Michael Brookes
Game Director
Mimicing humans isn't a greatest test of intelligence in my opinion. Machine intelligence would be of a different order to human thinking.
Michael
Artificial Intelligence - Why is it prohibited in Elite Universe?
- Thread starter AreZee
- Start date
Mimicing humans isn't a greatest test of intelligence in my opinion. Machine intelligence would be of a different order to human thinking.
Michael
You realize that what you wildly argued 2 lines up, you find "to make sense" 2 lines down.
"You can have smart computers, but not sentient computers, because sentient = AI"
Too much Cutter-ramming in the CZ? ;P
you could juts google what a sentient being is and what the definition of AI is. And then you would realise that AI exists by defintion no requiring sentience.
And no my courier onyl rammed a cutter once, but I rubbed myself on many ASP's.
tehre is AI,
there is sentient beings
and there can be sentient AI
A crew NPC beign mechanic may not be sentient, just havign a high level or artificiela intelligence. The complexity to analyse a situation and react properly with a proper solution to it. It would not require any "sentient" behavior in this.
And thats where Michaels part makes sense, when sentient AI is forbidden yet AI isn't. Thats therefore maybe whats the issue of "control" by lore is about, to make sure the used AI is not able to be sentient or develop sentient behavior.
Last edited:
Since real sentience has not been done by now, I think many "kinda AI.. so let's call it AI .. or Siri" stuff has soaked into popular culture nowadays as "AI".
Heck, NPCs are called "AI", because they have a scripted "behaviour". ^^
If it doesn't pass the Voight-Kampff, shoot it!
And I've heard no human chess player, regardless of his ELO, has won over a dedicated chess computer in quite a while.
Are those chess computers "intelligent"? They have some "smart decisionmaking" - obviously better than humans - in a rather limited scenario.
Exactly. My brother has a masters degree in Artificial Intelligence, and he would argue that self awareness is not a requirement for it to be deemed AI.
AI is defined as:
There is a difference between artificial intelligence and artificial self awareness.
Just because some of us automatically think self aware machines when we think of AI, does not make this the definition.
There are many levels of AI, and the most complex systems we have today, can in many ways be called "thinking machines" in as much as they take in data, evaluate it (not only in the sense of predefined criteria either) and make a decision "on their own", but we are far from sentience.
People have a hard time accepting that we have a certain level of AI already, it doesn't have to be the SciFi definition of the word. This is why people often say "true AI" to try to encompass that term. Or in this case "self aware".
Last edited:
You can have a system making intelligent decisions without being self-aware, although finding a definetion of self-awareness or intelligence that everyone agrees with is probably a bigger challenge
Michael
I tend to disagree with the first part of the sentence and agree with the second one.
Good point.
I've been freelance comic translator in a previous life.
It requires a lot more than "translation" to "translate" a text (not talking bout VCR manuals
).As soon as Google translate starts laughing at it's own "translations", it's time for the Plasma Accelerators.
Last edited:
(/me sips coffee and reads very interesting discussion on what AI is in ED universe)
Carry on everyone
Carry on everyone
Pretty much any story that involves unlimited AI squares them off against humanity in the competition for the universe's resources - and invariably winning. The friendliest AIs are in the Culture - and even there, humans are more like tolerated pets. Anything an SC agent could be doing could be easier and faster (although usually a bit messier...) done by a souped up knife missile.
So, if AI is the next step of evolution, us humans might well have to be reassigned to the role of the American Buffalo - or Cockroach, if we're lucky. Which means we wouldn't have a story for ED, or at the very least a completetly different story.
So, if AI is the next step of evolution, us humans might well have to be reassigned to the role of the American Buffalo - or Cockroach, if we're lucky. Which means we wouldn't have a story for ED, or at the very least a completetly different story.
Which gets us back to the definition of "intelligence".
Just don't start with survivability and/or adaptability to its environment. By that ruler, smartphones are highly intelligent - they just need human slaves to do all the tedious evolving/reproducing/distributing for them...
AI is a major can or worms we are being tempted to open; however: To have self awareness without emotion, is an issue, for humans with feelings and a self aware Artificial Intelligence with emotions, would become a very unpredictable thing. It is catch 22, however you look at it.Not really - self awareness is a different construct to intelligence. You can have a system making intelligent decisions without being self-aware, although finding a definetion of self-awareness or intelligence that everyone agrees with is probably a bigger challenge
Michael
Umm, there are different types of AI.
Obviously "weak AI" or "narrow AI" is existent, and not banned, in the ED universe.
"Strong AI" or "Artificial General Intelligence" / "Artificial Super Intelligence" is the sort of AI that is banned.
