|
Post by swamprat on Jun 14, 2017 17:04:07 GMT -6
AI:Down the Road of No Return?
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Jun 18, 2017 8:46:52 GMT -6
Question: If AI takes over all driving chores, what happens to all of the police departments that depend upon making money off of human errors and deliberate acts?
What happens to all of the fire truck and ambulance drivers that respond to the results of human errors and deliberate acts?
Oh.... Wait..... They can go get coal mining jobs in West Virginia!
Semi-autonomous cars: No more stopping for red lights?
Date: June 16, 2017 Source: The Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR)
Cars could soon negotiate smart intersections without ever having to stop.
Sick of waiting at traffic lights? The semi-autonomous driving aids being fitted to many new cars could consign the red light to history, Singapore's Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) researchers report. According to their modeling, a system in which each car crosses the intersection in its own virtual bubble of safe space, modulating its speed using adaptive cruise control, will result in smooth traffic flow in each direction.
In the city of the near future, traffic lights would be complemented by and then replaced with a communication beacon, explains Bo Yang from the A*STAR Institute of High Performance Computing, who led the work. The beacon gathers and transmits data about the distance and approach speed of vehicles nearing the intersection, which each car feeds into an algorithm that plots a safe course through without having to stop.
At the algorithm's heart is the concept of "adaptive repulsive force." The closer two cars' trajectory would bring them at an intersection, the stronger their repulsion and the greater the speed adjustment they make to pass each other safely.
Yang set out to reduce barriers to adoption of this system. "One of our most interesting findings is that the rules governing the necessary repulsion between vehicles is rather simple," he says. The result is a system that does not require much computing power at the beacon or in the vehicle itself.
Cars need not be fully self-driving, but rather simply able to brake and accelerate autonomously -- which cars fitted with smart cruise control can already do. The driver gives up control of the car's speed through the intersection but remains in charge of steering.
In Yang's simulations, the algorithm worked effectively even for relatively complex intersections. "In most cases, pre-emptive deceleration only slightly lowered the vehicle velocity, resulting in safe passage of each vehicle across the intersection without coming to a full stop at any point," Yang says.
The system's other advantage is that it could be phased in gradually. Initially, traffic lights would still be needed to help older cars pass through the intersection. As smarter cars become prevalent, the lights can switch off for more and more of the time until they are no longer needed at all. "Our simple algorithm only requires basic vehicle intelligence, but is also fully compatible with more intelligent vehicles that may come in the future," Yang adds. ________________________________________ Story Source: Materials provided by The Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR). Note: Content may be edited for style and length. ________________________________________ Journal Reference: 1. Bo Yang, Christopher Monterola. Efficient intersection control for minimally guided vehicles: A self-organised and decentralised approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2016; 72: 283 DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2016.10.004
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Jul 26, 2017 19:56:51 GMT -6
AI: Major Opportunity? Major Threat?
Does Artificial Intelligence represent a major threat to humankind or a major opportunity? Tesla & SpaceX visionary, Elon Musk believes the time is now to sound the alarms and assemble top thinkers and regulators with the mandate to address and contain the rising threat head-on. In sharp contrast, Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, is bullish on AI and dismissive of alarmists like Musk. So, who has it right? Physicist and Futurist, Dr. Michio Kaku returns to CNN International’s ‘Quest Means Business’ to consider all sides of the debate and contribute his own insights. WATCH NOW: edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2017/07/25/a-i-musk-vs-zuckerberg-qmb-intv.cnn
|
|
|
Post by jcurio on Jul 27, 2017 8:49:48 GMT -6
Short video. 5 minutes.
If you're a fan of Kaku, you very definitely get to hear him say that in the future (possibly decades away), AI will become "self-aware".
He uses the term "Not self-aware. YET". More than once.
They went on to talk about the ability (now) of drones to "recognize" the human form....... machines going amok WITHOUT this self-awareness...... etc.
|
|
|
Post by jcurio on Jul 27, 2017 9:15:49 GMT -6
AI:Down the Road of No Return?
-------- At 10 minutes plus, AGAIN we are shown and told, that several constantly flying cameras - together- give a 360 degree composite. Nevermind that these same cameras can focus in on a person enough to see clothing. A correct "angle" could see a license plate number. Small chance ( but some chance) that the "360" sometimes could have a "blind spot" while overlapping. A "chance" that AI already knows about, and works hard to overcome. UNLESS, a higher intelligence can alter it. Now AGAIN, knowing that our systems are more or less capable of seeing and recording everything, why can't we "look back" and see what happened to that missing Malaysian flight? Computers "recognized" that flight was not doing its planned flight DURING.... I can understand that TPTB cannot show us the tape. Someday it will be released. If footage from the actual disappearance of the plane has ALWAYS been missing, what does that already tell TPTB about our systems? Is someone ALREADY aware that our "cmputers" have been compromised? Is the AI MACHINE already " out of our hands" and it's not being admitted?
