Does Siri, or Cortana, actually know anything - and, can they remember what you asked?
We may not all perceive intelligence the same way. In an attempt to better understand Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) it may be better to ask; does a machine know anything - instead of asking, is it intelligent.
Comments (18)
Is "everything" stored on a hard drive - or, can flash drives, cloud storage, or other things - be used as storage of information? How does the method of storing information limit whether a machine knows anything or not?
So called AI ultimately does comprise the actions of billions of switches. Of course their output is orchestrated by ingenious programming which is indeed awesome. (Hey I was six years old when our country got television.) Now, nobody really knows what 'sentience' or 'mind' is, but I'm of the view that computer networks don't possess it. They can emulate some aspects of it, to great effect - I actually use SIRI a fair bit, and I notice that Google gets more useful all the time, sometimes spookily so. But I agree with the above comment, it doesn't amount to sentience or actual knowledge. It's different in kind, and there's a difference in kind between beings and devices.
But I know it's an interminable argument. There's another forum I used to post to back in 2012-13 and there was a thread on this topic there that had been running for years already, and I bet it still is.
The type of storage only affects the rate at which data can be accessed (e.g SSD's are faster) and the total size capacity ( flash drives are smaller). Cloud storage is still storage on a HDD, but that HDD is on a remote server.
'AI' is improved by having access to large amounts of data. Which is why big data is so important these days.
I think we can interpret those AI are intelligent because they have a very developed algorithm. They learn a lot of us and then keep our data to act more precisely the next time you asked them something.
So with these patterns I guess we can argue they are intelligent.
We train our kids to emulate us - and we program our computers to emulate us. Really does't seem to be to be too much difference. We even congratulate our kids for being intelligent. Do we "expect" our computers not to be intelligent because they are machines?
That's like saying a person doesn't understand "air vibrations" - only sound. A computer converts the 1's and 0's into something it can use - just like we convert air vibrations into something we can use.
If I dropped my computer into a pool of water and destroyed it, I would have committed no crime.
I'm really not sure what "being a crime" has to do with being intelligent. Could you offer more details.
You should be able to figure it out. You're the one who compared computers to children. Children are sentient beings, computers are devices. If that is a distinction that eludes you, there's probably nothing I can say.
In spite of the attitude, I still don't see how that has to do with intelligence?
Thanks! Yes, I realize it's a subject with a lot of thought, and commentary. One way to address something that is as complex - is to discuss it - get other opinions. Thanks again for your commentary.
Phrased like this, this question is terminological. We can say that a machine "knows" to recognize our voice the way a calculator "knows" what the answer for 32578+97722 is, as elevators knows which floor we want to go to.
For that matter we can say ants know where the queen in the colony is and bees know how to defend themselves. But these examples of know don't have much to say about knowing in the human case, or so it seems to me. It's analogous to asking whether airplanes really fly as opposed to glide (in Hebrew, apparently, they glide) or if cars fly as opposed to race. You can choose whatever words you'd like to describe such occurrences.
But asking what "knowing" is in the human case is very difficult, it's still very much debated. But I don't think looking at AI helps much at all, it's better to continue studying people for these matters.
I believe I understand what you are saying. I also believe we should study "both". Both AI, and people.
Sure. Even if AI may not explain human intelligence, who knows what might happen as we continue developing technology? In either case we still discover something new.