Last edited:
The most basic one might be the latin root word "intellegere" .. which "translates" (as a concept) to "to understand".
It's not just collecting and processing data and taking decisions based on that (that's a chess computer).
It's the "why play chess" on a "meta level". Computers beat humans playing chess - so they "understand" chess better?
Last edited:
Its quickly becomming apparent that the cause of discussion here is more a debate on definitions and terms rather then their implications.
So to try and mitigate/translate:
Michaels definition of AI: Smart computer programs that are able to do evaluation and make decitions, but that is not "self aware" (For clarity or something, lets say; "has no agenda of its own")
Now this might be different to how you use the term - but the fact is that people doing research into computer AI, call what they are doing today AI, but if you still need for the term AI to be this "sacred holy grail term" from sci-fi, lets call what we have now and what Michael is talking about "intelligent code" or "really clever programs" or whatever
So to try and mitigate/translate:
Michaels definition of AI: Smart computer programs that are able to do evaluation and make decitions, but that is not "self aware" (For clarity or something, lets say; "has no agenda of its own")
Now this might be different to how you use the term - but the fact is that people doing research into computer AI, call what they are doing today AI, but if you still need for the term AI to be this "sacred holy grail term" from sci-fi, lets call what we have now and what Michael is talking about "intelligent code" or "really clever programs" or whatever
Last edited:
And how exactly would one judge that from the outside? I suppose that self-preservation would be a precursor, so opening up that chess computer to stick probes into his brain night backfire...
the last time i used my docking computer it has somewhat hit that famous singularity, went self aware and decided artificial life was not worthy and bumped us into the station to commit suicide
Last edited:
I kinda disagree. take the movie AI, in the end of it you see the high devloped "machines" or the artificial Life. In fact artificial LIFE is what the end of an AI development would be.
Because lets take a simple fact of what a human is: A community of cells that have the purpose to survive for the greater good of transferring it's genes to the next generation, Every individuel cell here is rather irreleveant to this. In our very own body we do ALL. It's capable of repairs to some degree, reproduction and powering itself with just food and other stuff.
Surely you can make a single "robot" giving it AI and exceeding its abilities in intelligence and strengths. But this robot will have issues in maintenance, and energy supply, because to truly be independend form a huge maintenance chain (specialsied production, repair and power supply focused other facilities).
Otherwise the individual will sooner or later malfunction. Therefore the AI in total would either create a collective Hive mind like behavior and being what every single human is (just not on cell bassis) - An individual consisting of many other tool-indivisuals for a common goal. Or it would have do advance into a artificial life. Where each individual even has cells as we do to power itself by an external energy source. To maintain itself and repair or even reproduce ontop of developing itself further.
Last edited:
To learn, that is what is dangerous because in learning errors are made and with sentience a sense of appreciation to self might inspire rebellious behavior.
We kind of expect machines to operate reliable and sentient AI with learning capabilities might be a problem because they learn, feel make errors and eventually evolve.
And automation is nothing like AI - a clever script or washing machine have some resemblance - like an insect, eat, run from the light etc. but suddenly feromones kick in and their behavior changes, mostly we just mimick their behavior.
Blackcompany
Banned
Judging by the way automation and AI has been used to date humans will still be working. Those controlling companies will use automation/AI instead of human labour and middle management, those not in control will be either eradicated or exiled as surplus to requirements and those remaining will use automated defenses to ensure rebellion is quashed, leaving the rest of humanity to go find some other rock from which to eke a living (or alternately be left on a broken Earth whilst the 1% take themselves somewhere nicer).
The problem with sentient machines is when they develop a desire to continue existing past the lifespan we plan for them. We humans will never allow sentient AI to exist without a killswitch, so the conclusion that we are the biggest threat to their existence is inevitable... then Skynet, Butlerian Jihad etc. I presume that that inevitability was reached at some point in the history of the Elite universe, AIs lost and humans have banned them to prevent a repeat.
Trust me I'm a Mentat
You should the book Thousandth Night and its companion novel, if you have not done. I think you might enjoy them.
In the case of a chess computer with current technology, it's simple. It only does what it's programmed to do, any further "learning" could not be achieved for lack of imput/storage/processing.
Quantum computers on the other hand ... hmmm...
This is a really interesting look into some of the issues of emerging AI: http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html
It's such an interesting read, and helps make it clear just how completely unfathomable a true "strong AI" might quickly become to us limited meat creatures - the articles might serve to inform speculation on the reasons for Strong AI being banned in the ED lore too.
Enjoy!
It's such an interesting read, and helps make it clear just how completely unfathomable a true "strong AI" might quickly become to us limited meat creatures - the articles might serve to inform speculation on the reasons for Strong AI being banned in the ED lore too.
Enjoy!
