Intelligence vis-à-vis AI

From Wikinormous

Contents 1 trinary binary 2 AI, intelligence in appearance 3 Humans, intelligence in appearance? 4 A lot of creativity, but for whom? 5 related

Much effort is put to the creation of artificial intelligence (AI). A great challenge, but there are some issues I believe, where this might run into perpetual contradictions, as it were. At its core are problems with definition of terms. Basically, artificial, suggests some type of ready made outcome, a wanted product or programmed direction. The intelligence behind this "striving for creation" is not done by the "artificiality", but by the intelligence using a tool, e.g. a computer to create and edit a movie or a web page. The computer itself is just a tool albeit greatly advanced and multi-tasking, it’s still just an inanimate instrument. The art (ars 'skill') is done by the user (facere 'to make' 'do'), not the tool ('vis-à-vis' unintentionally resonates with face, interface etc. Shouldn't we perhaps verbify 'artificial', maybe 'to artface', 'artiface'?). There is certainly enormous intelligence behind our tools, methods and techniques but it has come from the skills of the creator. I am not focusing here on what is, but what is not yet. Novelty.

trinary binary

What any tool, gadget or instrument thus far (as far as I know) does not have, is the void, the not-have, the novelty potential (we can have discussions on other types of innate intelligences of course). Our binary computer language is on to something when we talk of the zero, the absence, but as far as I can tell, this absence is not "real", it is just an expression or a symbol for the mechanical devise for a computer to communicate. It is a smart way of doing communication with either-or, on-off. Nothing novel comes out of that "off". Unless we add what the creative user actually is doing when writing, drawing or singing. Combining something with something and creates what a moment ago did not exist, 'nothing'. A triangulation, where at least two inputs are resonating so a third, a brainchild comes into being. Which naturally resonates with the creation of life between father and mother.

A comment in Swedish addressing the vis-à-vis

I Marko Rodin's binary triplet (och många andras väl så kända treenighet), skapas "novelty". Kvinna och man skapar nytt liv. Kreativitet finner lösningar på problem, eller bringar fram konst, klanger, nya färger. Det är inte "den vanliga" dualiteten jag pratar om. Det binära här är en förenkling, den skall ses som en symbol för otal inspirationskällor som kombinerat skapar en helt ny, en tredje. Det är detta som är förutsättningen för liv. Det är detta som blir en oändlig potential. Den är oändlig inte för att de "redan finns", utan för att de inte finns. Det är DU som är förutsättningen för den tredje "noveltyn". Men du måste vara öppen och nyfiket strävar efter den, annars kan den aldrig komma till existens. Du kan heller aldrig låta någon annan göra denna åt dig. Då blir det en produkt, påtvingad eller liknöjt serverad. Frågan är, tycker vi att samhället verkar för denna "novelty", eller känns det som vi lever i en rundgång, en loop, en ändlig industri? Kan vi ana att rädsla är det som stänger ett annars öppet flöde? Binary triplet, eller trinärt datorsystem, är fö den troliga lösningen på A.I. Först när du ger datorn förutsättningen att skapa novelty "själv" (vi kan kalla potentialen för absens, eller "nollan"), inte som idag "programerad", kan vi tala om riktig artificiell intelligens. Vilket då faktiskt inte borde heta artificiell längre, utan bara, intelligens. oscar berven on Leif Erlingsson's web log Intelligentsians Blockering

AI, intelligence in appearance

When we see and experience AI in computer games or in more advanced robots we see a programmed intelligence, in fact artificial. We interact with a multitude of combinations, ever increasing, but it is not based on infinite potential, let's say what maybe a quantum computer could do. So if we want real intelligence we must put the triangulation potential into the machine. I believe it is indeed possible and makes no contradiction that "it", the machine, in itself being artificial. Aren't human bodies also machines?

Humans, intelligence in appearance?

Is it not "what I do" that defines "who I am"? Rather than how I look or smell, or other bodily features? (Though what I do to my body can change the appearance of "me".) I think we can see ourselves as extraordinary machines. The intelligence that flows in and out is the real marvel. But I sense a great danger. The input output (I/O) is very much defined today what the market tells us, the school system, economy, cable TV, computer games, politics, conventions etc etc ... I frankly see a programmed reality, no matter if we inherently posses real potential triangulation or not. The real creativity and novelty can never be dictated on to you, then it will be forfeit. It is of essence that everybody grab hold to one's own I/O, to avoid the grave risk of being programmed. No matter if it is a Big Idea, a New World Order behind it or not, you mustn't surrender Your novelty potential.

A lot of creativity, but for whom?

All professions and workplaces have a lot of creativity going on, not just presumed ones. One important aspect no matter if one works at Pixar, State Department or Clean Away, is the motive. The 'On whose behalf are you being creative' question. All the schemes, profit incentives, strategies and agendas in creating for example an entertaining film ties into the programming issue, the I/O.

"In latter times I think that artists and writers have allowed themselves to be sold down the river. They have accepted the prevailing belief that art, that writing are merely forms of entertainment. They are not seen as transformative forces that can change a human being, that can change a society ... It is not the job of artists to give the audience what the audience want. If the audience knew what they needed, then they wouldn't be the audience. They would be the artist." Alan Moore

related

• Monica Anderson, a computer science researcher, developer and programmer on her website Artificial-Intuition.com (AN, Artificial iNtuition)

• Jim Elvidge's www.theuniversesolved.com on programmed reality, singularities, transhumanism, AI etc. Also interview on red ice creations

• Artificial General Intelligence Research Institute a wiki

• Unknown internet 2: Could the net become self-aware? Michael Brooks

• The Trivium Gnostic Media interview with Gene Odening