Hate to tell you…..

And because Intelligence isn’t based on behavior

Artificial Intelligence can NOT be judged by behavior.

These are Chat bots are nice…but they will never be able to gain sentience. Because they don’t understand how to talk…..YOU DO! They will only will only know where to look for the next set of instructions.

So you guys hoping for self-aware…Your going to have to start from scratch.
I swear. Its like hearing people think the world is flat.

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

Hate to tell you…..

And because Intelligence isn’t based on behavior

Artificial Intelligence can NOT be judged by behavior.

These are Chat bots are nice…but they will never be able to gain sentience. Because they don’t understand how to talk…..YOU DO! They will only will only know where to look for the next set of instructions.

So you guys hoping for self-aware…Your going to have to start from scratch.
I swear. Its like hearing people think the world is flat.

I agree. Intelligence isn’t based on behavior, for instance, I can’t determine if you are intelligent from your behavior. However behavior is influenced by intelligence; therefore, I could use abductive reasoning to infer that you might be intelligent, or inductive reasoning to infer you probably are intelligent. Still, I can’t use deductive reasoning to prove you are intelligent.

The obvious question no one ahs asked is ... what is intelligence based on if it isn’t based on behavior.

I also recieved an email from someone who thought i was being mean….

I am not sure anyone realizes that the saying

“Intelligence is based on Behavior”

Is an AI staple that every coder just accepts…and the fact that its not true just really irratates me. I want to see some great things come out of here but I feel like you are all making pancakes and can’t wait to eat waffles.

Look at the views…and look at the replys. Just assume I am stupid and move to the next thread…

People who thought that we revolve around the sun..were burned at the cross. I get emails. Don’t learn…just program things that do….

You can’t program logic if you don’t know how to use it yourself.

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

These are Chat bots are nice…but they will never be able to gain sentience.

I don’t think anyone here (apart from Arthur) believes that an artificial intelligence or chatbot will ever be sentient.

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

Hate to tell you…..

And because Intelligence isn’t based on behavior

Artificial Intelligence can NOT be judged by behavior.

I disagree with your assumption.

Intelligence is not based on sound, but I can tell how intelligent a person is by the sounds they make. How they behave allows me to draw conclusions on how intelligent they are. The behavior of a bot (how it responds), allows me to judge how intelligent the bot is. Although intelligence may not be based on behavior, behavior can be used (along with other factors) to create the illusion of intelligence.

The illusion of Intellignce is not Intelligence. I can not believe no one has asked the obvious question. Look at what you said to me…

“How they behave allows me to draw conclusions on how intelligent they are.”  you are sooo close

You are thinking on the right track and have been the most logical so far.
I can see you trying and appreciate it. I think you know the answer but just haven’t dropped the old ideals yet man.

Merlin - Jul 27, 2011:

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

Hate to tell you…..

And because Intelligence isn’t based on behavior

Artificial Intelligence can NOT be judged by behavior.

I disagree with your assumption.

Intelligence is not based on sound, but I can tell how intelligent a person is by the sounds they make. How they behave allows me to draw conclusions on how intelligent they are. The behavior of a bot (how it responds), allows me to judge how intelligent the bot is. Although intelligence may not be based on behavior, behavior can be used (along with other factors) to create the illusion of intelligence.

 

 

I am suggesting that a chat bot could be more then just self aware of pass a test. That is what I am doing that.

I am simply stating that before we get to that point we have to Re-Look at the basics.

Steve Worswick - Jul 27, 2011:

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

These are Chat bots are nice…but they will never be able to gain sentience.

I don’t think anyone here (apart from Arthur) believes that an artificial intelligence or chatbot will ever be sentient.

Wow, aren’t we condescending?

Wakko, the entire scientific method is based on recording observables. The behavior of a system—the response of a system to external or internal stimuli—defines what that system is. Unless you’ve got your own definition of “behavior”, I’m going with the dictionary on this one.

