Chazz wrote:Ahem, bud, balls don't have stems for one thing.
How far does artificial intelligence have to come, before it could be classified as "alive"? Alive meaning concious.(sic)
Chazz of Blades wrote:New debate topic: How far does artificial intelligence have to come, before it could be classified as "alive"? Alive meaning conscious.
Xargoth wrote:I would Alan almost hits the mark on realness http://www.a-i.com/alan1/ On alicebot, if you ask her a question, or tell her something, it goes like this: "You: I want to hammer a piece of gum into a wall. ALICE: You said, 'you want to hammer a piece of gum into a wall'? You: Yes, I did. ALICE: have fun then." Whereas alan just says, "Ummm, ok then." Alan is better, and very close to human, I know it is all choice and effect, but isn't that how we think? Some one tells me that he is gonna whack me, I tell him that he "might" regret it. we learn by cause and effect, as do these bots, we just have the ability to add effect to our knowledge basses, they don't, but could someday. Which is really creepy.
Wolf wrote:I don't care how advanced. A machine will never be close to a human, nor animal, nor bug, nor cell. It is never going to be alive in my opinion. To be alive you must have true emotions. I don't care what the scientists say, I believe: No true emotions, you are not living. By true emotions I mean nonprogramed emotions, ones that come on there own.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests