
189
Then I guess depending on the politics of the time, we would have to either have robot prisons, or else a robot social welfare system.
Or hopefully we included an "off" switch. But perhaps they will reconfigure themselves to defeat it. One thing seems to be evident. We will see, soon.
hmmm. I too have read that the artificial neurons are much faster than the biological neurons...
But that doesn't mean they are better or more powerful. The truth is we are just speculating. Perhaps our treasured intelligence is dependent upon our lack of logical rigidity... Augmenting our mental abilities could inadvertently make us "less intelligent". Technology already has that obvious effect just from using external devices.
 
  • #12
HyperTechno
135
7
Augmenting our mental abilitie

Are we using only 10% of our cerebral capacity? or is it just an odd theory?
 
  • #14
jerromyjon
1,244
189
Are we using only 10% of our cerebral capacity?
There are multiple ways to define "capacity", if you were referring to 10% of the mass that is completely absurd. If you were talking about cognitive abilities you would have to be describing apparent actual abilities that our brains are shown to be capable of and to say we may be capable of being 10 times as "intelligent" as we are seems a bit of a stretch. The things that nature shows us in so many ways is that it most usually evolved into the most capable and efficient systems for almost everything. Why would our brains be an exception? Of all the brains on Earth ours is the crowning achievement. Perhaps we just only comprehend 10% of our brains... but I'd say speak for yourself.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
DiracPool
1,231
516
It's not even a theory and it never really was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_percent_of_the_brain_myth

This isn't a trivial case. I can't even count the number of times I've faced the "folk" conception that the human only utilize 3% of their brain. These day's it seems to be 10%, but in the old days it was 3%. But it's the same thing. If you want to make the argument that the average guy (or girl) only uses 10% of their brain capacity to make a given decision, I'm not going to argue with you. However, for the record, the brain and the human that possesses it is at all times using 100% of their brain power. Even when the brain is not working it is working. For example, as in a movie when a scene fades to black, there are still frames representing the black. In the same way this is how the brain works, the black of a scene carries just as much information as the vibrant colors of a scene, and all these variables go into the construction of the percept of a scene.

So where am I going with this? Where I'm going is that 100% of the brain is active at all times. If it's not specifically involved in tracing out the contours of a percept, it's busy filling in the blanks of that percept. The second part of the argument is that neurons that do not have at least a baseline oscillation and, more importantly, are not integrated into some meaningful functional network tend to DIE. To put it another way, percepts are manifested in the brain as hierarchically organized superposed chaotic attractors over cytoarchitectonically circumscribed regions, e.g., V1 versus the lateral occipital complex versus the fusiform "face" gyrus. On the formation of these attractors, every neuron involved in the construction plays a role.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
rootone
3,393
946
Yes it does seem to be one of those 'urban myths' that have been out there for quite a long time.
The whole concept is of course in defiance of natural selection. Nature does not select for defects.
It's also in defiance of all the experimental evidence available concerning how brains function.
It's one of those things that get attributed to Einstein and others although they never said anything like that.
It probably remains in circulation as an idea only because it's a goldmine for snake oil salesmen and is an attractive proposition to idiots.

Back to our improved AI type brains though. as a comparison.
Why would anybody design an AI that was only 10% capable of utilizing it's installed hardware?
 
Last edited:
  • #17
HyperTechno
135
7
Why would anybody design an AI that was only 10% capable of utilizing it's installed hardware?

Yes I agree! It's stupid.
 
  • #18
HyperTechno
135
7
So for millions of years human kind has evolved and come to the position that we are in today. Are there anyways that the advances of AI technology helps that?
 
  • #19
WIN
50
10
if you are asking 'were' there anyways that the advances of AI technology helps that(the improvement)?
i would say no. Assuming you are talking about the brain or IQ level in human.
'will' the advances of AI technology helps that?
on brain and IQ level.. yes and no. AI can help indirectly as a tool but it still come down to the individual itself.
 