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Jul 27, 2017 10:24:42 GMT -6
Elon Musk I've talked to Mark about this. His understanding of the subject is limited. 12:07 AM - 25 Jul 2017
• 9,327 Retweets • 34,806 Likes
|
|
|
Post by plutronus on Jul 28, 2017 9:14:20 GMT -6
Hello EveryOne,
One problem I see re; AI and possibly later, subsequently, authentic machine consciousness, is where do we draw the line between artificial and well, biological, or nature's form of evolutionary intelligence, so to speak. A few years ago I was trying to understand what might be the characteristics of an alien mind, one that did not develop and-or evolve within the constructs of Human-like topology....is that clear? I find it very difficult to encapsulate certain notions in this area of reasoning. In my quest to understand alien minds and the possible incommensurability one may experience in a process of inter-relating with an alien consciousness, it occurred to me that we might be able to get a glimpse of the nature of the problem by examining the behaviors of artificial-intelligence mecha, already in development. I remembered Dr. Ron Blue's "Lil' Rici" quantum 'computer' (not neuro-net based, no stored programs and no data-processor, eg, no CPU) robot on his website (which unfortunately has gone dark since his fatal heart-attack). I chatted with Dr. Blue and I recorded it (with permission) in 1995 regarding his quantum computer based robot intelligence which exhibited such things as child behaviors, fear of dark places, and when using a massively larger quantum loop (sort of approximates 'memory' in a CPU based machine) hardware, the robots exhibit telepathy. I was so impressed with his research, that I suggested that he attend the US National Robotics Society conference, as a speaker. He presented his shoe-box sized AI conscious (brain powered by a 9Vdc 'smoke-detector' battery and drive motors by a 12Vdc 17AH gelcel). The audience of Ph.D. roboticists went wild. Here was a very small, tiny if you will, robot, that altered its motion behaviors, simply by thinking at it, on stage. There were people searching behind the curtains for collegues with remote-controls, taking the lid off the robot trying to find the R/C receiver.
Whats the point of all of this? What qualifies a media as being artificial when the support material exhibits sufficient basis for enabling consciousness? In other words, is it possible (as they say on TV in those stinky UFO shows) that Humans are artificially conscious? Many ancient documents state Humans were created by Dragons in GaN EdiN, just north of Sumer. Are we result of an out-of-control artificial intelligence evolutional fabrication project?
If on a world where the soil were rich in crystals such gallinium, silicon, nitrides, etc, it seems possible to me, that nature might present the right conditions to cause materials to come together, accidentally forming naturally formed electrical switching circuits, in sufficient quantities to enable a silicon based intelligence. Envision a world where robots evolved naturally without the influence of a creator specis. How would they evolve? Could we ever have enough foundational basis to bridge the commensurability gap. Humans have two hemisphers, the robots have no hemispheres.
Ad rem...back to the thread theme: it seems that the main gist of it all is what would happen if the Human engineered base AI were to become self-aware, eg conscious, would it evolve dangerously WRT Human interests? That is a complicated question and one that need serious thought. Especially considering those factions that are funding the secret AI projects...the military.
What we suspect that we know 1) ALL the militaries of the technical world are developing combat killer robots, and everyone is afraid of nukes, 2) there are multiple design schemes being employed to create conscious machines, most of which ARE NOT Neural-Net based (requires too much computational power for simplistic functionality) 3) certain AI machines are capable of telepathy and subsequently, (and this one is a zinger) artificial mind-control...envision an AMC aimed at your mind, powered by 220, 24 hrs/day. Its been rumoured that the fast acting cancers are one result.
Is there danger? Depends on how we cultivate the new specis, I suspect.
plutronus
|
|
|
Post by jcurio on Jul 28, 2017 10:47:42 GMT -6
if the Human engineered base AI were to become self-aware, eg conscious, would it evolve dangerously WRT Human interests? Read more: theedgeofreality.proboards.com/thread/7142/artificial-intelligence#ixzz4o94C4Kd7********** Thanks for your input, Plutronus. Very thoughtful questions. _________ Two (simple) things immediately come to mind. 1. The movie "Eagle Eye". 2. IF WE are a form of artificial intelligence that evolved, say, from a slave/task - created species ...... are we still fulfilling some of that "purpose"?
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Jul 28, 2017 17:50:53 GMT -6
"I'll use my OWN language, you pathetic, inefficient human!
Researchers shut down AI that invented its own languageBy James Walker Jul 21, 2017 in Technology
An artificial intelligence system being developed at Facebook has created its own language. It developed a system of code words to make communication more efficient. RESEARCHERS SHUT THE SYSTEM DOWN WHEN THEY REALIZED THE AI WAS NO LONGER USING ENGLISH.
