Dear Colleagues,
What to do you think, in case of future possibility of creating artificial intelligence which will be like ours, where will be the edge (in a legal point of view) between human being and the robot with artificial intellect?
If you are talking about the intellect, any Artificial mind can easily surpass the limitations of biology in a short period of time. However, the main reason behind their Godly intellect is the fact that they can access unlimited information and reflect over all at any instant. But for humans, however, we might have a very beautiful and efficient brain but we are still too far at using it to its full capacity. If you compare the future artificial intelligence with today's mind, the AI takes the hat. However, we don't yet know how far would we plunge into the biotechnology and neuroscience to increase the capacity and efficiency of the current usage of the brain.
Phasing out from the Science fiction, the human mind has the ability to bring illogical thoughts in the middle of logical ones. We have conflicts. We can distinguish between the right and the wrong. We can foresee future outcomes in a way no artificial mind can. We can love, and hate our actions at the same time. This all affects our decisions and actions drastically. These variables do not exist for an artificial one. However, if you want the answer only with respect to the intellect, AI is your man. Not yet. But probably once we have created one with enough computation to connect worldwide, learn and reflect on what and why it has learnt. Most of the AI today lack the capacity to connect past events with the present ones, one thing that our mortal brain is good at.
If someone destroys a robot, there's only the
material value to reimburse. There is a way
for making a robot really valuable:
Robots should be given a brain that is
integrated in the hardware and that can't
be copied. Then the robot is at least as
valuable as the data. The robot could have
knowledge about its own value and refuse to
do dangerous work that might harm it.
Regards,
Joachim
I see IT as an extention of our brains, similar to robot-manipulators that are extentons of our hands and cars can be extention of our legs...
Where is the edge between robots (artificial intelligence) and human beings?
No matter how advanced / intelligent is the robot / AI, we should position them as agent to serve the principal i.e. human beings. They should be perceived as complements for the betterment of mankind.
According to Stephen Hawking, Artificial Intelligence is the biggest threat to humankind.
I think that you would get a much better idea of what is involved if you consider "Artificial General Intelligence" instead of the narrower "Artificial Intelligence".
There is a good paper at Scholarpedia:
Ben Goertzel
Artificial General Intelligence
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Artificial_General_Intelligence
It is not clear what is meant by "artificial intelligence" because it is not really agreed what constitutes "intelligence." It is doubtful that the word intelligence refers to a single thing; emotional intelligence, mathematical intelligence and spatial reasoning all look like fundamentally different things to me. Psychology has multiple competing definitions of intelligence, while philosophy has spent 2,500 years arguing about it without much progress. Hard AI is thus inevitably a skewed concept in which people refer to different things using the same terms. There are systems which are able to make their own decisions, and the ethical and legal responsibilities for such autonomous systems are explored in most detail in the literature on military robots. The issue there revolves around the responsibility of the programmers, whether the actions of the autonomous system could have been anticipated, and the nature of what constitutes "reasonable" anticipation.
Choice between good and bad in a given situation is the edge between human and AI from all points of view including legal.
You are aware that there is currently no (publicly idenitified) "artificially "intelligent systems in existence yet?
First the terms:
Intelligence - this, for us, is best defined in terms of viability with respect to the environment. Intelligence is an evolved property of neural systems. Computers under that definition are not remotely viable. Complex real-time systems that obtain information from sensors on the environment that they inhabit can be made adaptable this is a modicum of intelligence.
Because it is a property of the system the qualifyier "artifical" is inappropriate.
Knowledge is the product of intelligence. At its most primitive, we can call it tuning ie the adaptation of a response to a normal input such that it improves.
This suggests that there is a consistent source of information (from the environment) which can be sensed to allow a system to control its response in a meaningful way (ie converge on an optimal solution) (ie learning)
The key ingredient: The environment
(This is simply a way is restating the origin of thought has been a consequence of evolution which is why viability => intelligence )
Therefore the test is (and that is your edge) "the most viable between man and an environmentally orientated system (AI as was) "
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Artificial Intelligence