P-MART wiki - User contributions [en]

User:TresaSadler91

TresaSadler91 — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:22:01 GMT

TresaSadler91: Created page with 'Scientific people have always enjoyed the idea of artificial intelligence--of a device being able to think and act by itself. It's really a popular theme for novels and films too…'

Scientific people have always enjoyed the idea of artificial intelligence--of a device being able to think and act by itself. It's really a popular theme for novels and films too. And who of us wouldn't enjoy having your own robot to anticipate our needs and look after them? I even remember a production in the local planetarium about computers worldwide that networked and synergized their data. After the development this networked computer system commanded, "Let there be light!" plus a new universe came to be.

Artificial intelligence has as many definitions as people defining it. For some it is only a matter of a machine having the ability to analyze data and then take a suitable action. However i think for most, this means that the machine can certainly think, can learn, can create, can come up with original ideas--that it may become a person and become indistinguishable from the person in its actions and thoughts.

[http://www.robertsugar.com/ virtual reality london] - If artificial intelligence is simply a machine or a system functioning on its, then the lawn watering that has a moisture meter to know if it has rained or otherwise not would be artificial intelligence. Whether it has rained, the sprinklers won't come on until the sensor dries out. But this method has been programmed to act this way, as well as the only reason it won't act that way is when it malfunctions. By no means is the fact that intelligent. The system just isn't thinking at all. It's doing what it has been designed to do and has no other choice.

I maintain that the more popular meaning of artificial intelligence--that a piece of equipment or system can think, decide, and create--is impossible.

First, a concept of intelligence that I think most people would accept: Intelligence will be the power to learn; to get experiences that teach the things that work and what doesn't. Then to consider that learning and make a move worthwhile from it.

[http://www.robertsugar.com/ robotics london] - To genuinely learn something, a piece of equipment would require emotions. Young people need emotions to find out too, and also since we've them there is no end as to the we are able to learn or what we can do with this knowledge. Higher animals likewise have emotions and are in a position to learn. The less intelligent an organism is, the harder instinctual it is, meaning it can things since it does not have a choice--because it's less intelligent. Lower organisms like bacteria do not have emotions whatsoever, so far as we all know, and they act similar to machines which have been programmed than like living organisms. They do not act as if they have a selection. They just do what their genetic programming ensures they are do.

Machines do not have emotions and so are incapable of having them. An individual can program a machine to behave as though it's got emotions, but obviously it doesn't obviously have them. A machine may be developed to search the web, view television and pay attention to radio broadcasting, read magazines and books, and tune in to people speak. It can amass huge amounts of data therefore it may analyze those data and act. Only as it has been developed to act. It's a lot of data nevertheless it doesn't care about them. It couldn't care less if dozens of data sat on its hard disk and nothing ever became of these. It couldn't care less if a person arrived and erased those data. It would not feel bad for a week because everything work had come to naught. So any machine or system that has to be designed to act since it doesn't care about acting otherwise, even thought it can be and do amazing things, is no more intelligent than a lawn watering with a moisture meter to indicate if the sprinklers should run or otherwise. And even though every one of the "knowledge" in the world can be stored on computers, and computers can be networked together to maximise their power, which will never develop a God who can create a new universe.

We people learn as a result of emotions. We want things. We'd like things. People have only 1 instinct: self-preservation. We learn what to keep ourselves alive and comfy. We quite often learn as a result of embarrassment or disappointment. We get pumped up about things and would like to know everything about the subject. I've talked to 5-year-old children who knew a little more about dinosaurs than I am going to ever know or choose to know.

I saw a Nova program on PBS about separating conjoined twins. One of many twins were built with a tracheotomy, and for that reason didn't have voice. But she quickly learned to pull her sister's hair to ensure that her sister did the crying for of these. She also, later, learned to pay for her throat together with her hand to ensure that breath passed through her vocal cords. Each time she vocalized in this way she smiled, pleased about her power to learn something and act intelligently.

[http://www.robertsugar.com/ volumetric visualization] - People are authentically intelligent simply because they can and do learn new things on their own, then learn how to take their knowledge to utilize to preserve themselves, then to assist others, then to try and make the whole human experience on the planet better. There may be a spot in our midst for machines that can analyze data and work as they have been programmed, but that's the extent of the worth.

Companies, parents, and governments should value people because they are people. Machines won't ever replace people. Treating people as extensions of technology will not result in success. Letting people use their intelligence and technology to complete amazing things will lead to outrageous success.

It is very good to be a thinking, creating, choosing, feeling, remembering, self-actualizing, improving person. Nothing pleases me more than that I'm a person.

TresaSadler91

TresaSadler91 — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:21:46 GMT