Path: news.net.uni-c.dk!newsfeeds.net.uni-c.dk!newsfeed1.uni2.dk!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!news.uunet.ca!nntp.igs.net!news.igs.net!not-for-mail From: "donald tees" Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets,comp.lang.apl,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.beta,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.dylan,comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Einstein's Riddle Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 18:39:00 -0500 Organization: IGS - Information Gateway Services Lines: 86 Message-ID: <98ovep$4dm$1@news.igs.net> References: <3AACB567.A59B8497@Azonic.co.nz> <3AACE6CF.7F05484D@ieee.org> <0W8r6.178$fo5.14165@news.get2net.dk> <3AAD60F3.120F284A@ieee.org> <3AAE371A.2F9F596F@brazee.net> <98m43a$fe2$1@localhost.localdomain> <3AAEAD1A.BCDE11DB@ix.netcom.com> <98mugg$2mj$1@news.igs.net> <3AAF8163.EFB87962@brazee.net> <3AAFC102.37293B19@ieee.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: ttyc08.kw.igs.net X-Trace: news.igs.net 984613145 4534 216.58.99.136 (14 Mar 2001 23:39:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@igs.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Mar 2001 23:39:05 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: news.net.uni-c.dk comp.ai.neural-nets:67597 comp.lang.apl:29416 comp.lang.awk:17191 comp.lang.beta:12777 comp.lang.cobol:102688 comp.lang.dylan:24200 comp.lang.forth:78603 I'd agree with you entirely that one of the most difficult problems of "AI" is motivation, or rather self-motivation. I would consider any entity without at least the illusion of free will as "not intelligent". That is one of the reasons that dictionary definitions of intelligence are not very useful ... they are always couched in terms of human actions. However. It is quite undeniable that a cat or dog do exhibit all those characteristics that we include in the word intelligence, regardless of the fact that either may be not very intelligent by human standards. That is why the Turing testis so valuable ... it does not even try to define the word. It simply states that if a computer can fool a human for an indefinite period of time, then the computer is exhibiting what Turing called "artificial" intelligence. The definitions you quote, I would not consider valuable to the discussion. Replace the Turing test "communication device" with E-mail, or even Usenet, and the test remains intact, and valuable. I think man simply a bootstrap for silicon intelligence. After all, software not only has the ability to travel at the speed of light, but also the potential for immortality. I wonder if DNA is written in Cobol? ... Naw, probably not that old. "Jerry Avins" wrote in message news:3AAFC102.37293B19@ieee.org... > Howard Brazee wrote: > > > > donald tees wrote: > > > > > > But the Turing Test only checks whether the program can imitate the > > > > particular forms of stupidity common to human beings. It doesn't work > > > > as an intelligence test. > > > > > > Sure it does. If you take that line, then the only logical endpoint is that > > > there is no such thing as intelligence (which may be true). > > > > Only if you define "intelligence" as "human like". It may take some AI to > > emulate a person, but there are much better tests. > > > > 1 a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal > > with new or trying situations : REASON; also : the > > skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply > > knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to > > think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as > > tests) b Christian Science : the basic eternal quality > > of divine Mind c : mental acuteness : SHREWDNESS > > 2 a : an intelligent entity; especially : ANGEL b : > > intelligent minds or mind > > 3 : the act of understanding : COMPREHENSION > > 4 a : INFORMATION, NEWS b : information > > concerning an enemy or possible enemy or an area; > > also : an agency engaged in obtaining such > > information > > 5 : the ability to perform computer functions > > > > Well, #5 is easy. Most computers can do this. #1 requires that a program learn > > from its mistakes. Programs have been written to do this. The intelligence > > level can be very low - but it is still there. > > > > So AI exists. And as computing gets better, there will be some things which > > the computer's AI does better than human NI. (I just made up "NI", I don't know > > if it has been used elsewhere). There is no measurable goal which says we have > > arrived. > > I suggest, for reasons that I can't clearly articulate, that in order > for an entity to act intelligently (rather than imitate intelligence), > it must *care* about an outcome, and it must exhibit consciousness. > There is good reason to believe that consciousness in animals is a > byproduct of the need to move about in, and know one's position in, an > external environment. Whether consciousness can be constructed without > that basis in machines is an open question. > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.