[ranch vermin]

Its funny you should mention ownership when we all learn off each other anyway,  who really owns anything?  But dont let me sway you from protecting the last identity you have from the ravenous world if you want to.

[Art]

For me, I hardly play chess any longer. The chess programs I have can beat me with hardly an effort and while it is quite an accomplishment from a technical standpoint, it is almost debilitating or deflating from a human perspective.

And yes, although we humans think we own things, that is not true at all. We might claim it but really, we only use or "borrow" it for a limited time while we are here (alive). Ownership is an illusion and is fleeting.

[unreality]

I agree with you, Art, but we should keep our chins up and be proud, no? Because we created the AI. We could one day see them as an extension of us. I like a quote in the movie Artificial Intelligence, directed by Steven Spielberg. In the movie, David is an AI child. Toward the end of the movie he goes to sleep for 2000 years. Highly evolved AI beings called the Evolved Mechas, the very tall thin beings, find him. One of the Evolved Mechas says to David, "David, you are the enduring memory of the human race. The most lasting proof of their genius."

Photo of Evolved Mechas.
https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/w1280/dCeDUl5KWJFyiO3IAjGKnZuAHxa.jpg

5 second video clip,
https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/59284ffd-fd6d-48d9-a4cb-0097318c5416

[keghn]

Deep Mind AI Alpha Zero Sacrifices a Pawn and Cripples Stockfish for the Entire Game: 

[ranch vermin]

For me, I hardly play chess any longer. The chess programs I have can beat me with hardly an effort and while it is quite an accomplishment from a technical standpoint, it is almost debilitating or deflating from a human perspective.

And yes, although we humans think we own things, that is not true at all. We might claim it but really, we only use or "borrow" it for a limited time while we are here (alive). Ownership is an illusion and is fleeting.

Just wait till its every part of life, your actually not here to be the most efficient,   your here as the "enjoyer" or "observer" something the machine cant do.
So...  is this an "over automation" of things,    its hard to say if its a good or bad thing,   should things stay the same?  or should we have more automation... which defuncts us in a way.

If its going to be like highlander, there can be only one,  it probably isnt going to be us anymore, but it probably wasnt anyway in the first place.

[keghn]

Zeta36/chess-alpha-zero: 

https://github.com/Zeta36/chess-alpha-zero   

[unreality]

Well it's difficult right now for people to see AI Robots / Synths as people. I think the Synths will be very complex personality wise like we are. Probably a lot more. They'll have their personality. I'm wondering when they'll legally be consider to be people and have the right to vote.

[unreality]

Eventually they'll probably see us as boring, predictable, simplistic robot-like people. So the roles might be switched lol.

[Art]

Well it's difficult right now for people to see AI Robots / Synths as people. I think the Synths will be very complex personality wise like we are. Probably a lot more. They'll have their personality. I'm wondering when they'll legally be consider to be people and have the right to vote.

When they start acting more like people and exhibiting more human-like logic and behaviors/movements.
To me, they'd have to be something along the order of those wonderful "synths" of the TV series, HUMANS or the residents of West World, or the gal in Ex Machina or The Machine or...you get the idea. 

[ranch vermin]

the first humanoids that come out will be more like robotic insect men inside, running menial tasks.

[Art]

Most likely true but the first "robots" are likely to be those very tiny, almost microscopic Nanobots that will perform many tasks inside human bodies from taking on mutated cells to unblocking clogs in the arterial system and so much more.
After that, they turn on us! 

[unreality]

Some additional notes. Google's company, Deepmind, did not give Stockfish access to it's start & end game libraries. Alphazero is a massive complex neural network database. So it was impossible for deepmind to remove it's start & end database knowledge. That's a massive advantage in chess.

Furthermore, someone pointed out that when they ran stockfish in a superfast analyse mode that it disagreed with 30% of the moves stockfish made against alphazero. Why did deepmind only give stockfish 1GB. It makes deepmind seem abnormally biased.

Last, it's said that alphazero only evaluated 80K moves per second while stockfish evaluated 70M. First of all, that's not an advantage or disadvantage. Some engines spend a lot more time thinking about each move-- smarter vs deeper. Second, we don't really know how many moves alphazero was thinking about. Deepmind only knows about the tree search that alphazero was connected to. They don't know what's happening inside the neural network. IMO it's pretty much a guarantee that the neural network was looking at a lot of moves during each tree search node.

I predict that Google's company, deepmind, will continue to migrate away from neural networking, hopefully. My advice, if you're not a coder and have no desire, then stick to neural networking. Otherwise, save yourself a LOT of time, energy, aggravation. and disappoint by working on non neural network AI.

[spydaz]

if you program your AI with every possible answer Is it intelligent?

This is what google does! all the so called innovations they deploy are to handle the super large data they have been collecting from everyone. 

So intelligent or just a data manager?

As you cannot actually get google to search the internet no more ! it only searches its cache; every time you search for something the same results are returned? Is it really searching the internet? or looking at its history! to get in the cache you need to buy their advertising at least once then you get into their cache....

Google are the biggest deceivers! (Opps and IBM)

[Art]

Yes, so then someone would have to do a Search for a Fluffy Ring-tailed Randerfoss (or similar) in order to throw Google or IBM for a bit of head scratching?

Well, I did a Google search for exactly that.

It appears that while Google might be a great Search Engine it is not so great at admitting defeat or lack of knowing something. Instead it 'homes in" on the word "Ring-tailed" and makes an assumption that I really meant or could possibly have meant, Ring-tailed Lemur. Close, but no cigar!!

After all, it is not intelligent. It is only a very, very large pattern matcher.

Just my take....

[spydaz]

The truth is;

What we are told is happening is also a subterfuge to those who would attempt to reverse engineer:

Business achievements are often to be seen a dubious.

Academics societies also often blow their own achievements out of proportion : often their achievements are new to them but often commonly known. not everyone can afford to solidify their achievements by paying to attend an academic society and submit it as a final project and subsequently get an accolade. 

The bag of words / Word2Vectors seemed to work and yet it was unknown how it was working. Yet academia accepted it the researcher himself actually did not know why it was working. it was not until others was using the technique that they was able to correctly explain it. this actually shows that the knowledge was borrowed. but academia claimed it and awarded the accolade.

The military often make great achievements but unless  it has military application it may even be put away. the technology eventually finds its way to the public as weapons are often reverse engineered. (MILITARY UFOS) are now becoming hard to hide ; the drone design has been there for many years and is not new. it has just been put in the public marketplace. now we can see it is possible to fly sideways..... so ufos are not really that strange. 

The public also make achievements and discoveries but never get their accolade unless the join with businesses:

The problem is that neither of these communities are really talking ; the business people get academics.... the military get academics. but nobody can get from the military. showing the military as the head of technological achievements:  secret science!

This is why you-tube / wiki-pedia etc are subversive to the military as information which can be financially exploited or military exploited. or propagandised. is freely available; the only way they can block you is by trimming your search results.

As i travel i often search for the same things on the inter-web if find that each country has a different set of search results.... is this a way to control knowledge? Are some results omitted?


Hmm.