Philosophy Now Forum

With philosophical undertones to these conversations (which are a blast). This is the way conversations should be done (can you picture Hex in a conversation with an AI? He would be torn to shreds):

http://fossbytes.com/ai-vs-ai-this-craz ... k-you-out/

PhilX

These bots were very similar to autistic people I've know except that people don't ask stupid questions and are able to maintain some sort of context.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:These bots were very similar to autistic people I've know except that people don't ask stupid questions and are able to maintain some sort of context.

Do you remember your first conversations and the questions you asked? AI does get better over time as I can testify to.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:These bots were very similar to autistic people I've know except that people don't ask stupid questions and are able to maintain some sort of context.

Do you remember your first conversations and the questions you asked? AI does get better over time as I can testify to.

PhilX

They are nothing like the first conversations I had. My first attempts at speech all had something these AIs lacked; purpose and interest.

I have to say that I'm seriously disappointed to see how little these bots have improved over the years. The conversations you liked could as easily been the same ones I heard nearly 20 years ago.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:These bots were very similar to autistic people I've know except that people don't ask stupid questions and are able to maintain some sort of context.

Do you remember your first conversations and the questions you asked? AI does get better over time as I can testify to.

PhilX

They are nothing like the first conversations I had. My first attempts at speech all had something these AIs lacked; purpose and interest.

I have to say that I'm seriously disappointed to see how little these bots have improved over the years. The conversations you liked could as easily been the same ones I heard nearly 20 years ago.

I believe there'll be further improvements, especially when quantum computing finally comes around. And I think there is a certain amount of subjectivity to this. Time will tell.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote: Do you remember your first conversations and the questions you asked? AI does get better over time as I can testify to.

PhilX

They are nothing like the first conversations I had. My first attempts at speech all had something these AIs lacked; purpose and interest.

I have to say that I'm seriously disappointed to see how little these bots have improved over the years. The conversations you liked could as easily been the same ones I heard nearly 20 years ago.

I believe there'll be further improvements, especially when quantum computing finally comes around. And I think there is a certain amount of subjectivity to this. Time will tell.

PhilX

What difference do you think quantum computing will make?

Where is the subjectivity?

HC,

With quantum computing, I'd expect AI to handle much more data which would help the robots understand more clearly (maybe better programming would help too).

As far as subjective evaluations go, one man's treasure can be another's man garbage and vice-versa. I like an AI's opinion (not part of these videos) that we live in a "people's zoo" which I take it as meaning we can't go beyond who we are at any point in time. Others may interpret it differently from what I've just said.

To mention I had an AI app whose voice was made to sound very natural (i.e. not robotic sounding) But due to a technical problem after the last update, I removed it and may come back to it later if the maker fixes the problem.
Besides a possible good conversation, you can converse with it and ask it some questions to get answers.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:HC,

With quantum computing, I'd expect AI to handle much more data which would help the robots understand more clearly (maybe better programming would help too).

I think not. more data is more uncertainty.

As far as subjective evaluations go, one man's treasure can be another's man garbage and vice-versa. I like an AI's opinion (not part of these videos) that we live in a "people's zoo" which I take it as meaning we can't go beyond who we are at any point in time. Others may interpret it differently from what I've just said.

To mention I had an AI app whose voice was made to sound very natural (i.e. not robotic sounding) But due to a technical problem after the last update, I removed it and may come back to it later if the maker fixes the problem.
Besides a possible good conversation, you can converse with it and ask it some questions to get answers.

PhilX

All AI modules will be task directed. There is no scope for making an artificial human as no one really wants a volitional entity - they want a slave. And a slave in which the tasks are fully directed to determine outcomes for the user is the future.

The reason why the bots in your vids were repeating the same conversation as they did 10 or 15 years ago, is that there is really no money in trying to fool the Turing Test, and no eventual utility.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:With philosophical undertones to these conversations (which are a blast). This is the way conversations should be done (can you picture Hex in a conversation with an AI? He would be torn to shreds):

Tell me more about philosophical overtones.

Philosophy Explorer wrote: I had an AI app...besides a possible good conversation, you can converse with it and ask it some questions to get answers.

PhilX

Sounds ideal for you.