Could the Internet become a conscious mind?

[ydoaPs]

@ YdoaPs,

 

Because I program and know what commands are used in programming.

That doesn't answer the question. How do you know using the commands doesn't constitute thinking?

[barfbag]

md65536,

 

I did say biological methods may be possible in the future, but currently a program or AI can only make yes or no decisions one at a time.

 

Example. If you run your character past a line in the game it will trigger the villain to appear. In an effort to make these characters seem intelligent sometimes dozens or hundreds of IF/Then statements are applied (in computer language of choice).

 

they inevitably encounter some situation they haven't been programmed to "think" their way out of

 

,

In the game development there would be many such instances we call glitches or bugs. Eventually your Computer AI's will seem intelligent, but they cannot think in tangents. They are only following yes or no decisions.

 

just look at your character walking. This is obviously a set of pictures that are used depending on the angle you are viewing him. the step is in motion like a cartoon would be with different perspectives. The cartoon sequences only appear after a long set of If/then statements including asking itself if you are within x number of "feet". It will run an if/then loop to slow the character down enough so he appears lifelike. It will ask if a shot has been fired by you then (if/then) statement show the shot at its desired location, etc. After amassing hundreds of if then statements the image in front of you might appear life like.

 

 

This basic AI chart simplifies it (understating a lot), as a real AI flowchart would be massive and would not fit in a post.

 

Notice every comparison must have either yes or no. There is no fancy algorithm around this. Math can be involved, but all programming (presently) must boil down to comparing or actions (actions means turning parts of the screen Blue, green, white, red, etc., ).. This again is a simplification, but AI is very simple in its building blocks.

 

ydoaPs,

That doesn't answer the question. How do you know using the commands doesn't constitute thinking?

 

 

If you connect the dots in a kids book. Is that thinking or following a path?

 

If you are on a roller coaster, does it think about where it needs to turn? No. It follows the same path each and every time. If you added a second path for the roller coaster to split off and change directions then a yes or no decision is required by some input mechanism or randomized data to compare in the decision. If the dice roll is above 3 then roller coaster goes straight, if dice roll is less than 4 roller coaster turns.

 

Is the roller coaster thinking because now it has a computer chip randomizing numbers between one and six and comparing the values. So is it now alive and thinking? no.

 

Look at a simple computer.. A coffeemaker. There is a clock on the front panel.

 

There is also a looped program running inside of it that recorded the time you want to have the coffee brewed in the morning. You set it to start at 8am.

 

So inside it asks itself. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program, Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? no. Okay. Go back to start of program. Is the time on the clock equal to 8am?no. Okay. Go back to start of program,

 

meanwhile.....

 

Eventually after it compares times a few hundred thousand times over the course of the night 8am comes along.

 

Is the time on the clock equal to 8am? Yes... So flick on switch on and end program.

 

Does that seem like a very intelligent coffee machine/computer (it is a computer if it is programmable)?

 

No.. It only knows to ask itself the same question over and over and over until the answer changes. This is the heart of programming and even though I made it look dumb here, it might seem awfully clever to you when you wake up and find it has not forgotten to brew your coffee.

I may not respond here further unless a different line of thinking/questions develops. I cannot explain this idea much better than I have.

Edited June 20, 2014 by barfbag

[ydoaPs]

Notice every comparison must have either yes or no. There is no fancy algorithm around this. Math can be involved, but all programming (presently) must boil down to comparing or actions (actions means turning parts of the screen Blue, green, white, red, etc., ).. This again is a simplification, but AI is very simple in its building blocks.

Except, of course, AI that learns and makes predictions based on what it learns. You know, like the entire field of Bayesian AI.

[md65536]

just look at your character walking. This is obviously a set of pictures that are used depending on the angle you are viewing him. the step is in motion like a cartoon would be with different perspectives. The cartoon sequences only appear after a long set of If/then statements including asking itself if you are within x number of "feet". It will run an if/then loop to slow the character down enough so he appears lifelike. It will ask if a shot has been fired by you then (if/then) statement show the shot at its desired location, etc. After amassing hundreds of if then statements the image in front of you might appear life like.

We're getting off topic here, but "proof by example" is meaningless.

Your examples are showing your lack of experience. There are better examples that are a lot closer to real intelligence, in games as well as other areas.

[barfbag]

md65536,

We're getting off topic here, but "proof by example" is meaningless.

Your examples are showing your lack of experience. There are better examples that are a lot closer to real intelligence, in games as well as other areas.

 

 

Computer AI is directly related to Internet and machine consciousness. If you feel there is a flowchart or program in existence that is more than a mix of IF/Then statements and Action directives I would be ecstatic with Joy (honestly). I'd be happy with the simplest of examples.