If you’d like to refine your argument to specifically discuss whether the text output of a computer program is a reasonable metric for its intelligence, now that’s a topic worth discussing. In fact, it’s been discussed several times on this forum.

If however you are interested in making ill-defined, sweeping statements about chatbot technology based on your own, unsubstantiated ideas about general intelligence, I don’t think you’ll find many interested ears (well, eyes). It’s also worth reiterating what Steve said:

I don’t think anyone here (apart from Arthur) believes that an artificial intelligence or chatbot will ever be sentient.

I’d maybe throw Hans in the list of people interested in general intelligence, but I haven’t seen him around lately.

C R Hunt - Jul 27, 2011:

I don’t think anyone here (apart from Arthur) believes that an artificial intelligence or chatbot will ever be sentient.

I’d maybe throw Hans in the list of people interested in general intelligence, but I haven’t seen him around lately.

http://www.chatbots.org/expert/hans_peter_willems/8758/ is missing! Mount a search. Ask all your oh so clever chatbots where Hans Peter Willems is.

Meanwhile I was torn between further AI coding and doc-writing.

http://code.google.com/p/mindforth/wiki/KbRetro took me two days to compose and publish.
I must confess, I don’t know know whether intelligence is based on behavior, or whether I belong among the Neats or the Scruffies. Maybe AI coding is my response to people who tell me to “Get a life!”

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

The illusion of Intellignce is not Intelligence. I can not believe no one has asked the obvious question. Look at what you said to me…

I often use the phrase “the illusion of intelligence” versus “intelligence” in describing what I am trying to create, because I believe that there is a distinction without a difference. It amounts to comparing birds to planes and asking, “Do they fly?” Or fish to submarines and asking, “Do they swim?”

I believe some (many?) people will not believe a computer/AI can be intelligent. Is Watson or Deep Blue intelligent? Since it is difficult to define intelligence, it may not matter. In a limited domain a spreadsheet can do math much better than a human, but is it more intelligent? If not what is missing?

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

“How they behave allows me to draw conclusions on how intelligent they are.”  you are sooo close

You are thinking on the right track and have been the most logical so far.
I can see you trying and appreciate it. I think you know the answer but just haven’t dropped the old ideals yet man.

If you have insight, feel free to share. I am always open to new ideas/approaches. If you have a theory that you think is best I would be happy to take a look.

In AI, a drive toward “Sapience” may be more appropriate than “Sentience”.

Thank you Merlin…

Intelligence is Based on Prediction

The ability to percieve info and make a judgement on what might happen next.
The important distinction here, is that while a computer may learn a language to talk back, through mimicry or a set learning diagram….It is not learning anything more then what it was told to.

To develop Artificial Life there are a couple of things that need to be created first.

If you could create a human, that would be useless unless you have an enviorment to put him in.

A windows explorer folder, as an example, is an enviorment akin to the vaccum of space. A Lifeform can not survive there because it doesn’t provide anything to support its life.

I think the first step towards Alife will be made by new thinkers.. and not by people who can not learn themselves.

To teach something to Live and learn you must be able to understand FULLY how you Live and Learn. From the above posts I only count two people open to new ideas.

New Ideas are like a variable in the human enviorment. If you can not interact with them successfully, How will you program a computer to do it? Some of you have been failing to adapt yourselves.

I will comment again soon about the things that are required to sustain life of anyform, Organic, Or metallic.

C R Hunt - Jul 27, 2011:

Wow, aren’t we condescending?

Wakko, the entire scientific method is based on recording observables. The behavior of a system—the response of a system to external or internal stimuli—defines what that system is. Unless you’ve got your own definition of “behavior”, I’m going with the dictionary on this one.

If you’d like to refine your argument to specifically discuss whether the text output of a computer program is a reasonable metric for its intelligence, now that’s a topic worth discussing. In fact, it’s been discussed several times on this forum.

If however you are interested in making ill-defined, sweeping statements about chatbot technology based on your own, unsubstantiated ideas about general intelligence, I don’t think you’ll find many interested ears (well, eyes). It’s also worth reiterating what Steve said:

I don’t think anyone here (apart from Arthur) believes that an artificial intelligence or chatbot will ever be sentient.

I’d maybe throw Hans in the list of people interested in general intelligence, but I haven’t seen him around lately.

Creating AI Life is not the job of a scientist. As you said above. They watch and make theorys. I am glad you understand this.

My grandfather told me.. it is better for people to think you are stupid, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I have no more doubts about your further usefullness in this discusion. Good-Bye.

Dear Arthur, I find your ideas fasinating. Very high in logic. Would love to discuss further. Hit me up in IMs sometime.

Dear Merlin, Its like I wrote this topic just for you. I look forward to your next reply.

Dear No_Replyers

Thank you for your time. Hope you find this thread, at the very least, entertaining.

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

[...][Dear Arthur, I find your ideas fasinating. Very high in logic. Would love to discuss further. Hit me up in IMs sometime. [...]

“IMs”—is that Instant Message? I prefer out in the open.

I would just like to hear your thoughts on the topic of ALife. Feel free to jump in head first at any point in time.

Arthur T Murray - Jul 27, 2011:

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

[...][Dear Arthur, I find your ideas fasinating. Very high in logic. Would love to discuss further. Hit me up in IMs sometime. [...]

“IMs”—is that Instant Message? I prefer out in the open.

Wakko SicK - Jul 27, 2011:

I would just like to hear your thoughts on the topic of ALife. Feel free to jump in head first at any point in time.

ALife as an approach to AI I do not like (too slow), but otherwise I am in favor of aLife. When I was 19 and just beginning my AI project (back before there were personal computers), I bought several dozen electromechanical relays and made switching circuits out of them. In one circuit that I considered to be artificial life, some relays in a big loop would energize the relays in front of them, and let go of the relays behind them. The result (impressive in the dark with sparking contact points) was a circling pattern of noise and sparks and visibly moving relays. To me it was a form of aLife because otherwise inert matter was continuously active by dint of the information looping round and round. And what is _your_ AI or aLife or chatbot activity, pray tell?

[I can visit here only for a brief window each day, from an Internet cafe or library] -Arthur

I want to feed you knowledge. Close your mouth and open your mind. If you do not read the following links don’t be mad if you don’t understand something later. Just come back here and check them out.

Where did I get the idea that The way we define intelligence is wrong?
http://www.nesteduniverse.net/aritificial_intelligence/

Where can you get a Real Working Game that simulates ALife? It was made in 1996. It was called Creatures. Creatures 3 Exodus was the last release. It included online play and an engine that has been used by countless biology students at places like berkley, to simulate ecosystems and primate behavioral models. I think I even saw somewhere someone taught HS students how different behavior relates to inevitable war.

Here is the article explaining how you can use Creatures 2 AI models to help your AI
http://aigamedev.com/open/highlights/creatures-ai/

Here is an article explaining Influence Maps
http://aigamedev.com/open/highlights/creatures-ai/

Garry’s Mod(along with WireMod)  on steam, is currently being used to simulate enviorments on a level never before possible. It uses the Half-Life 2 Physics engine. You are able to create robots that fight each other as well as a use most coding to manippulate the engine on your own. You could easily make a chat bot from an NPC in Gmod and script it in whatever language you want. It would run in game seamlessly. My friend hooked a hal bot up to one for me awhile back using Lua.

This article is somethign I am currently reading and trying to digest. I ahve been using Balbooka text to speach engine to learn while I sleep as well as manual reading.
http://www.csse.uwa.edu.au/cig08/Proceedings/papers/8034.pdf

If you have any questions ask. I am not some troll. These are things I am working on, and it sucks looking for help cause I start telling people who know how to build stuff how to do it and they instinctvly get defensive and offended. I am not trying to come off that way but…sometimes you find answers in weird places.

http://site.nixuz.com/evolving-fish-intelligence