  • #20
WIN
50
10
it had me go to the top and check whether its a sci-fi topic or not..lol
 
  • #22
jerromyjon
1,244
189
It probably remains in circulation as an idea only because it's a goldmine for snake oil salesmen and is an attractive proposition to idiots.
As if there might be some simple procedure to make individuals "unlock the unused potential" in their brain or "add some technological implant". I don't think either of these are realistic, ever. Not even the "matrix" downloading information and abilities into your brain as if that's all there is to "martial arts" for example. The purposes all that above could serve is for those who lack the abilities that a healthy human possesses. We perhaps could create technology to repair damage to restore normal function but improving something so intricate and precisely balanced is quite a feat.
building the technologies into us..., developing our brain!
I'm curious how many ideas actually make sense or actually perform a function that our brains are currently incapable of? I mean the simplest thing I could think of is a "calculator" in your brain to make math trivial but you can do that now, not that a calculator in the sense of a "GUI" in your brain that you push buttons and see numbers, that would be lame. You'd want something that sub-consciencely and "like magic" you know the solution. For example when you are grocery shopping and a cost total is already tabulated before you "choose" to think how much you've spent.
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #23
HyperTechno
135
7
For example when you are grocery shopping and a cost total is already tabulated before you "choose" to think how much you've spent.

Well the wearable s(glasses) that would be coming in the future would do many things like that... Well I don't think that we'd be able to control them using our brain but may be the dilation and aim of the eye would be! (Ex: Google Glass)
 
  • #24
Eric V
10
8
Artificial Intelligence Technology can be used to develop intelligent Operation systems/ Management Systems for vehicles, buildings, factories, to control various systems.. etc.
We can make robots out of it... and make intelligent equipment that improves the comfort ability of our day to day life... There are lot of such applications for AI.

But all of them are like having various things, technologies for us... What about developing our selves as species, we being our technology, building the technologies into us..., developing our brain!

I wonder whether we can use Artificial Intelligence technology to develop our brain power, intellect, memory capacity, brain capacity.
Is there any possibility for this? :wideeyed:

Assuming the Universality of Computation, then the brain is computable. If it is computable, it is extendable. This would indicate that it is not physically impossible to interface with, offload, and increase computation which currently happens in the brain.

The question then is not whether it is possible, but if it is feasible. To this question there is no known answer, but I for one encourage us to find out.
 
  • Like
Likes Silicon Waffle, GTOM and HyperTechno
  • #25
GTOM
955
64
This is a good question and I think highlights some misconceptions about AI, neural network research, robotics, etc. My background is in cognitive neuroscience but I am currently working on more applied applications of neurally inspiring cognitive architectures. So, not to go into too much detail, as far as the future of where "artificial intelligence" is heading, we can very generally break it down into two camps. The first camp is the "hybrid" camp, which is what your post/concern is addressing. This camp is basically the camp of the "brain-computer interface," which sees technology as complimenting the native capacities of the human mind/brain. The second camp is that of pure "machine intelligence." This is the camp that says that the future of cognitive evolution is going to be entirely machine based and is not going to require, nor want, any old-fashioned biology to make it run.

I can almost assure you that the former camp, the "brain-computer interface" camp, which is currently in vogue, is going to fall by the wayside in the next decade or two and the latter camp will persevere. The future (in my opinion) is not going to one of us hooked up to brain-machine interfaces as you see in the sci-fi movies. Far from it. Biological neurons are much too slow, sloppy and crude to have much of a future in the rapidly evolving field of machine cognition. The future will be one where we have human-like robots with our cognitive architecture only running many times faster than the cable delays of our neurons allow, along with good old Homo sapien with his skull intact and not "cyborged" to some printed circuit board. Trust me on this.

There were many such predictions over history... Sure until we don't understand brain enough, we can't extend, improve it.
Chemical reactions are a bottleneck yes, but i don't see impossible that future genengineering or nanotechnology could solve even that.
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #26
GTOM
955
64
Assuming the Universality of Computation, then the brain is computable. If it is computable, it is extendable. This would indicate that it is not physically impossible to interface with, offload, and increase computation which currently happens in the brain.

The question then is not whether it is possible, but if it is feasible. To this question there is no known answer, but I for one encourage us to find out.

Clearly more feasible than doom ourselves, with reducing us to machine AI pets...
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #27
HyperTechno
135
7
Clearly more feasible than doom ourselves
:wink:
 
  • #28
jw6661
3
10
we can implant a processor in ur brain
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #29
GTOM
955
64
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #30
HyperTechno
135
7
Otherwise, at first i think, there should be new simulators, VR devices to help training, yes i also think it is good to trust boring routine to low level AIs, so humans can focus on really important things.
Interesting!:wink:
 
  • #31
.Scott
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
3,113
1,319
I can almost assure you that the former camp, the "brain-computer interface" camp, which is currently in vogue, is going to fall by the wayside in the next decade or two and the latter camp will persevere. The future (in my opinion) is not going to one of us hooked up to brain-machine interfaces as you see in the sci-fi movies. Far from it. Biological neurons are much too slow, sloppy and crude to have much of a future in the rapidly evolving field of machine cognition. The future will be one where we have human-like robots with our cognitive architecture only running many times faster than the cable delays of our neurons allow, along with good old Homo sapien with his skull intact and not "cyborged" to some printed circuit board. Trust me on this.
As long as there are homo sapiens, there will be reasons to "open the skull". For example, if Steve Hawking is still alive in 25 years, he will probably have a brain implant.
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno and GTOM
  • #32
.Scott
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
3,113
1,319
I wonder whether we can use Artificial Intelligence technology to develop our brain power, intellect, memory capacity, brain capacity.
Is there any possibility for this? :wideeyed:
I have an issue with the semantics here. Current AI would perform poorly at the kind of tasks you envision. However, new techniques will be developed that can do these tasks and they will be added to the list of techniques considered "Artificial Intelligence".
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #33
DiracPool
1,231
516
As long as there are homo sapiens, there will be reasons to "open the skull".

Of course there will always be reasons to open the human skull; just ask Katie Hopkins:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-undergoes-12-hours-7429134

Actually, don't ask her, you'll never get her to shut up...

As far as brain-computer interfaces (BCI) to deal with pathological conditions such as brain damage, paralysis, etc., I see a big future for BCI's. My comment is that they will not be used to any successful extent to enhance the native cognitive capacities of otherwise healthy human brains. Perhaps I should have been more clear on this point in my earlier post.
 
  • Like
Likes 256bits and HyperTechno
  • #34
GTOM
955
64
Of course there will always be reasons to open the human skull; just ask Katie Hopkins:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-undergoes-12-hours-7429134

Actually, don't ask her, you'll never get her to shut up...

As far as brain-computer interfaces (BCI) to deal with pathological conditions such as brain damage, paralysis, etc., I see a big future for BCI's. My comment is that they will not be used to any successful extent to enhance the native cognitive capacities of otherwise healthy human brains. Perhaps I should have been more clear on this point in my earlier post.

Even if they don't enhance the native cognitive capacities of healthy human brains, there can be lots of useful applications of them, for healthy humans too, like droning, entertainment, faster training.

Otherwise why do they think, that there should be one superintelligent (artificial) brain, and that would be so good? I think it is far more realistic, that lots of computers and humans do cloud computing to solve something great. (Unless we make machines random, i think they are completely unable to think outside the box.)
 
  • Like
Likes HyperTechno
  • #35
HyperTechno
135
7
i think they are completely unable to think outside the box.
I agree with you!
 

Suggested for: Artificial Intelligence for human evolution

Replies
3
Views
149
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
508
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
484
  • Last Post
2
Replies
54
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
679
Top