And we meet a robot built to be so sentient that its creators hope it will one day have a consciousness, and a life, all its own. Growth and evolution instead of production and design 1. It would also be interesting see how the Turing test stands up to a less sophisticated first grader. I'm sad you guys didn't touch on Watson, the Jeopardy experiment! In 1998 I was an Air Force cadet with the 520th training wing at Cornell. ...there was a trilogy of movies you may have seen called The Matrix that played with some of those ideas..." Yawn... i won't ruin the ending for people who haven't seen it, but he does get quite attached to it, even though he knows it's a robot, at a certain point he forgets or at least becomes convinced that it doesn't matter that she's not human.
In 2006, Robert Epstein decided to turn to his computer for some help finding a date. In the Memory & Forgetting episode I learned just how literally creative memory is, and how essential it is to our imagination (and identity). The issue, it seems to me, is not how human the machines are, but the capacity of the machines to invoke our hard-wired interpersonal neurology. Also, early on you talked about how you would want some sort of a label for these machines that could think and act and speak like people, because they wouldn't be. During this time we had standing written orders that furbies were not allowed on military bases and so to our wing offices. The moments where I actually learn something are getting fewer and further between. My grandfather went to the Antarctic with Robert Falcon Scott. Human Computer Interaction is not the same as Artificial Intelligence.
Thanks so much for show, Rosemary Moore I tried both Cleverbot and Eliza and both were quite dissappointing. I just tried to have a normal chat and tell them a little about my self. It's an interesting perspective, but rather than just protesting that it "feels" wrong or insufficient, Krulwich could have taken a moment to tell listeners that behaviorism has been largely supplanted by cognitivism in modern science, which has shown that mental states do correspond with physiological states in the brain - and that these are qualitatively and quantitatively very different from what is going on inside the Furby. He has obviously dedicated himself to his work with the same passion he showed for performance. Listening to Caleb Chung talk about how machines like Furby and humans are both alive made me think about B. Here is my conversation with Cleverbot: Cleverbot: Are you a clone? It seemed to me that the only distinction of human thought is that we do not completely understand it."If I had all of the necessary parts to make a Furby, I could assemble them to working order.
I think I person would have to be quite desperate for company to have several hour conversations with either of them, but especially with cleverbot. This episode could have really benefitted from an interview with Dan Dennett, and for the last story, you danced around the "Chinese Room" problem but never actually addressed it, which is an important concept in AI that would have bolstered the argument Krulwich was trying to make. If I had all of the proper organs and body parts of a human and I sewed them together like Frankenstien, I could not bring that human to life." Actually, what you're missing in both cases is a power source.
I think if ever there is any hope of ending up with a significantly conscious and sentient computer , it will have to contain biomimetic carbon nanotubes. It was very funny though and the fact cyberbot grows with knowledge every day is rather exciting Another attempt to interview cleverbot:me: Did you hear about radiolab? The second question is can machines experience human emotion.
Since having a complex carbonnanotube computer is some ways away, maybe one could achieve a conscious computer by having the computer embedded within the larger carbon nanotube structure. There is a documentary about his studies, titled "Mechanical Love".
Who are we to say that another form of machine could never attain that? In the future, when we will be able to build such machines, we would first need to learn and understand new life division - Organical Life Form and Artificial Life Form, which is still Life, though extending in a totally different way. We need to remember, that when artifical machines become sentient life forms, when we turn on a machine, we loose any privileges to it - it is its own master. Your response has incorrect punctuation in it, which proves my assertion. I heard from my brother (who is teaching English in China) that a common technique to make an oral examiner think you are more fluent than you are is this: you memorize large scripted stories full of idiomatic phrases, and then learn certain 'segue' keywords to direct the conversation into your memorized script.
As a result of this program (and the comments) I've begun to understand 'bots as "books - literature - with conversational access". Cleverbot: How was my response grammatically incorrect? Jon's experience with Bina is a good example of how effective this is.
A moving story about a Vietnam vet brother coming from her mouth NEEDS TO BE TALKED ABOUT BECAUSE HOW DID THE TECHNOLOGY OF ROBOT COME up with that? Most fascinating since it's a step beyond robot answering who is Hillary Clinton. Customer service, health insurance, law, finance, education ... listening to this podcast I was on Facebook and saw this status of a 16 year old that I know: "So I'm cleaning my room at 2 in the morning (don't ask why but at least my mom should be happy that I'm even cleaning it) and I am going through this box and I see my ferbie... I honestly thought it was gonna murder me." Thought it was fitting. He taught a workshop on falling, jumping and physical applications of mime and clowning. Chung is accurate when suggesting that machines are just as alive as humans. Skinners "Beyond Freedom and Dignity" book to get a better outlook. Krulwich's assertion that interacting with a robot isn't "real." If a human being is programmed to respond or feel because of past behavioral reinforcement histories, is that any more real that a computer generated response doing the same thing. User: He was brought up amidst the war in Vietnam and although surrounded by the devastation of his homeland he committed his life to peace in the world. The key question that never got answered (I think that they do this on purpose, dancing all around it tantalizingly) is whether we are alive.
Instead the commentators just marveled at it in a way that excluded listener. a series of checklists and calculated gradations to categorize and direct a set of tasks. are we making machines smarter or dumbing down the rest of society so that they fit in better? The Furby thing is interesting, but the discussion with Caleb Chung could have benefitted from just another 30 seconds of digging into his argument - it's rooted in the kind of thinking that underlies behaviorism, a theory of mind that was cutting edge in the first half of the last century. I am very happy to hear that he has found a vocation where his study of human gesture has been put to such good use. From a behaviorist perspective, love, hate, thinking, freedom, etc," are conceptual labels that we use to describe a behavioral set. If this is the case then any programmer could replicate a behavioral set to produce the construct. Our affinity to feel "real" does not lie outside of ourselves but rather is interpreted internally! Chris Fernandes, LMHCBehavioral Psychotherapist Thank you again for a wonderful show. That is, from a completely materialistic pov, once we totally understand how our own brains work, will we be able to say that we are any more alive than a program that we also understand completely.