Does your brain outpower a computer?

[N468989]

Thats a contradiction in itself. "PROGRAMMED" to "THINK"

if you were instructed what to do and how to do it for the rest of your life, and did not realize it I would say you weren't "thinking"... no matter how complex the task might be.

Besides the only way a computers can function correctly is logically...its dependent on logic. without it... its useless. so it is confined to itself.

Our brains on the other hand are free to do what we want whether immoral, unjust, unreasonable, impulsive, illogical, self-destructive, spontaneous, whatever...

Well, if you see it that way , we can assume that we were programmed to be immoral, unjust, unreasonable, impulsive, illogical, self-destructive, spontaneous, whatever...

One may think that we are capable of everything and anything, but we are not. We have our fisical and mental limitations, for example let's take the human hearing system, we can hear sounds from 20Hz to 20Khz this is what we were programmed for. We, instead of being "programmed" to be logical and systematic, are quite the oposite.
If we look at the physics inside us, we will discover that even us humans, have electric signals flowing throughout our body.

 

[Mentallic]

Thats a contradiction in itself. "PROGRAMMED" to "THINK"

if you were instructed what to do and how to do it for the rest of your life, and did not realize it I would say you wern't "thinking"... no matter how complex the task might be.

It is of course not impossible to assimilate robots into the human population. They would act like any other normal human. While this might not truly be 'thinking', if it can make reasonable choices to react accordingly in a situation, where is the significance in whether it thought about it, or followed a program?
Are we even completely understanding about what thinking really is? For learning it is a valuable tool, but often after this stage in life we go by precedence. e.g. 'Oh it really hurt when I touched that blade last time, so I won't touch it this time'
Robots could skip the entire learning process by their integration. Their life will consist entirely of 'precedence'.

Or possibly even, we cannot even yet to fathom how complex computers will become. Thinking could even be inferior.

 

[XPTPCREWX]

It is of course not impossible to assimilate robots into the human population. They would act like any other normal human.

True, but humans have the ability to think, and the will to do it whether they like it or not. as robots do not.

While this might not truly be 'thinking', if it can make reasonable choices to react accordingly in a situation, where is the significance in whether it thought about it, or followed a program?

Thats the point, "IT" can't make reasonable choices. We obviously made it's choices first.
If it were able to "learn" as you imply.

Then it would be able to determine what's best for "itself" which is absurd because WE are the ones that gave IT a purpose in the first place. WE are the ones who determine what is best for it. No purpose exists other than this which we gave it.

Are we even completely understanding about what thinking really is? For learning it is a valuable tool, but often after this stage in life we go by precedence. e.g. 'Oh it really hurt when I touched that blade last time, so I won't touch it this time'

This applies if you are a vegetable.

Robots could skip the entire learning process by their integration. Their life will consist entirely of 'precedence'.

If all robots were designed to do this how would you expect them to "integrate" a standard if it skips the "learning process"

 

[Mentallic]

A computer follows a set of instructions to solve a problem. A human thinks about the problem and applies the methods learned thus far to solve it. The steps are the same, the conclusion is the same, what really is different here?

Thats the point, "IT" can't make reasonable choices. We obviously made it's choices first.
If it were able to "learn" as you imply.

Then it would be able to determine what's best for "itself" which is absurd because WE are the ones that gave IT a purpose in the first place. WE are the ones who determine what is best for it. No purpose exists other than this which we gave it.

Good point. And this is what I believe brinks the gap between humans and computers. Computers are more superior in many ways, except that they are yet capable of judgement.

This applies if you are a vegetable.

Please elaborate. I am curious how a vegetable (possibly a carrot) would be physically able to touch a blade
Life is full of situations where following precedence can determine similar outcomes. Of course with some thought as to how one should react to the slight differences of the new scenario. If a computer were 'taught' to react to nearly any seemingly possible life experience, it would be capable of being considered A.I.

If all robots were designed to do this how would you expect them to "integrate" a standard if it skips the "learning process"

Sorry I meant the robots would have all they need to know integrated into their circuits prior to being thrown into society.

 

[N468989]

Believe it or not. Humans are programmed! Well if we go down to the core of question we will discover that everyone has a genetic code, which we call DNA. This code is unique (i mean without cloning , etc).

"...DNA is often compared to a set of blueprints or a recipe, or a code, since it contains the instructions needed to construct other components of cells, such as proteins and RNA molecules. The DNA segments that carry this genetic information are called genes, but other DNA sequences have structural purposes, or are involved in regulating the use of this genetic information."

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

This means that we are programmed and can think?

Of course computers cannot think (yet), but if it were possible to make computers to learn (e.g: fire is dangerous), then act correctly (e.g: avoid everything being fire related). Can consider that thinking? We do the same thing, learn from falling down, or seeing others fall down. Do you need to put your hand in fire know that it will hurt? Or do you need to drink a cup of boiling water to know that it be bad for you?
these questions answer many other questions.

 

[XPTPCREWX]

Please elaborate. I am curious how a vegetable (possibly a carrot) would be physically able to touch a blade
Life is full of situations where following precedence can determine similar outcomes. Of course with some thought as to how one should react to the slight differences of the new scenario. If a computer were 'taught' to react to nearly any seemingly possible life experience, it would be capable of being considered A.I.

Vegetable...a not so intellegent lifeform (figurative)



Having "DNA" is not being programmed, it is your "genetic makeup" or "design" that you are referring to...

Now I guess you could say we are programmed to breathe, but "programmed" isn't the right word here. All life has an "inherent" "nature" or an "essence" to "continue its existence", to perpetuate, preserve, and protect "itself"...whatever "itself" may be...whether "consciously" or "subcounsiously", from the moment we are born.
(...perhaps this is why that which has "life" is "afraid" to "die"?)

This is found in all lifeforms, and with that being said it is the "design" of "life" itself and NOT the term "programmed" that you speak of.

If you still don't get it:

Life is an "essence" that inherently has us do something to preserve itself, its not programming.

Programming has no essence.. it just is what it is, an instruction with no other meaning. There is NO "essence", NO "intuition" that exists it to perpetuate itself.

 

[mplayer]

Perhaps life is programmed to preserve itself. Programmed is probably not the best word to use here, because it implies some consciously coded set of instructions to carry out. Whether or not life was consciously 'coded' is debatable, but in my opinion seems highly unlikely. Life is adapted to preserve itself.

An organism's genome could be analogous to a program. Genetic information within our genome consisting of DNA contains the instructions necessary for building our bodies, including our brains. Our bodies are vehicles built by genes for the purpose of perpetuating those genes, even to the detriment of the individual organism itself. Using the word program does not take away any meaning or special quality from life. It does not take away it's essence, whatever that is.

Life itself could be compared to an amazingly complex set of programmed instructions. The fact that we do not yet have the knowledge or methods to understand it fully does not necessarily mean that life has some sort of magical quality that is absolutely superior to our fairly limited computational devices.

 

[Averagesupernova]

Perhaps life is programmed to preserve itself. Programmed is probably not the best word to use here, because it implies some consciously coded set of instructions to carry out. Whether or not life was consciously 'coded' is debatable, but in my opinion seems highly unlikely. Life is adapted to preserve itself.

An organism's genome could be analogous to a program. Genetic information within our genome consisting of DNA contains the instructions necessary for building our bodies, including our brains. Our bodies are vehicles built by genes for the purpose of perpetuating those genes, even to the detriment of the individual organism itself. Using the word program does not take away any meaning or special quality from life. It does not take away it's essence, whatever that is.

Life itself could be compared to an amazingly complex set of programmed instructions. The fact that we do not yet have the knowledge or methods to understand it fully does not necessarily mean that life has some sort of magical quality that is absolutely superior to our fairly limited computational devices.

I agree with this post more than virtually anything ever posted here on PF.

 

[N468989]

"Does your brain outpower a computer?"

The answer is: Yes and No. Or if you like, we can say it depends.

