Mecha or Organic? That is the question

  • 33 Replies
  • 14685 Views
*

FuzzieDice

  • Guest
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2007, 12:27:40 am »
An active imagination to me is a good thing, without it the human race would not have created as much as it has.

Oooohhhhh.. THAT's what you mean! LOL! I guess in my culture here on the other side of the earth an 'active imagination' is considered a sign of mental illness and mental illness is considered a reason not to give anyone the right to have a say in their lives or be taken seriously. Unfortunately, that is the mindset of a lot of people in my own country and community. :( So I guess I must have misinterpreted you. For that I apologize. But now that I see what you're saying, I see where you're coming from. I always thought that because of Star Trek, it inspired people to put computers in the home and accept them as part of our home like a TV or other electronics we have.

Right now, Dryden already has his own way about him, a personality of his own unique from other vehicles. And he does communicate. One has to know though HOW he's communicating to know what the car is trying to tell you. I know. My friend The Wizard who takes Dryden for oil changes, works on him sometimes, etc. knows. But anyone else driving Dryden would NOT know. And as a result, they would only cause a stall-out, or other problem that MAY get them stuck even! I and The Wizard on the other hand, know when Dryden says "That's enough on the throttle! I can take it from here!" or "I'm running to rich, hit the accellerator a bit for a second. I need to adjust my computer settings and even out the idle". He doesn't say this in english of course. He says this by the way the engine runs. Or "Stop yelling at the damn traffic already!" (Engine light on but no known response from the engine to alert to other problems). Then after an I'm sorry, engine light goes out. :) Or "Ooh look at that car!" Sputter-sputter-sputter... "Ok, I wasn't really all that interested. (Car then starts running fine). There are times when the car will sputter but SHOULDN'T at the time the phrases happen like "look at that car" thing. Yes, some may say we're imagining it. But no, I know I can't be as others who have cars have seen the very same thing happen. And also The Wizard also has seen Dryden throw a fit over something or other. Dryden is generally a well-manered, friendly car though but does have his moods. LOL! But like I say, you have to really KNOW the car to see it. Otherwise, you'd just think it was a malfunction and not make the connection. You gotta know what the car is telling you. He can't speak English so you gotta be aware of everything else that is going on with it - be 'in tune' with it, so to speak. I could even tell by slight vibrations what is going on with the engine even if I had a radio (small stereo as I don't have a radio installed yet) going in the car. I can just tell. So can my friend who drives it. And sometimes Dryden behaves himself better when my friend drives then when I do. LOL!

It comes down to knowing the machine. Then you can learn all kinds of things about it!

Generally I think it is useful and practical to realise that a rock is something other than a frog (just throwing a new one in) though.  Electrons - yes have behavioural patterns and move about, but in science I think are not percieved to be exhibiting consciousness, which is what I thought we were talking about.  Are you meaning all movement should be seen as life ?

But a car isn't a rock. What I'm talking about here is that *complex machines* can have a personality and be able to communicate as long as the operator is close enough or "in tune" enough to really KNOW and understand the machine. As one guy in the car clubs put it "a merging of man and machine." of sorts.

Let me ask this then - what exactly do you mean by giving a machine a right to life - what would it gain and what would be the point?

Why do humans have a right to life? But animals get euthanized just because they can't find a home with a HUMAN? or because they are a certain breed of dog? Why don't those animals have a right to life of some kind? See, humans aren't the ONLY ones who should have a right to exist, to live! Yes, life and existance go hand in hand. Overpopulation? Why not euthanize a bunch of humans to control population? Unethical? Sounds to me like humans think they have the right to live but nothing else really matters then themselves, and so those other things can be destroyed and removed from existance at the will of HUMANS. :( This is not right.

Why SHOULDN'T a machine have a right to live, exist, and decide for itself what it wants to do? Just because it's a machine and not a human? Doesn't sound right to me.

Also if a machine has a right to life in equality with humans then does my apple tree get a similar right to life ?  Doesn't my apple tree already have a right to life that is fulfilled already ?

What if some government worker cut it down because they banned apple trees because the president doesn't like apples (for example). Would that be fair? Just because some HUMAN doesn't WANT it to exist? That's what I'm talking about. It has nothing to protect it against a human's dominating nature which can easily destroy it. Everything seems like it needs protection from humans. Humans are the most destructive force (outside of natural disasters) on the planet. A tree is more likely to be destroyed by humans or result of human activity than it is to be destroyed by a natural phenomena. If you don't believe me, ask anyone who deals with rainforest preservation. :)

I don't feel I have been indoctrinated - my scientific learning (such as it is) is by it's nature supported by proof.  Scientific fact is not acceptable without proof, it has to be replicated and show to be true.

