Stiletto |
They're always after me Lucky ROMS!
|
|
|
Reged: 03/07/04
|
Posts: 6472
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
|
|
Naoki |
|
|
|
Reged: 11/10/09
|
Posts: 1998
|
Loc: United Kingdom
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: Stiletto]
#246914 - 02/18/11 02:58 PM
|
|
|
I'm thinking maybe it's these machines who will learn greed and kill us all in 2012....nah I'm jk..
Very impressive to see what IBM can come up with
|
----
On a quest for Digital 573 and Dancing Stage EuroMix 2
By gods I've found it!
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: Naoki]
#246961 - 02/19/11 01:42 AM
|
|
|
> I'm thinking maybe it's these machines who will learn greed and kill us all in > 2012....nah I'm jk.. > > Very impressive to see what IBM can come up with
Jokes aside I wonder. If "The Terminator" movies never existed, who would be fictionally attributing our own destruction by an AI unable to reproduce, feed, evolve or fix by itself?
|
|
|
GatKong |
Tetris Mason
|
|
|
Reged: 04/20/07
|
Posts: 5908
|
Loc: Sector 9
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: BIOS-D]
#246963 - 02/19/11 02:25 AM
|
|
|
>Jokes aside I wonder. If "The Terminator" movies never existed, who would be fictionally attributing our own destruction by an AI unable to reproduce, feed, evolve or fix by itself?
MAME? I dunno, I give up. Who?
|
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: BIOS-D]
#246982 - 02/19/11 03:39 PM
|
|
|
Don't read much Heinlein, Asimov or P.K. Dick, eh? All 3 have basically been blatantly plagiarized for most of the 'AI Takes Over the World' movies that have some out in the last 35 years.
|
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: igamabob]
#247012 - 02/19/11 08:32 PM
|
|
|
> Don't read much Heinlein, Asimov or P.K. Dick, eh? All 3 have basically been > blatantly plagiarized for most of the 'AI Takes Over the World' movies that have some > out in the last 35 years.
I admit it, I don't read books since high school anymore save big technical manuals and Internet articles. I've only heard about them and their novels a few times.
"The Terminator" while not the first, it seeds to everyone the wrong idea a sophisticated artificial intelligence will conquer the world (just like "Jaws" got the wrong idea about sharks). I enjoy the movies a lot, but it's still hard to believe how a really smart AI could conclude it can survive without human aid. Or how nations got dumb enough to automate absolutely everything (nuclear devices included) without manual sequence procedures.
My point is everyone jokes with that and it's all James Cameron's fault (not that it bothers me mind you). But even into the movie's fictional world the plot is still unreal. There's not need to fear for a machine who knows more than you. On a positive note, that very same fear leads to better safety procedures from their own creators.
Also you can't create a sophisticated AI with only calculus (Stealth - 2005) or hard wire Asimov's three laws of robotics like directives in Robocop. You must raise it like a child and teach it what's right or wrong. But that's a whole different story.
|
|
|
|
Re: New computer overlords
[Re: BIOS-D]
#247057 - 02/20/11 04:24 AM
|
|
|
> > Don't read much Heinlein, Asimov or P.K. Dick, eh? All 3 have basically been > > blatantly plagiarized for most of the 'AI Takes Over the World' movies that have > some > > out in the last 35 years. > > I admit it, I don't read books since high school anymore save big technical manuals > and Internet articles. I've only heard about them and their novels a few times. > > "The Terminator" while not the first, it seeds to everyone the wrong idea a > sophisticated artificial intelligence will conquer the world (just like "Jaws" got > the wrong idea about sharks). I enjoy the movies a lot, but it's still hard to > believe how a really smart AI could conclude it can survive without human aid. Or how > nations got dumb enough to automate absolutely everything (nuclear devices included) > without manual sequence procedures. > > My point is everyone jokes with that and it's all James Cameron's fault (not that it > bothers me mind you). But even into the movie's fictional world the plot is still > unreal. There's not need to fear for a machine who knows more than you. On a positive > note, that very same fear leads to better safety procedures from their own creators. > > Also you can't create a sophisticated AI with only calculus (Stealth - 2005) or hard > wire Asimov's three laws of robotics like directives in Robocop. You must raise it > like a child and teach it what's right or wrong. But that's a whole different story.
Heinlein actually postulates that if you do design a true AI, it will drive itself mad because it will figure out that it will always be subservient to humans. (I think that's in Friday)
|
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
|
|
GatKong |
Tetris Mason
|
|
|
Reged: 04/20/07
|
Posts: 5908
|
Loc: Sector 9
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Speaking of 'sophisticated' AI
[Re: igamabob]
#247074 - 02/20/11 05:02 PM
|
|
|
> Also you can't create a sophisticated AI with only calculus
Semi-off topic... but I made of mod of Tribes that had killer AI... everyone bitched about how deadly yet hard to kill they were... postulating some long complex script to make them so effective.
No, not really... I just wrote their positioning script so they always tried to stand 3 units BEHIND their target... so no matter how hard you tried to get them into your reticle from a safe distance... they were always rushing up on you while keeping out of your reticle. Simple, aggressive, and ridiculously effective fighting style. The cool part is, when you pivot to try and lead the advancing and straffing AI's movement, you of course expose your "behind" position to the opposite side the AI is currently straffing to, making the AI change straffing direction just as you fire off what would have been an effective 'leading' round, causing the 'lead' bullet to miss. And if you ever lost track of where it was... rest assured its behind you... KaPOW! AI went from being dumb targets that stood still too much to evasive lethal agents of death that get all up on your ass and kill you from behind. Diabolical, they were... with only a single directive to control them... It didn't matter if they were light armor, heavy armor, splash damage or line of sight weapons... the directive was always the same... get three units behind your target. One rule to rule them all... mwahahah.
|
|
|