Will computers eventually outsmart people?

[matt-browne-sfw]

Computers become faster every year. Computers can store more and more data every year. Eventually all mp3 files that exist somewhere on our planet will fit on a memory chip that we carry inside our wristwatches. Okay, that's all hardware related. For computers to become smart you need software. Well, you need very good software. How can it be created? Will reverse engineering of the human brain help? Or will reasonable good software at some point make further improvements without our help? Evolve on its own? Should we allow evolutionary algorithms to develop into true artificial intelligence... Survival of the fittest?

I know many people shudder at the prospect, while others say it's not feasible anyway, so no need to worry. What do you think?

Here's an interesting quote from a very intelligent and well-known physicist:

"Some people say that computers can never show true intelligence, whatever that may be. But it seems to me that if very complicated chemical molecules can operate in humans to make them intelligent, then equally complicated electronic circuits can also make computers act in an intelligent way. And if they are intelligent, they can presumably design computers that have even greater complexity and intelligence." -- Stephen Hawking

[Fake Vencar]

Computers will only outsmart people if people let them, if indeed these 'complicated electronic circuits' will ever be formed. Computers are stupid; they can only do what ever you tell them to do, including what viruses do.

[dustinzgirl]

It is very possible to create a software system that learns and remembers the way a human brain does. Its actually a pretty simple idea, mapping the functions of the brain, minus the hormonal changes, and apply that to a software program. The only problem is that we don't yet have the technology capable of completing the vision. We will someday. Technically, computers are smarter than people now anyways, they can remember and complete functions we can not do without the computer...but, the computer needs human input, so the real trick is creating a computer software program that does not need human input.

Skynet, anyone?

[Fake Vencar]

Sounds like Data off Star Trek. Incredibly brain, no hormones. Until someones gives them some.

Skynet!!! No!!!!

[PTeppic]

I was "studying" neural networks and pattern recognition (admittedly by missing 80% of the classes!) almost 15 years ago and I suppose they've made some developments since then! From my random ponderings on the subject (running 3-4 miles 3-4 times a week gives a sci-fi addict plenty of time to think about things) the key is perhaps not how to make computers "learn" but to take the philosophical or biophysics step backwards to determine what is the intelligence we're trying to replicate. Assuming we want to.

As mentioned, computers are stupendously good at calculating, in both senses: they are fantastically fast at the most complex calculations, if they know what it is they're supposed to be doing. Though can ironically make fundamental mistakes due to errors in hardware or software and aren't necessarily any good at spotting it. But so are inexperienced humans. But is that intelligence? They're awesome at memory - but what about recollection? I guess indexing technologies are on the rise. But still not intelligence. Even "pure" learning isn't the key: as I understand it you pretty much have to programme neural nets very specifically about the problem domain before they can learn on their own... whereas the human brain can simply learn the whole thing: that there is a problem, determine the domain, the rules and how to succeed in them. It's that associativity that we're probably still some way from. But it will only be time.

[pyan]

In one very specific way, a computer has already proved it was smarter than a human - when IBM's chess computer Deep Blue beat the then world champion Gary Kasparov 3.5-2.5 in 1997.

IBM Deep Blue - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[The Ace]

Give them a scratchcard.

[pyan]

LOL, Ace - that should do it!

[dustinzgirl]

Originally Posted by The Ace

Give them a scratchcard.

Agent Smith found that hilarious.

[tangaloomababe]

Gosh mine often outsmarts me already!!!!!!!!!

[iansales]

Originally Posted by pyan

In one very specific way, a computer has already proved it was smarter than a human - when IBM's chess computer Deep Blue beat the then world champion Gary Kasparov 3.5-2.5 in 1997.

But that's not really smarter, though, is it? All the computer does is work through every possible combination of moves resulting from its opponent's move, and chooses the best one according to a rule-set written by... a human.

Computers can process data faster than humans, but where they have to laboriously work through every data item, the human brain can shortcut the process - either through recognising a pattern, using experience, or even from "intuition".

I don't think computers will ever be "smarter" than humans. If true AI is ever achieved - and we need to know a lot more than we do about the brain before computers can become more than just sophisticated adding machines that can mimic some of the characteristics of a human - if true AI is ever achieved, then it will result in something that bears so little resemblance to human intelligence that no comparison will be really possible.

[TK-421]

Anyone see 2001: A Space Odyssey????

[iansales]

Er, that's not real, you know.

[tangaloomababe]

Give it time!!!!!!!

[iansales]

You might not have noticed but 2001 was 6 years ago :-)