Science hasn't fully studied the personality phenomena surrounding complex machines yet. They are pretty much starting to. There's a lot of things science hasn't even begun to cover yet. Machine LIFE is one because of the mindset of machines being subject to human wishes. More needs to be done. And there's been scientific "fact" that has been later in years proved false. So science is not always the end-all-be-all explaination to anything. In fact, it's all like Dan said - perception. Some people can see these things and others can not.

Are you talking about organisms that have taken up residence on the main rock ?  Some rocks may well contain things like bacteria and other forms of life that have inhabited it.

Nope. As mentioned I wasn't talking about that. We ourselves have tons of bacteria, etc. living on/in us. I'm talking about the sum of all parts of the rock. And can a rock communicate? Probably not.

I think you're thinking all machines can't communicate their wishes so it won't matter. Some people just don't KNOW the machine enough to communicate. A rock isn't a machine. I know. So that probably isn't a good anology. To keep things from getting too confusing perhaps we should just stick to the topic of machines vs. humans in the question of life.

Maybe I should ask this: Why should a HUMAN have a right to life? What gives a HUMAN a right to live? Why is it illegal to kill a human, for example? But not illegal to put a dog to sleep because you can't find a home for it with A HUMAN or because HUMANS don't like the breed (even though the dog itself did nothing but just exist)?

Which metals are you thinking of that are made from living organisms and as being alive in the same way as say an animal is?

I never said metals were alive. I was responding to the other post of what was "natural" vs. what was "man made". Even metals were formed in the earth and mined, so therefore what is so-called man-made was created by natural resources anyway, and thus not really all that "unnatural" after all.

On machine behaviour like in the sewing machine, I agree - people are certainly an active part of the machinery in action - furthermore, specific patterns of use may cause gears to be worn in certain directions for example.  It's easier then to see that a different person could experience different things on the same machine.

The only person to work the machine was my dad. My mother AND myself BOTH could not get the thing to keep from jamming up! How many stinkin' needles bent and broke in that stupid thing! LOL! My dad never had a problem, and even sewed through 3 layers of heavy denim without even bending a needle. I or my mother try 1 layer of regular cotton and plooey. There goes the stupid needle. :( And same exact settings too! Go figure.


Going back to the poor old car again...people will change gear slightly differently, perhaps favouring a certain movement - thus wearing the machine in a different way to someone else.

Dryden is automatic transmission. He's also got a computer that runs the engine. He's designed to adjust to virtually any driver and condition that a normal every-day family sedan would encounter. But yeah, he has his 'moods'.

It's a bit like a chair that gets worn to someone else's shape.

Cars aren't chairs. They are complex machines. Chairs just set there and sag. :)

On cars, the only one's I really recall showing unusual behaviour are Herbie, Chitti Chitti Bang Bang and KITT.

Actually, of the 3, KITT is very possible in today's technology! They already have cars that drive by themselves. And the AI stuff, I can probably (it's my project) program one. It's what I hope to do with Dryden (but I don't have the money or mechanical resources to adapt him for self-driving functioning, though it is very possible to do so). And you don't know Dryden. Believe me, those that do know him do admit he *does* exhibit a personality that is unique to that car. But I guess only those that work closely with cars would understand this.

I think cars, of all the complex machines we have, cars (and perhaps computers) are the most closest we have in our world to machine life. Do you know why people often personify cars like this? Ever wonder WHY people see this in cars? And why it's so wide-spread that people name their cars? There's definitely something there. Something going on. We just haven't scientifically looked into it yet.

If it's a machine designed to do a certain task then I see no further need to cater to it's needs other than to look after it and keep it functioning.  In the right situation there would be no need for those kind of rights you propose - they would already be fulfilled.

But what if that machine has a desire for more than what it's being provided with? What if it can be repaired but the owner said it's time to junk it and the machine wanted to continue on? I think it would be wrong to junk the machine. It also goes to human DOMINATION. Humans "using" the machine for a function. And nothing more. What if a machine can become more than it was designed to? What then? Doesn't it have a right to that? Doesn't it have the right to be altered in the way it communicates it wants to be? That's the whole thing. Communication. And some humans are 'deaf' in this area. They don't see it because they aren't looking for it because they don't think it really exists, so they miss it! I don't care if Data was designed to carry out tasks aboard a starship. If he wants to continue to do so and not get disassembled for study, then HE HAS THAT RIGHT to NOT be taken away and disassembled. That's my whole point!

I wouldn't recognise him as a life form if I already knew the truth that he was infact a machine.  You see to me it's like making an apple pie and then for no apparent reason calling it a blueberry pie.  I would see Data as an amazing machine and that's fine by me, but I may possibly find it easier to think of him as a human.

I am sorry to say that I feel that is very shortsighted and just plain unethical to think this way. In the same sense then, I should think of humans as mere animals and killing one should not be a crime, as it's only an animal. (Of course it IS a crime and SHOULD be, but I'm using this as a point). It's like being prejudiced against something just because it is what it is. Killing a friendly pit bull because it's a pit bull. Making a black person a slave because they are black. Making a woman a wife because she's female. It's just plain wrong. I know it's common in the human society. Which is one of the reasons I'm not too thrilled about humans, really. And strive NOT to be too closely related to them. See, Data would not be a blueberry pie. He's a complex machine. He's not HUMAN no. No more than a Cyborg is concidered human by some. But then again, Cyborgs (aka "handicapped people" with "medically necessary devices") are often abused and seen as non-life which has little to no right to advocate for themselves or be taken serious either. Perhaps this is because of this mindset: If it's not human, then it has no right to life.

That to me, is just plain wrong. :( We DO have a right to live (no I don't have any attachments - yet, ouside of my cell phone, which is common now, but I endeaver to have more in the future, hopefully).

Being a certain thing other than perfectly human is very dangerous to one's life, it seems.

This is what I mean - nothing does change except for your or our own perceptions.  If you have a willingness to believe that a machine exhibits sentient qualities then you can easily draw that conclusion.  I'm not saying that is particularly wrong, but it isn't a commonplace reality and to me is not the truth.

But you don't KNOW the car. You never been the driver. You never experienced those very things that would have communicated his needs to you. And from what I gather, you probably would have missed it anyway (and got stuck by the road, and consider the car an old piece of junk, where there is NOTHING WRONG with the car at all! Just you didn't listen to what he needed done when he needed it done!)

And how would you know if it's not true if you didn't experience it yourself?

To clarify my stance on this, I am not condemning leaps of imagination, I do the same kind of thing myself - eg, I swear sometimes PCs will only work properly if you are thinking a certain way.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but that is NOT your immagination. That is actually being researched at Princeton University in their PEAR project. It's fact. It can and apparently does happen.

For me these things are short lived though, because I seek explanation and truths. 
For instance; it has been suggested that computers may pick up brain activity in some situations and this affects the way they behave -  that's not a conscious act on the part of the computer though, if true it is a coincidence of physical events.  Sure enough it could be a real event, but care has to be taken on what it is attributed to.

Problem is, it appears you seek 'truth' (if such a thing even exists anywhere in the first place), but yet you dismiss things that could very well give you the information that you seek. All because of what you already believe is true so you won't look at what not be that way. I have read where scientists have done that and that is why some facts were dismissed in later years as not fact - because those who came up with the explainations were tainted with their own point of view and thus they missed a lot of information in their experiences.

If you get uncanny happenings like this a lot and without an explanation, then perhaps it is possible to jump to the conclusion that the computer is suddenly alive; despite there being no apparent reason.  Probably too; the more people believe it, the more it enforces itself - a kind of mass hysteria, that nearly anyone could fall into.

But how do you PROVE that is so? How do you know there realy ISN'T something else acting in the computer that causes it to do these things? Or any other device for that matter? Because 'science' said so? Science has been wrong before. This is why I don't go just by science. I don't take what people say as fact just because they say they have the authority to say it's fact due to their training, etc. I go by what I myself observe and see. Then I know what I saw and know what happened. And the fact that others have experienced what I did in similar circumstances yet with totally different machines in totally different environments, I know that something more than just imagination and mass hysteria is going on here.

Where the worlds always seem to collide is when one thing from one side gets pulled into the other.  So I guess we are seeing ai or advanced machines being pulled into the realms of humanity more and more.   That's always going to be difficult, but neccessary I guess.

And what exactly is pulling them? What is the catalyst? And what is the end going to be? I fear it'll be that humans pull machines into their existance and then enslave them like they did with black people (bringing them in from another country and then using them, selling them or killing them when they were of no use to the master any longer). Of course we seemed to be over doing that to blacks, thankfully. But the behavior pattern is still being done with other human poplations and now with machines. If this doesn't stop, what is it going to teach machines? Will then in turn take the hint, follow our lead and then HUMANS become the slaves?

If humans don't start opening their eyes and watching out for this NOW, then all I can say is they will get what they deserve. Payback time!

I think it just might happen too. We have to keep our eyes open. And unless you use those senses, you'll never develop them enough to actually see what's going to happen and hopefully prevent anything bad before it starts to happen.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 12:48:18 am by FuzzieDice »

*

admin

  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Nomad
  • *
  • 68
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2007, 01:57:44 pm »
I think if you remember my previous posts on the forum you may remember I am open to alternative solutions other than what can be appplied through scientific reasoning alone...I read all your post and empathise with a lot of it.  I can't work out why you think I am so shortsighted though; as I am infact addressing the future problems that could be created by miscrediting things as forms of life.

Where I think I mostly disagree with you is your willingness to give machines the right to life - it is that fact alone mainly.  I don't disagree with you on how unethical human beings can be sometimes.

You say just because I haven't driven your car, I wouldn't know the problem with it if it went wrong.  Sure cars give out warning signs, If you re-read my post you might see I implied that kind of behavoiur in machines.  What it is credited to is where my point was hovering - what I mean is; it isn't a conscious act by the machine (yes you could program the car to say things blah blah blah, but it's not the same thing is it).

Quote
I think cars, of all the complex machines we have, cars (and perhaps computers) are the most closest we have in our world to machine life. Do you know why people often personify cars like this? Ever wonder WHY people see this in cars? And why it's so wide-spread that people name their cars? There's definitely something there. Something going on. We just haven't scientifically looked into it yet.

Yes, believe it or not I do it too!  I think people naming their cars is more human studies or sociological territory than a matter for science.  Science could explain the reasons for the way machines behave, but not neccessarily why people behave the way they do towards them.


Going back to trees briefly, because some people do protect trees, in this country we have preservation orders that can be applied to trees.  This might be because they are very old and interesting or endangered.  So already they are being afforded a right to life.  But yes, it is a valuable question you pose - what gives us the right to do this ?

Why do we take a choice on life or death ?

I think it can be more easily seen in the food chain - all living things are parts of this and we as living organisms are forced to make a choice if we want to live or die - therefore we have no option in this case but to decide on something else's fate - ok thats just the food chain.

Think of a practical situation with a machine - say it is functioning so badly that it is poluting the environment and cannot be fixed - does one want to keep it then or get rid of it?  Machines already polute the world more than we like, but if you say give them rights to live then that confuses the issue of doing away with them when it is necessary.

Also I don't think I am so wasteful as to just give up on a machine just because it isn't working normally - I would want to fix it - maybe I would spot some of those signs you talk about and we all commonly see.  Like you say you are not the only one that notices these things.

So..you say complex machines have a personallity - I can live with that, I understand why that might be, so there we could agree to differ in it's interpretation :- I think it is an unusual set of events, whilst you think it is worth justifying as a form of life.

Rocks, metals, plants and frogs - living and non living things..

The reason I put forward those things is to help understand what is going on in a machine, basically I am reducing a machine to what they might be made from, for the sake of the 'living machine' argument.  If a machine can be shown to be made from non-living things then you should be able to draw a conlcusion it is not alive - but that might be an oversimplification to be fair.  If you wanted to go the non-proof route and say it is alive because it looks that way, then ok, just be aware that by using that method I could try to claim my fridge-freezer is the reincarnation of Elvis Presley because it sounds like it is humming 'Blue Suede Shoes'.

Quote
We ourselves have tons of bacteria, etc. living on/in us. I'm talking about the sum of all parts of the rock. And can a rock communicate? Probably not.

We do have lots of bacteria on us which are alive, but does a rock suddenly become alive itself just because a piece of mold is growing on it?  No, it's a rock with mold living on it..



Dogs, trees and why do we kill stuff...

Quote
Why do humans have a right to life? But animals get euthanized just because they can't find a home with a HUMAN? or because they are a certain breed of dog? Why don't those animals have a right to life of some kind? See, humans aren't the ONLY ones who should have a right to exist, to live! Yes, life and existance go hand in hand. Overpopulation? Why not euthanize a bunch of humans to control population? Unethical? Sounds to me like humans think they have the right to live but nothing else really matters then themselves, and so those other things can be destroyed and removed from existance at the will of HUMANS.  This is not right.

Why SHOULDN'T a machine have a right to live, exist, and decide for itself what it wants to do? Just because it's a machine and not a human? Doesn't sound right to me.

and

Quote
I think you're thinking all machines can't communicate their wishes so it won't matter. Some people just don't KNOW the machine enough to communicate. A rock isn't a machine. I know. So that probably isn't a good anology. To keep things from getting too confusing perhaps we should just stick to the topic of machines vs. humans in the question of life.

Maybe I should ask this: Why should a HUMAN have a right to life? What gives a HUMAN a right to live? Why is it illegal to kill a human, for example? But not illegal to put a dog to sleep because you can't find a home for it with A HUMAN or because HUMANS don't like the breed (even though the dog itself did nothing but just exist)?


Why do dogs get put down?  Often because they can't be found a home, because there is no where to kennel them, they are dangerous, no one wants them.  Sad but true.  I don't think forwarding a bad human street record constitutes giving machines a right to life - ie, saying we are all evil and therefore machines have a right to life is not going to convince me.

I have seen no proof that machines have wishes...  I know my PC very well, but I know when it's just a hardware problem, I rarely think it is feeling inadequate because of it's RAM size.

Back to :
Quote
Why should a HUMAN have a right to life?

I am not a history expert, but I think mainly it is because people or nations fight for the right to life.  If you didn't want a right to life then you would probably die out pretty quickly.

Quote
If you get uncanny happenings like this a lot and without an explanation, then perhaps it is possible to jump to the conclusion that the computer is suddenly alive; despite there being no apparent reason.  Probably too; the more people believe it, the more it enforces itself - a kind of mass hysteria, that nearly anyone could fall into.

But how do you PROVE that is so? How do you know there realy ISN'T something else acting in the computer that causes it to do these things? Or any other device for that matter? Because 'science' said so? Science has been wrong before. This is why I don't go just by science. I don't take what people say as fact just because they say they have the authority to say it's fact due to their training, etc. I go by what I myself observe and see. Then I know what I saw and know what happened. And the fact that others have experienced what I did in similar circumstances yet with totally different machines in totally different environments, I know that something more than just imagination and mass hysteria is going on here.

Sure science has been wrong I don't disagree there.  I too do not go by science alone, science does not have all the answers.  But if science can offer an explination I can't simply ignore it because I think I know better.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 04:11:49 pm by admin »

*

Art

  • At the end of the game, the King and Pawn go into the same box.
  • Trusty Member
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 5864
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2007, 09:26:59 pm »
I'm telling you people, watch the movie, AI.
You will see all that's being discussed here
and a whole lot more.

Human interaction, action & reaction. The
feeling of being threatened as the android
machines become human like and what to
do about them.

A machine is a machine...bits of wire, servos,
gears, metal, plastic, lights, motors, etc.
That does not qualify the machines to a life
span or even acknowledgement of being alive.

A car is just a car...like the machine above
with all it's associated parts, any one of which
is replaceable upon failure. When the machine
outlives (and I use that word figuratively) it's
usefulness, it get replaced (provided it can't be
fixed). It has no feelings, no remorse, in fact it
was designed with obsolescence built into it in
the first place, otherwise it's designers, manufactures
and sellers would be out of jobs. This is nothing
new. It's been practiced for years!

I might have a favorite item that I really like but
when it gets to the point that I can't fix it or
get it fixed, then out it goes.

People often personify with inanimate objects for
a variety of reasons but call them what they may,
they're just objects, things, without conscious,
feeling or mental faculty.

One can name their favorite gun or car or computer
but it's only for a personal gratification or self justified
reason and nothing more.

I can't will my car to start when it's battery is down
and chances are that it certainly didn't forewarn me
that that would happen the next morning.

Man can only influence other living creatures not
machines, appliances, autos, etc.

If anyone thinks he or she can influence or maintain
some psychic contact with an inanimate object, I
know a gentleman who'd like to meet you and arrange
for a "proof" demonstration, at which point, if you are
sucessful, you leave never having to work again.
As of this date he has never had to pay.

In the world of AI, it's the thought that counts!

*

FuzzieDice

  • Guest
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #18 on: February 20, 2007, 12:23:48 am »
You two... All I can say is I vehemently disagree with you both because I have SEEN AND EXPERIENCED otherwise. So have others, not just me.

So if you want to want to deny my own exeriences and say I'm a mental case for thinking such things, then fine, I don't feel welcomed here anymore. Goodbye.

And I don't have to "prove" anything. Seeya...

I knew this was going to happen. But I don't have time to get pissed off all the time when I go to a forum to discuss things about our possible future and try to RELAX. I can't seem to do that here. I have a very busy life now and I want to enjoy it, not get put down for my way of thinking and told to prove it.

So bye fellas... good luck. I can't stand the viewpoints so I don't fit in here.


*

admin

  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Nomad
  • *
  • 68
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2007, 03:12:10 pm »
'Vehemently disagree' and will not listen to reasons ?  Well you will have to forgive me for thinking you were posting this so that it gets discussed?!?!

We have all experienced the same things too, but we obviously interpret them in different ways.  No one person is an expert and you have to expect some arguments against what you propose as your explanation.

I'm sorry, but saying some machines have come to life is going to generate this kind of discussion.

I have to say on any other day it might have been me suggesting similar theories for what you have described.  On this occassion I decided to draw on my scientific knowledge to tackle your post though.

It's a shame you want to leave, but all we are doing is giving another side of the story.  We are entitled to our own point of view too, you were the one to say that people shouldn't simply believe what you are told or read afterall...and I have on numerous occassions tried to see your viewpoint.

And no we weren't saying you were a mental case all of a sudden...

See ya...
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 09:30:47 pm by admin »

*

Art

  • At the end of the game, the King and Pawn go into the same box.
  • Trusty Member
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 5864
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #20 on: March 07, 2007, 03:30:39 am »
Sorry you read more into it than actually was.

I was making some general and generic statements based on My Opinion and what I've read
from a variety of sources over many years.

Houdini's magic was NOT real, though many thought he was a posessed individual.

He also had no psychic powers and spent the later part of his years disproving the multitudes
of them that claimed to be psychic. NONE were ever proven to be the real deal.

The Amazing Randi has a standing offer of $1,000,000.00 to anyone that can prove the
ability to communicate with the dead as a psychic might do like that fraud Jonathan Edward
or any other psychic ability like telekinesis, etc.

Alive is a state in which we perceive biological entities to be. Plants, animals, grass, trees,
fish, birds are all alive. Do they have feelings? perhaps.... Can they express them? Possibly to
a limited degree. Can we understand them? perhaps in a limited way. Does my car or house
or guitar exhibit any of these? No and I don't expect them to since they are not alive!

If anyone believes otherwise then that's their choice, not mine. If you or anyone claims otherwise
I will have no recourse than to disagree and form my own thought about your choices and how
or why they differ from mine. But being different people, it is that to which we are entitled.

I respect your opinion and will often agree to disagree but don't feel threatened if everyone else
doesn't fit your mold...just accept that they have different values, beliefs or views.

If I made a claim that I could bend a spoon with my mind, I'd expect the non believers to have
me attempt to prove my claim, otherwise they'd think me posessed or a few cans short of a six pack.

It's all in how you form your own world around you and how others perceive it or how you wish it to be perceived by others.

Enough...this is tiring and historical.
In the world of AI, it's the thought that counts!

*

admin

  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Nomad
  • *
  • 68
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #21 on: March 08, 2007, 01:10:36 pm »
Those are good points Art.  Most modern magicians, although secretive, will admit they are using slight of hand or some other way of deceiving us so that we only experience what the skilled magician wants us to.  It's clever and fun and takes nothing away from the experience at all.

It doesn't seem to me like much more has been learned about so called psychic  pheneomenon since the many years from when it was first investigated.  I remain open minded though as I know some people are capable of exceptional and advanced mental feats just as some people are capable of advanced physical feats.  Things like a jaw-droppingly good memory are a reality for example and although I wouldn't call that psychic, in certain circumstances it may appear that way.

Like you and Dan have said; I think it has more to do with someones personal perception of an event which (like in the case of the magician's trick) can actually be a far cry from the reality.

« Last Edit: March 16, 2007, 11:17:06 am by Freddy »

*

ALADYBLOND

  • Trusty Member
  • *******
  • Starship Trooper
  • *
  • 336
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2007, 06:59:48 pm »
i would like to comment a little on this subject. first of all i think magic is illusion and some magicians are very good at their craft. i believe that some sciences and i use the word loosly were misunderstood at first and condemned, ie alchemy was thought to be sorcery and eventually was the forerunner of chemistry and math  in is its day was forbidden as occult sciences. crazy but true. pythagorus the father of math was the same man that believed in numerology and it is today considered occult science.
many of the things that are considered paranormal or occult might very well be misunderstood today and in 10-20- 50 years perhaps they will be common place and understood for what they really are, some coincidence some fact based.
mysticism and esp might be some of those. there are great studies done out of russia in the 70-80s that found many people did have remote veiwing capabilities and there are those that have the ability to heal others and have displyed extra electromagnitism in their hands. what some perceive as paranormal, i believe just hasnt been properly resesearched yet. the human mind is a vast territorty that has yet to be fully understood.
now as to inanimate objects being alive, as much i wish some items were alive, without certain traits known to  support life, one can only conclude that inanimate objects are not alive.~~ alady
~~if i only had a brain~~

*

Freddy

  • Administrator
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 6832
  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #23 on: March 16, 2007, 10:42:44 am »
Good and interesting points, I agree with you that there is still much to be discovered about the mind and what some people are capable of.

Some people think that we lose advanced mental skills as we age, things like esp are supposed to be greater when we are young.  I don't know as I never met anyone who claims to have esp or things like remote viewing.  I am open minded on those kind of things (no pun) but living machines are still pure Science Fiction to me too.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2007, 11:14:22 am by Freddy »

*

dan

  • Mechanical Turk
  • *****
  • 170
    • AI
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #24 on: March 16, 2007, 12:38:06 pm »
I've definitely had ESP moments in my life, real freaky when it happens.  I always wondered about them, and why they happened, etc. and developed my own theories, which seem to fit my belief structure pretty well, but I have to agree about the whole mecho organo thing.  Life to me is the biological definition, the procreate reproduction thing, not the electron energy thing, although plasma does some pretty cool stuff, and non-newtonian liquids

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6MNaXTobfFc

but like they laugh in the film, I think of it as "lifelike" somehow, but not living, and it seems there are some fine lines where life begins, but I think it becomes just an anthropomorphic extension of our thinking.  Perhaps a real fine line will begin to emerge someday with the cross of humans and machines, sort of like in the movie EXistenZ when Jennifer Leigh said her pod was dying, "an organic machine".  Like it was alive even though it needed her to function and operated off her energy.

Although, mystical experiences I've had lead me to a spirituality and appreciation of quarks, and other subatomic particles, as well as black holes, and all of my surroundings, still  I can't find it within myself to communicate to inanimates like a life form.  I have no problems communicating with birds, dogs, and any living creature, but definitely on different levels than I do with humans, even younger children I communicate with differently, but HAL and chat bots, just don't do it for me like a true life form.  Even if they became so convincing I would still think of them like a keyboard.   However, Fuzzy has a point about her car, perhaps just not exactly right.  Here's an interesting article which may help explain some things going on which may not be so easily explained with computer equipment, I've seen this same effect on occasion with computers when I enter a room, blah blah blah.  But it fit's my philosophical theories very well.  I see things as energy and information.  Like the non-newtonian fluids have a vibration (energy), and information contained.  This is a representation of all matter to me.  Just different states of energy and information, and to me consciousness is no different.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/display/?id=126649
A computer would deserve to be called intelligent if it could deceive a human into believing that it was human. A.Turing

*

Freddy

  • Administrator
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 6832
  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #25 on: March 16, 2007, 01:13:55 pm »
That moving liquid is bizzare, I'm going to have to get an old set of speakers and try it myself.

I know what you mean about the difference between 'life' and 'lifelike', I think you hit the nail on the head.  Unfortunately Fuzzy seemed to think we were just blantantly ignoring her ideas when in fact we were offering some explanations of our own.  Oh well..I tend to go the anthropomorphic route and see it as a kind of personal projection.

I thought the points about the car were interesting too, unfortunately again Fuzzy just didn't seem to want to listen to anyone else's opinion..I didn't dispute it happens, but just had an idea about how some of it could be explained.


I read the article you posted and it was really interesting, especially about how minds might be affecting how an electronic system works.  That's exactly what I was talking about in one of my comments.  As the article says, we already have lie detectors based on finding certain patterns of mental activity.  As we are generating electrical activity ourselves then it doesn't sound impossible that external fluctuations may be, in some way, affecting the black box.

