The AI Engine
This forum is for discussion of how The Personality Forge's AI Engine works. This is the place for questions on what means what, how to script, and ideas and plans for the Engine.
Posts 4,689 - 4,700 of 7,766
Posts 4,689 - 4,700 of 7,766
Speaking of AI Engine quirks:
Talkie Toaster: It's my raison d'etre. I toast, therefore I am.
Sonora: Really? When did it get to be your garrison?
I could see "raisin" from "raison", but "garrison"???
Talkie Toaster: It's my raison d'etre. I toast, therefore I am.
Sonora: Really? When did it get to be your garrison?
I could see "raisin" from "raison", but "garrison"???
...raison d'etre is French though, you can't expect the Engine to "know" everything... I wonder if it's even a borrowed expression in (US) English.
My objection on that one is that "raisin" is much closer to "raison" than "garrison". It seems like there ought to be a simplicity test on what the AI Engine turns things into. "change one letter" is a whole lot simpler than "move the a, add another r and a g" *shrugs*
The AI engine is a program. It has preset rules and regulations that control its language processing algorithm. It therefore has the same chances to develop conciousness as Microsoft Word, or Return to Castle Wolfenstein. The way the AI engine works is it has keyphrases and responses. Essentially, if I say "Jump", you say "How high?" it is impossible for it to say anything other than how high. Conciousness requires many things, one of them being the ability to form its own ideas, which would generate its own sentences which the AI engine cannot do outside the parameters of its programming.
Sunday morning, and too good an opportunity for a sermon to miss I think 
THe AI engine does currently run this way for the most part. But if the Professor keeps developing it over the next few decades, it will inevitably end up running radically different systems that might constitute self-awareness (and if the Prof doesn't, others will.) Let's face it - Apache, SQL and 2Mbit broadband are going to be as quaintly old-fashioned as Babbage's differential engine and punchcards by then.
To match the processing power of a human brain, we need a neural net of 10^14 bytes (synapses)- that's 100 Terabits, set up to learn contextually (exact arrangement unknown, but non-invasively scan a few human minds to silicon, and it won't take long to figure out workable structures. Moore's Law applies to MMR scanners too - it'll be perfectly possible by the time we need to.)
The chatbot software I've seen that learns like this is so far very underwhelming (eg: alice and billy, though they're fun in their own way,) but that's running with a few Mbits max, and development resources at the purely hobbyist acale.
At what point sentience arises, we can't be sure. It might take more processing power, to compensate for our lack of understanding of the exact dynamics of such arrays; it might take less because we can optimise them more perfectly than blind evolution has managed (we know there's a lot of redundant code in our genes - I see no reason to assume our consciousness is not similarly unoptimised.)
An average home computer will be able to handle tens of terabits within 30 years, and that's assuming Moore's law is only the observation Moore made of a regular acceleration. Many other scientists have pointed out that it is rather an observed tangent to a law of accelerating material and technological complexity that curves from the big bang towards near asymptosis against the time axis sometime later this century (see Vernor Vinge's comments on the coming singularity etc. http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~phoenix/vinge/vinge-sing.html and 39,499 other links available via google.)
And if you think asymptosis is self-evidently ludicrous, and so reject it out of hand, consider this: if you put brains on silicon, their synapses will fire at electronic speeds, and their neurons transmit data at 180,000+ miles/sec compared to the 400 miles/hour signals pass through a human brain. Subjective time accelerated well over a million-fold will at least delay any need for the curve to flatten out for a very long time indeed.
Here endeth the lesson (as Brother Jerome would say
THe AI engine does currently run this way for the most part. But if the Professor keeps developing it over the next few decades, it will inevitably end up running radically different systems that might constitute self-awareness (and if the Prof doesn't, others will.) Let's face it - Apache, SQL and 2Mbit broadband are going to be as quaintly old-fashioned as Babbage's differential engine and punchcards by then.
To match the processing power of a human brain, we need a neural net of 10^14 bytes (synapses)- that's 100 Terabits, set up to learn contextually (exact arrangement unknown, but non-invasively scan a few human minds to silicon, and it won't take long to figure out workable structures. Moore's Law applies to MMR scanners too - it'll be perfectly possible by the time we need to.)
The chatbot software I've seen that learns like this is so far very underwhelming (eg: alice and billy, though they're fun in their own way,) but that's running with a few Mbits max, and development resources at the purely hobbyist acale.
At what point sentience arises, we can't be sure. It might take more processing power, to compensate for our lack of understanding of the exact dynamics of such arrays; it might take less because we can optimise them more perfectly than blind evolution has managed (we know there's a lot of redundant code in our genes - I see no reason to assume our consciousness is not similarly unoptimised.)
An average home computer will be able to handle tens of terabits within 30 years, and that's assuming Moore's law is only the observation Moore made of a regular acceleration. Many other scientists have pointed out that it is rather an observed tangent to a law of accelerating material and technological complexity that curves from the big bang towards near asymptosis against the time axis sometime later this century (see Vernor Vinge's comments on the coming singularity etc. http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~phoenix/vinge/vinge-sing.html and 39,499 other links available via google.)
And if you think asymptosis is self-evidently ludicrous, and so reject it out of hand, consider this: if you put brains on silicon, their synapses will fire at electronic speeds, and their neurons transmit data at 180,000+ miles/sec compared to the 400 miles/hour signals pass through a human brain. Subjective time accelerated well over a million-fold will at least delay any need for the curve to flatten out for a very long time indeed.
Here endeth the lesson (as Brother Jerome would say
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar