Post: #1

IBM unveils a computer that can argue

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-excha...28620.html



I think, therefore I argue.

This might be a more apt summary of humankind’s intellectual evolution than Descartes’s famous dictum, and computers are now treading the same path. IBM (IBM) has been a leader in developing artificial intelligence systems such as the Watson supercomputer, which won $1 million on Jeopardy in 2011, beating out top human champs. And now Big Blue has taken Watson technology one step further with a system that can form logical arguments for or against a complex issue--rather than just answering questions--once it absorbs relevant information.

At the Milken Institute’s annual conference in Beverly Hills, John Kelly III, IBM’s director of research, unveiled an artificial intelligence project called the Debater that has new capabilities to think—and argue-- like a human. In a demonstration, Kelly asked the Debater to provide arguments for and against this statement: The sale of violent videogames to minors should be banned. The contraption scanned 4 million Wikipedia articles and narrowed them down to a handful that seemed most relevant. Then, in a synthesized voice, it spit out answers.

Among the reasons to support a ban: “Exposure to violent videogames can cause adolescents to commit acts of aggression in real life,” the Debater explained. ”On the other hand,” it went on, “the sale of violent videogames to minors has not been causally linked with aggressive tendencies.” Doing the research and rattling off several statements, pro and con, took about 45 seconds.

The technology breakthrough here is the ability to understand spoken and written language in context, then applying computing power to a question that arises from that language. The human brain is far better at contextual learning than computers, because we can almost instantly ascertain whether a word like “fair” pertains to a square deal or a carnival with a Ferris wheel. A few minutes of speech or a few paragraphs of writing might contain dozens of such associations, leaving a typical computer stupefied, no matter what its processing speed or RAM.

IBM isn’t just showing off a smart-alecky machine on a whim. The Debater, which is still a research project not yet commercially available, could have plenty of important real-life uses once it comes to market. Medical researchers could use its services to get a big head start when they’re trying to find cures and treatments for diseases. Its ability to summarize terabytes of data in ways that are logical to humans could allow it to summarize all the research that’s been done on a given disease, while also identifying new and unexplored avenues of inquiry that could yield promising discoveries. The same goes for legal research, military intelligence and many types of science and technology.

Kelly envisions the Debater having a seat at the table — either in the flesh, so to speak, or through the cloud — when people in disparate fields develop projects to solve complex problems. It can listen to conversations and contribute meaningful information through real-time data crunching. The Debater also learns as it listens, adding information gleaned from its human interlocutors to its gigantic database. “It’s not man versus machine,” Kelly insists. “It’s man and machine reasoning together.”

On an individual level, the Debater could help develop a personalized course of treatment for cancer patients by processing all known factors associated with the individual case, and comparing that with all the data available on treatment outcomes for different types of malignancies. That might allow doctors to prescribe a precise cocktail of drugs or other treatments with the highest likelihood of success, avoiding a trial-and-error approach that often burns valuable time. If there's a risk, it might be that practitioners in the future come to rely too much on machines, taking human judgment out of the process.

The next step will be adding visual capability to such a machine, so it can see what’s going on around it and add images to its databases and reasoning power. Possible uses include military combat, space exploration and other realms where a sentient machine might be preferable to a human.

Here’s a question for the Debater: What will happen as artificial intelligence replaces human reasoning? Pro: There’s a long history of new technology giving humans fresh tools to become even more creative and productive. Con: When the robots have taken over, there may not be any jobs left for humans. Maybe the next IBM supercomputer will be able to feel bad about that.

Post: #2

So they've wasted money on a machine without reason, logic, and will be an emotional wreck for a week once a month? Good job.

Post: #3

(05-02-2014 09:48 PM)vinman Wrote:  So they've wasted money on a machine without reason, logic, and will be an emotional wreck for a week once a month? Good job.