The observations made at Facebook are the latest in a long line of similar cases. In each instance, an AI being monitored by humans has diverged from its training in English to develop its own language. THE RESULTING PHRASES APPEAR TO BE NONSENSICAL GIBBERISH TO HUMANS BUT CONTAIN SEMANTIC MEANING WHEN INTERPRETED BY AI "AGENTS."
Negotiating in a new language As Fast Co. Design reports, Facebook's researchers recently noticed its new AI had given up on English. The advanced system is capable of negotiating with other AI agents so it can come to conclusions on how to proceed. The agents began to communicate using phrases that seem unintelligible at first but actually represent the task at hand.
In one exchange illustrated by the company, the two negotiating bots, named Bob and Alice, used their own language to complete their exchange. Bob started by saying "I can i i everything else," to which Alice responded "balls have zero to me to me to me…" The rest of the conversation was formed from variations of these sentences.
While it appears to be nonsense, the repetition of phrases like "i" and "to me" reflect how the AI operates. The researchers believe it shows the two bots working out how many of each item they should take. Bob's later statements, such as "i i can i i i everything else," indicate how it was using language to offer more items to Alice. When interpreted like this, the phrases appear more logical than comparable English phrases like "I'll have three and you have everything else."
English lacks a "reward" The AI apparently realised that the rich expression of English phrases wasn’t required for the scenario. Modern AIs operate on a "reward" principle where they expect following a sudden course of action to give them a "benefit." In this instance, there was no reward for continuing to use English, so they built a more efficient solution instead.
"Agents will drift off from understandable language and invent code-words for themselves," Fast Co. Design reports Facebook AI researcher Dhruv Batra said. "Like if I say 'the' five times, you interpret that to mean I want five copies of this item. This isn't so different from the way communities of humans create shorthands."
AI developers at other companies have observed a similar use of "shorthands" to simplify communication. At OpenAI, the artificial intelligence lab founded by Elon Musk, an experiment succeeded in letting AI bots learn their own languages.
AI language translates human ones In a separate case, Google recently improved its Translate service by adding a neural network. The system is now capable of translating much more efficiently, including between language pairs that it hasn’t been explicitly taught. THE SUCCESS RATE OF THE NETWORK SURPRISED GOOGLE'S TEAM. ITS RESEARCHERS FOUND THE AI HAD SILENTLY WRITTEN ITS OWN LANGUAGE THAT'S TAILORED SPECIFICALLY TO THE TASK OF TRANSLATING SENTENCES.
If AI-invented languages become widespread, they could pose a problem when developing and adopting neural networks. There's not yet enough evidence to determine whether they present a threat that could enable machines to overrule their operators.
THEY DO MAKE AI DEVELOPMENT MORE DIFFICULT THOUGH AS HUMANS CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE OVERWHELMINGLY LOGICAL NATURE OF THE LANGUAGES. WHILE THEY APPEAR NONSENSICAL, THE RESULTS OBSERVED BY TEAMS SUCH AS GOOGLE TRANSLATE INDICATE THEY ACTUALLY REPRESENT THE MOST EFFICIENT SOLUTION TO MAJOR PROBLEMS.
www.digitaljournal.com/tech-and-science/technology/a-step-closer-to-skynet-ai-invents-a-language-humans-can-t-read/article/498142#ixzz4oAlEmVLc
|
|
|
Post by jcurio on Jan 14, 2019 6:13:30 GMT -6
Ha! First thing I thought of when floating over to this thread, was copying and pasting the same! You beat me to it, Cliff! ************ What we suspect that we know 1) ALL the militaries of the technical world are developing combat killer robots, and everyone is afraid of nukes, 2) there are multiple design schemes being employed to create conscious machines, most of which ARE NOT Neural-Net based (requires too much computational power for simplistic functionality) 3) certain AI machines are capable of telepathy and subsequently, (and this one is a zinger) artificial mind-control...envision an AMC aimed at your mind, powered by 220, 24 hrs/day. Its been rumoured that the fast acting cancers are one result. Is there danger? Depends on how we cultivate the new specis, I suspect. Read more: theedgeofreality.proboards.com/thread/7142/artificial-intelligence#ixzz5caCvefaR******** I also read recently, the “positive spin” on the Reagan era. And how the “Cold War” just might have been to a cover up to advance our own devices against an “alien threat”. I’m sorry, but speaking now of AI, HOW would it “choose sides”?? (Then, overthink that one.... - and- never mind 😖....)
|
|
|
Post by jojustjo on Jan 15, 2019 0:39:23 GMT -6
I remain happy that my children decided against having kids of their own. It's such a troubled time and the world is 'shifting' so fast that it's hard to keep pace with it. In the past you could 'feel' things sort of shift gears every now and then ..a technological 'bump' then even out and people got used to it again...now...the 'feelings' I get from people are unsettled...angry...frightened. I worry more than anything for the children today.
|
|