It depends on what we are considering. If some situations computers outpower humans, or else we wouldn't need computers for fast and accurate calculations, processing of information, etc. There are other situations where computers cannot react or interact with new situations, from this point of view humans win.

In a distant future, i believe computers will outpower humans in over 90%, let's just look at the fact that we are limited physically and mentally. One of the uniqueness of us is the fact that we have something called conscious. Just that itself outpowers any imaginable computer system.

 

[Hurkyl]

One of the uniqueness of us is the fact that we have something called conscious. Just that itself outpowers any imaginable computer system.

Can you define "consciousness"? How do you know we have it? How do you know a computer doesn't? What about dolphins, or dogs?

What concrete, observational experiment can be used to determine what does and does not have consciousness?

 

[N468989]

Can you define "consciousness"? How do you know we have it? How do you know a computer doesn't? What about dolphins, or dogs?

What concrete, observational experiment can be used to determine what does and does not have consciousness?

I cannot define consciousness as we define other things, there is much more to it than a dictionary definition. From the definition point of view, we know we have it because we can change the state of consciousness through hypnosis, sleep, etc( if we change something in any matter, we know it exists). We can define it being something immaterial, but that would bring us to philosophical and religious complications. It's not something universally accepted by all.

 

[Hurkyl]

My intent wasn't to challenge you to solve a long-standing philosophical problem -- it was more just to come up with something that can be observed and supports your argument. You effectively claimed three things:

Humans have consciousness.
Computers do not (and cannot) have consciousness.
Consciousness involves a huge amount of 'computing' power.

from which you conclude that the human brain outpowers any imaginable computer. I don't really care if you can come up with a generally accepted definition of 'consciousness' -- I just want a definition that satisfies your three claims!

 

[Scorael]

In my humble opinion, computers have yet reached the level of intelligence as humans because so far only humans (and perhaps animals) have the ability to be curious. We wonder why the sky is blue, why it hurts when we fall, etc. While current computers can learn it cannot wonder.

By the way, I am pretty paranoid about the artificial lifeforms taking over the world thing lol. They better place a virus into every single robot just in case.

 

[aquitaine]

Recently there was something of a breakthrough regarding this

Logic circuits that program themselves: memristors in action

Integrated circuits incorporating memristors are able to successfully perform logic operations and dynamically reprogram themselves, opening the door for learning devices.

Since 1972, scientists have known there are four basic circuit components, but if you've spent any time in an electrical engineering classroom, you probably only have experience with three: capacitor, inductor, and resistor. The fourth basic component, the memristor, had remained stuck in the domain of theory--a nice idea that even the theorists thought had few practical uses. Last year, scientists at Hewlett-Packard (HP) demonstrated the first functional solid-state memristor, made from thin films of TiO2, and discovered it had an abundance of unique and highly promising properties.

A study released Monday by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that these same TiO2 memristors can be fabricated into functional and reprogrammable integrated circuits. Scientists at HP combined a crossbar architecture of memristors with field effect transistors (FETs) to produce a convincing proof-of-concept device that includes circuits that can dynamically reprogram themselves, acting a bit like a solid-state nerve cell-like operation--a holy grail of electrical engineering.

All we needed were memristors to make this happen.

 

[XPTPCREWX]

Perhaps life is programmed to preserve itself. Programmed is probably not the best word to use here, because it implies some consciously coded set of instructions to carry out. Whether or not life was consciously 'coded' is debatable, but in my opinion seems highly unlikely. Life is adapted to preserve itself.

An organism's genome could be analogous to a program. Genetic information within our genome consisting of DNA contains the instructions necessary for building our bodies, including our brains. Our bodies are vehicles built by genes for the purpose of perpetuating those genes, even to the detriment of the individual organism itself. Using the word program does not take away any meaning or special quality from life. It does not take away it's essence, whatever that is.

Life itself could be compared to an amazingly complex set of programmed instructions. The fact that we do not yet have the knowledge or methods to understand it fully does not necessarily mean that life has some sort of magical quality that is absolutely superior to our fairly limited computational devices.

Guys seriously...Do you think a computer could ever come up with this conversation?