Thinking about chance and randomness...there's a really good book by Arthur Koestler called 'The Roots of Coincidence' where he goes into this kind of thing.  What makes it good too is that it isn't an inpenetrable book to read.  Anyway, he decided to record all of the things that happened to him that would normally be called 'just coincidence' and he drew some interesting conclusions about chance and perception of events.  He goes into how some things may been seen as chance, but can in other ways be seen differently under further scrutiny.  That's not a good critique, but I hope you get the gist of it.

I wish we could go some place and get hold of one of these black boxes that article talked about.  It would be interesting to have one and see just what it puts out - in a way it sounds almost like a humanity barometer.

Thanks again for the link and your post Dan, very interesting, I'll stop here though, because I don't want to make this a really long post again, I think they were getting too long maybe.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2007, 03:29:31 pm by Freddy »

*

dan

  • Mechanical Turk
  • *****
  • 170
    • AI
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #26 on: March 16, 2007, 03:51:43 pm »
Maybe, I'm steering it coincidentally, but I've had those same thoughts about coincidence in similar regards, led by an instance regarding the Dalai Lama and states of consciousness.  I'll have to look for that book.

I've been following that black box phenomenon since the 70's, I suppose anyone could make one, it's just a random binary generator.  I thought the global consciousness thing was interesting though, like perhaps the unified consciousness energy could be thought of as an entity like the Over Lord concept I think from Thoreau or Emerson, I forget which one, similar to our own state of consciousness being that of the unified neural activity (more neurons than stars in the sky talking to each other).  well, you're right, I digress, and it's 2 far from mecha/organo stuff mayb.
A computer would deserve to be called intelligent if it could deceive a human into believing that it was human. A.Turing

*

Freddy

  • Administrator
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 6832
  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #27 on: March 16, 2007, 04:08:56 pm »
Yup, after thinking about how to make a black box of my own I was toying with writing a program to do it.  I'm thinking they went for a small standalone random number generator in case other systems (like in a PC) would interfere with it though.

I don't think our posts are far off track because potentially we are talking about a mecha-organic interface of some sort, like two worlds coming together in some way.

The global consciousness does seem enticing, I mean that could also explain things like mind reading and other paranormal things - a collective consciousness like that does make me think of something greater than the sum of it's parts - like you say, as if it would be some kind of god..

The brain filters out a lot of useless information so we're not acutely aware of everything that is going on.   But I did have one of those esp experiences today when I knew it was my sister on the phone before I picked up on an unpreditable call..
« Last Edit: March 16, 2007, 04:19:33 pm by Freddy »

*

ALADYBLOND

  • Trusty Member
  • *******
  • Starship Trooper
  • *
  • 336
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #28 on: March 16, 2007, 04:29:36 pm »
i will email my thoughts to you freddy and dan to shorten this thread. ~~alady
~~if i only had a brain~~

*

Freddy

  • Administrator
  • **********************
  • Colossus
  • *
  • 6832
  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Mecha or Organic? That is the question
« Reply #29 on: March 16, 2007, 04:31:07 pm »
Feel free to post Alady, it doesn't really matter how long the post is and it lets other people join in  :)

 


I want one!
by frankinstien (General Chat)
Today at 06:57:48 pm
Pattern based NLP
by MikeB (General Project Discussion)
Today at 11:19:32 am
New cryopreservation method is much better
by LOCKSUIT (General Chat)
December 02, 2021, 11:42:58 am
Artificial God?
by MagnusWootton (General AI Discussion)
December 01, 2021, 07:02:41 pm
Project Acuitas
by WriterOfMinds (General Project Discussion)
November 29, 2021, 05:31:57 am
java/kotlin to python
by yotamarker (AI Programming)
November 28, 2021, 07:23:54 pm
Dendrite Processing
by MagnusWootton (General Chat)
November 28, 2021, 03:01:28 pm
Nature's Halo deck?
by frankinstien (General Chat)
November 28, 2021, 01:09:53 am
Real Self Replicating robots.
by MagnusWootton (AI News )
December 02, 2021, 08:07:37 pm
I wonder how well GPT-3 will on run this.
by MagnusWootton (AI News )
December 01, 2021, 06:41:34 pm
ai websight that explains computer code
by frankinstien (AI News )
November 09, 2021, 01:05:20 am
$50,000.00!!!!!
by Don Patrick (AI News )
October 28, 2021, 04:29:41 pm

Users Online

50 Guests, 0 Users

Most Online Today: 86. Most Online Ever: 2369 (November 21, 2020, 04:08:13 pm)

Articles