17 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe quibbling is all coming from you.
You're (again) quibbling about minor points.
Its very simple. The internet is NOT an AI. Live with it or quibble over it, it won't change that fact.
Is it possible to have an internet without AI developing?
Of course.
No one person is always right, despite your arrogance of pretense otherwise.
But some people seem to be wrong more often than not.
Your disconnect is the restriction of AI to the isolated tools being employed while failing to see the bigger picture which shows the entire system is learning, beginning to show signs of self-preservation as well as initiating code where access is otherwise unknown or established.
Your disconnect is not really understanding a thing you are talking about.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo, no source, no substance, just your claimed informed opinion.
The quibbling is all coming from you.
Its very simple. The internet is NOT an AI. Live with it or quibble over it, it won't change that fact.
[b]Is it possible to have an internet without AI developing?
Of course.
No one person is always right, despite your arrogance of pretense otherwise.
But some people seem to be wrong mor ...[text shortened]... or established.[/b]
Your disconnect is not really understanding a thing you are talking about.[/b]
Nice.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI don't need a source to point out that the internet is not an AI. That is a claim you are making (without source or substance) and its ridiculous.
So, no source, no substance, just your claimed informed opinion.
Nice.
Just look up what AI is on Wikipedia. Educate yourself for once.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour one source of information is laughably dated.
I don't need a source to point out that the internet is not an AI. That is a claim you are making (without source or substance) and its ridiculous.
Just look up what AI is on Wikipedia. Educate yourself for once.
And, it's really beside the point.
We have many examples of a dark web wherein nothing should be and yet edifices are evident.
The system is learning, period full-stop.
You want to call it fiction, feel free.
Bury your head in the sand and stick with what Wikipedia tells you.
No sense being aware of your surroundings, right?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAll I did was suggest where you should start if you wanted to learn what AI is. Wikipedia is a good place to start when you want to know what words mean.
Your one source of information is laughably dated.
And, it's really beside the point.
Then you missed the point.
You clearly don't have a clue what AI is. I was suggesting you do some research and find out.
We have many examples of a dark web wherein nothing should be and yet edifices are evident.
You don't seem to know what the dark web is either.
The system is learning, period full-stop.
Out as many periods as you like, it won't make it true.
You want to call it fiction, feel free.
I would rather call it nonsense.
No sense being aware of your surroundings, right?
I am a programmer. I haven't personally developed on AI's, but I have done enough research into it to know what it is and the algorithms involved and the possible uses.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'm not talking about Tor, I'm talking about areas beyond even those.
All I did was suggest where you should start if you wanted to learn what AI is. Wikipedia is a good place to start when you want to know what words mean.
[b]And, it's really beside the point.
Then you missed the point.
You clearly don't have a clue what AI is. I was suggesting you do some research and find out.
We have many examples of a da ...[text shortened]... ne enough research into it to know what it is and the algorithms involved and the possible uses.
You're a programmer who doesn't recognize what's happening with the proliferation of electronic intelligence self-creation?
Maybe you should stick to making selfie apps instead of arguing against something of which you are several steps behind.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHMr Freak, do you think AI can create itself spontaneously, given that there is enough information from the beginning?
You're a programmer who doesn't recognize what's happening with the proliferation of electronic intelligence self-creation?
Is this kind of intelligence benevolent or is it evil by its nature?
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBeyond? As in down in hell or something?
I'm not talking about Tor, I'm talking about areas beyond even those.
You do know how the interwebs works do you? Its just a lot of computers connected together, not some ethereal being in the netherworld.
You're a programmer who doesn't recognize what's happening with the proliferation of electronic intelligence self-creation?
No, I am a programmer who actually understands how computers work.
Maybe you should stick to making selfie apps instead of arguing against something of which you are several steps behind.
Maybe you should stick to musing on the Bible instead of trying to understand things beyond your comprehension.
17 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadAs a programmer and a person of obvious intellect, you can do better.
Beyond? As in down in hell or something?
You do know how the interwebs works do you? Its just a lot of computers connected together, not some ethereal being in the netherworld.
[b]You're a programmer who doesn't recognize what's happening with the proliferation of electronic intelligence self-creation?
No, I am a programmer who actually understan ...[text shortened]... d stick to musing on the Bible instead of trying to understand things beyond your comprehension.[/b]
You need to do better.
18 Jul 17
1. There are programs which write other programs.
2. There are programs which learn. For example, the programs which defeated human chess players, human go players, and human Jeopardy players.
3. So far, the chess- go- and Jeopardy-playing programs are not doing things we do not understand; they are just doing what we do better or faster.
4. Big data mining is on the threshold of recognizing patterns no human would have recognized (for example, in medical research), though humans will still be able to verify the computer-generated results after the fact.
5. A quantum leap in AI is theoretically possible, in which programs write programs which learn and mine big data sets and generate results no human will be able to verify independently of those second-order programs.
6. An algorithm can take its own previous result as the base for the next iteration of the same algorithm. It is therefore theoretically possible that a program as hypothesized in item 5. could write an encryption algorithm no human could crack because the algorithm itself is subsequently encrypted by that very algorithm.
7. One must beware of attributing intentionality to AI. Computers are not evolving consciousness or evil designs to exterminate humans. In so far as AI appears to exhibit conscious attributes, it is because humans have written programs designed to generate results comprehensible and useful to ourselves.
18 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadWe understand how such algorithms work; our incapacity is a matter of not being able to calculate large primes with 'pencil and paper' (or a pocket calculator) to carry out the algorithms 'by hand'. It is theoretically possible that AI could generate an algorithm we do not understand; that would be something different. Most encryption algorithms are based on generating prime pairs. If AI were to generate an encryption algorithm not based on prime pairs, but on something else entirely, we might not be able to follow what it is doing.
No need. We already have plenty of encryption schemes that no human can crack.
18 Jul 17
Originally posted by @moonbusAnd then What?
We understand how such algorithms work; our incapacity is a matter of not being able to calculate large primes with 'pencil and paper' (or a pocket calculator) to carry out the algorithms 'by hand'. It is theoretically possible that AI could generate an algorithm we do not understand; that would be something different. Most encryption algorithms are based o ...[text shortened]... on prime pairs, but on something else entirely, we might not be able to follow what it is doing.
This is exactly why Musk, Gates, Hawking, et al, are saying AI is humanity's biggest threat.
I happen to think something even bigger is afoot, but they are definitely trying to sound the alarm on this topic.