 

ydoaPs,

 

AI's don't really learn. That's personifying it and is misleading. They can change variables and measure your actions, but again, this is all done through if/then statements. ie. if the game checks (via if/then statements constantly) and sees your characters strategy is to run more than X amount of the time (If run > 75% of the time THEN go to dog subroutine) perhaps it will go to a subroutine villain that is quicker like dogs.

 

Discussing computer AI is directly related to internet consciousness because it is a connection of programs that run on the internet in the exact same fashion. While the cursor in front of you is blinking, it is constantly checking the keyboard for key strokes. If A location equals pressed then print the letter A in that location and move cursor one space to right. If B location equals pressed THEN print the letter B in that location and move cursor one space to right, etc... For the entire keyboard (example only). In an online game the program can PEEK (peek locations in basic) at your keyboard to see if a certain key or arrow or space bar is pressed.

 

Anyways.. Good luck. I tried to explain as best I could.

[md65536]

Here's how I imagine the internets becoming intelligent on the order of hundreds of years.

 

Already, Google is using AI to solve problems using solutions that humans don't even understand.

http://www.cringely.com/2014/04/15/big-data-new-artificial-intelligence/

I wouldn't call that intelligent yet. I'm sure it would be possible to analyze the computer's behavior and break everything down into an (unintelligent) algorithms. But computers currently do things that humans don't yet understand.

 

Say we apply this to networks, and have some part of the internet set up to configure its own layout and connections efficiently. It would use AI to create better designs than humans could directly program it to do. Now say you have several different instances of this running, and some perform better than others, and humans replicate the better systems elsewhere. Now we have an element of "survival of the fittest". Suppose after some decades the systems are complicated enough that the selection and deployment is automated and also done by some AI.

 

For example say that you have some self-configured subnetworks that become unstable or fail from time to time, and some other that is more resilient, and thus performs better. Whether by human or machine choice, the stable system might be reproduced. If by random coincidence a system favors self-preservation, it might end up being better and so preferentially selected. This can happen even if the humans never programmed self-preservation as a goal, if it's only a side effect of the stated goal of "efficiency". Now you have machines selecting for self-preservation and it's a short mental leap to Skynet.

 

Fast-forward a hundred years. With more AI-designed systems in use in all sorts of applications, on multiple layers (eg. a vehicle's partially evolved AI is connecting with evolved wide area networks, and the interaction between them is also being figured out by computers), the collection of systems is becoming more complex than humans want to understand, and we're letting the computers do more on their own while we're concerned only with the results, not the design. (Of course we'd try to build-in safety to prevent the computers taking over and killing us, so let's just suppose that we end up doing that adequately.) As well, the networks could become immensely more dense, say with smart materials and stuff. Imagine for example every thread in a shirt being able to network information, and processing and sensors distributed throughout a material, processing stuff that I couldn't even conceive of now.

 

Then we have a many orders of magnitude bigger network, evolving itself to process information more efficiently, evolving goals that humans never gave it and maybe couldn't even relate to or understand. If at some point the whole distributed system had a number of connections comparable to the human brain, and/or iterated on itself a large number of times comparable to the number of mutations and changes involved in evolution and growth of the human brain, it's possible that some form of consciousness might evolve. For sure evolved intelligence (without consciousness) would be useful. It might even be possible that some other form of thought that may or may not be considered "consciousness" evolves, but is just as advanced or more, perhaps something we will never imagine until it happens. And if a computer is able to evolve and replicate itself (eg. the Singularity), it could get always get more sophisticated. If after 100 years and a network covering Earth with more processing power than all the human brains combined is not conscious, then what about a thousand years later or several trillion times more processing? Finally, if the internet remains a part of the connection to whatever might develop from technological innovation, it could be part of the creation of a consciousness.

[barfbag]

md65536,

I see where you are going with this,

 

And then when humans finally realize the Internet has become self aware it is too late so we try to shut it down. But the machine does not want to die so starts a war against mankind.

 

I remember that movie...

 

You described the plot for the Terminator series in your last posting. Maybe you have a talent for fiction.

 

I have heard some stranger theories about consciousness. Some have argued that all matter is self aware, and that it pops in and out of existence as part of our holographic collective consciousness, but again we would need to attribute similar traits to our toasters.

 

I think if you took up a little programming as a side hobby (It's not that hard, all programming is mostly If/Then statements remember), you might start to lose a little of the romance concerning AI.

 

I can see where talk of AI, and shows such as "Person of Interest" can make people wonder about the possibilities.

 

Here is a simple little program...

 

5 LET S = 0

10 MAT INPUT V

20 LET N = NUM

30 IF N = 0 THEN 99

40 FOR I = 1 TO N

45 LET S = S + V(I)

50 NEXT I

60 PRINT S/N

70 GO TO 5

99 END

or

10 INPUT "What is your name: ", U$

20 PRINT "Hello "; U$

30 INPUT "How many stars do you want: ", N

40 S$ = ""

50 FOR I = 1 TO N

60 S$ = S$ + "*"

70 NEXT I

80 PRINT S$

90 INPUT "Do you want more stars? ", A$

100 IF LEN(A$) = 0 THEN GOTO 90

110 A$ = LEFT$(A$, 1)

120 IF A$ = "Y" OR A$ = "y" THEN GOTO 30

130 PRINT "Goodbye "; U$

140 END

 

Notice how tiny both programs are, yet they both contain IF/Then statements.

 

I am not trying to burst bubbles, or hurt your imagination.

 

"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Albert Einstein.

 

Good luck. My opinion on the matter is fairly fixed, but who knows. Maybe you are right and I am wrong.

[Strange]

Notice how tiny both programs are, yet they both contain IF/Then statements.

 

 

I'm not sure I see the relevance of that. Conditional statements are required for a programming language to be Turing complete, but so what?

 

Are you trying to make the point that computers are deterministic therefore they can't exhibit intelligence?

 

If so, the obvious question is, in what way is the brain not deterministic?

Edited June 20, 2014 by Strange

[barfbag]

@ strange,

 

My last post was addressed to someone else and the views must be taken into consideration with previous postings. I tried my best here and have moved on.

 

If you wish to hear my views start here

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/81185-could-the-internet-become-a-conscious-mind/?p=812042

 

and not with last post

Edited June 20, 2014 by barfbag

[Strange]

If you wish to hear my views start here

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/81185-could-the-internet-become-a-conscious-mind/?p=812042

 

and not with last post

 

OK. I've read that.

 

Are you trying to make the point that computers are deterministic therefore they can't exhibit intelligence?

 

If so, the obvious question is, in what way is the brain not deterministic?

[ydoaPs]

AI's don't really learn.

How do you know? What, exactly, is it that flesh does when it identifies a novel image as a McDonald's logo that counts as thinking and learning that AIs don't do?

 

You're making these grand pronouncements about learning and thinking, when it's not entirely clear that you even know what you mean by 'learning' and 'thinking'. It's also not entirely clear that you're familiar with anything more complicated than AI from gameboy games.

[barfbag]

@ previous posters,

 

From one of my last posts,

Anyways.. Good luck. I tried to explain as best I could.

 

 

I am interested if there are any programmers who feel a computer could really think, but I am not going to attempt explanations any more. As I said in several posts. I tried explaining as best I can.

 

Good luck

[Strange]

I am interested if there are any programmers who feel a computer could really think

 

That would be me, then.

 

Which still leaves the question, in what way is the brain not deterministic?

 

(Just to be clear, I am not convinced that strong AI is possible. And definitely not arguing that it is. But I have heard several good arguments why it might be. The only arguments against, basically come down to: "I don't believe it. Minds are like, you know, special.")

Edited June 20, 2014 by Strange

[ydoaPs]

The only arguments against, basically come down to: "I don't believe it. Minds are like, you know, special."

That sounds about right.

[barfbag]

@ Strange,

 

The only arguments against, basically come down to: "I don't believe it. Minds are like, you know, special.")

 

 

I disagree that my argument came even close to that. Although I went into more detail in the preceding posts, my argument is that even the most sophisticated AI we currently have today in Chess programs or Video Games or for any application when put under a microscope dissects into nothing more than a sophisticated flowchart of If/Then statements.

 

The electricity will follow the same pathways under the same circumstances every single time.

 

The Brain can visualize and create its own pathways and will never follow the same pathways under the same circumstances.

 

A metaphor I have used is that the Brain is like a car that can go down any road it chooses, but a computer is like a train that can only follow the track that it has been placed upon.

 

You argue that our own brains are deterministic and lack no free will. I think thiis is just saying we are also on a track even though we do not realize it. That is a unique argument. Normally people who think AI is possible argue based upon seeing programs play chess and "outsmarting" humans.

 

I said at the bottom of post 32,

My opinion on the matter is fairly fixed, but who knows. Maybe you are right and I am wrong.

 

[Strange]

I don't think anyone would claim that chess computers, for example, are examples of, or evidence for, AI. If they do, then I would agree with you that they are hopelessly naive.

 

 

The Brain can visualize and create its own pathways and will never follow the same pathways under the same circumstances.

 

What is it allows the brain to do that but not another computing machine?

[lamironi]

I am of the opinion that internet never can not become a conscious mind. I think it is impossible.

[barfbag]

I am

of the opinion that internet never can not become a conscious mind. I think it is impossible.

 

 

According to this it appears you believe the Internet will become conscious. I am thinking though that it is a Grammatical error though.

 

Using a double negative changes your position entirely.

 

I agree (I think), but reasoning is helpful.

Edited June 23, 2014 by barfbag

[lamironi]

I understand. I made grammatical error.