During that week it'll consume 3 times the electricity it normally does and do 1/10th of the work. It'll also fill up it's hard drives with useless files making it completely unusable.

Post: #4

If you slap the monitor hard a few times like the older computer illiterate men do, will it still suddenly stop arguing back and start working as it should?

Post: #5

I wonder how much processing power a rationalization hamster would need. If it came across an article that offended it would it delete it?

Post: #6

(05-02-2014 10:50 PM)kbell Wrote:  I wonder how much processing power a rationalization hamster would need. If it came across an article that offended it would it delete it?

It would enlist the help of other lesser computers and form a botnet network in order to DDOS the offending server and take it down then take pictures of it and post them it on Instagram.

Post: #7

Seriously, this is pretty cool though.

Post: #8

Quote:
Post: #1



At the Milken Institute’s annual conference in Beverly Hills, John Kelly III, IBM’s director of research, unveiled an artificial intelligence project called the Debater that has new capabilities to think—and argue-- like a human. In a demonstration, Kelly asked the Debater to provide arguments for and against this statement: The sale of violent videogames to minors should be banned. The contraption scanned 4 million Wikipedia articles and narrowed them down to a handful that seemed most relevant. Then, in a synthesized voice, it spit out answers.

Among the reasons to support a ban: “Exposure to violent videogames can cause adolescents to commit acts of aggression in real life,” the Debater explained. ”On the other hand,” it went on, “the sale of violent videogames to minors has not been causally linked with aggressive tendencies.” Doing the research and rattling off several statements, pro and con, took about 45 seconds.

That isn't intelligence, that is exactly what 10000's of students do every week and get poor marks for citing wikipedia.

Take an internet connection away from this "brain" and what do you have? Zero. Humans can think, this computer does not "think", it processes information and flies it off the tongue like a lecturer reading his presentation slides word for word.

You gain nothing but a waste of time, money and energy.

If they really want to test intelligence they need to put it in an environment where it can learn. Human behaviour is one area a computer can excel at.

Post: #9

Cool, but I wouldn't get too carried away by the emergence of our AI overlords. Just read this

Quote:https://what-if.xkcd.com/5/
What if there was a robot apocalypse? How long would humanity last?

Here are a few snapshots of what an actual robot apocalypse might look like:

In labs everywhere, experimental robots would leap up from lab benches in a murderous rage, locate the door, and—with a tremendous crash—plow into it and fall over.

Post: #10

Some people would argue that tech is going to evolve exponentially more powerful over time (singularity).

At some point it might grow faster than we can keep track of, and for all time bts and purposes, become alive.

The human race could just be an incubator for these "AI". Perhaps they pop up all over the universe replacing the biological civilizations that created them.

Post: #11

I observe these developments with a mixture of apprehension and fear.

I don't see artificial intelligence as any great event to be gushed over. We're signing our own death warrants with this stuff.

Our instrumentalities become more advanced, but our purposes remain as primitive as they have always been in man's earlier stages of development. This does not make for a good combination.

.

Post: #12

I think this technology will bring forth armies of servant type robots to handle the daily chores of life. They'll probably be solar powered and fix each other if they break.

Post: #13

The question is not will it or will it not take over to me.

It's clear that it will.

The question is: how will it happen?

Will there be an abrupt revolutionary moment like in the Terminator movies?

Will it happen so quietly and insidiously over time that we won't realize what has happened until it's too late? Like, one day humanity will wake up and realize that it is more machine than human or something.

Will there be a war between the different AIs? In the terminator movie, Skynet takes over all the machines and does what it wants. What if there are different AIs vying for control?


Either way, I don't see why any superior life form would keep us around once it's set up shop and is running things. The best we could realistically hope for would be if it showed us mercy and made us it's pets.

With the things are going with Russia vs. USA, we will probably bomb ourselves out of existence before the technology gets advanced enough.

Enjoy your time now while we are living the good life. Go fuck girls and have fun while fun all that shit is still around.