Are We Approaching Robotic Consciousnesses? 

+ColdfusTion awesome!!

+ColdfusTion skynet is coming!

+ColdfusTion Ty, i did enjoy the video! By the way cold... What do u think about the future and how do u think it will be? Good luck with the subs i do really think u will be big

+ColdfusTion still catches me of guard when you put on the webcam since you sound like the white version of morgan freeman instead of having a basy voice with a rasp you have an average but soothing voice its like a constant stream of water into a little pond

+ColdfusTion this video made me think about one thing: what about cybernetics? Prostetics? Cybernetic augmentation? How far or close we are from turning into half-human/half-machines in real life? I would love to see your opinion on this. Either by text reply, or (even better) a video.

+Alex Ha :O

+Alex Ha Though the wording sounds clever and true. It's simply a statement with no actual logic to back it up. Maybe we can one day understand(at least partly, bit by bit, and then replicate) our minds ;)

+Alex Ha If a system is too complex to understand individually, then by no means does that mean that a collection of that same system isn't capable of understanding. Ian Steward must be referring to something else rather than not being able to understand our own brain. To back-up my argument, let's do a thought experiment. A single comsumer computer is not capable of using 100% of its CPU on endless computations and do profiling of its CPU. However, if the architecture of that computer would run on a server-park, then 100% suddenly becomes relative to all the computers, let's say 20% if using 4 computers to simulate the consumer computer on. Now there is 80% available for profiling the CPU and putting the results together. If by any means we aren't capable of truly understanding our own brain, that just means we haven't yet found a way to divide the task of understanding to multiple individuals. Now to power that statement, what kind of brains are we trying to figure out? Basically all of them. Instead we should be focusing on understanding a single form of it completely before we'd start with one as complex as an animalistic brain.

+M SC 'Understanding' is precisely individualistic. It cannot be understood (lol) otherwise - we have no reason to suppose that some 'collective understanding' is even possible or sensible as a concept. It's purely a conjecture, a speculation, and a weird one as far as I'm concerned. Smells of wishful thinking to me. Ian Steward is spot on here, in other words.

+Apemant Atenjanin I think what M SC is getting at is that we have created things as a group that no one individual understands.

nah man, actually stress and depression have their own purpose for the species in general. if it was truely useless then we would not have it. capiche?

who are you to say if it was truly useless we would not have it? What is there some sort of law in our universe that states all existence has a purpose? not at all lol. There is no proof or reason to believe that depression or stress have a purpose for our species lmfao.

b em cough -natural selection- cough

Sable cough-derp-cough

b em And what do you mean by derp? Are you saying that natural selection does not exist?

Lol that's the test to beat :)

+cardog kitchen they are daily, there is a constant struggle between captcha devs and bot devs to break them.

+cardog kitchen Hell, I have trouble solving CAPTCHAs myself and last I checked, I'm human.

+cardog kitchen The hackthissite website has a programming challenge that is: "Bypass the image captcha Bypass the image captcha This level is about OCR. Write a program which is able to read all the characters in a given image, and let it beat a captcha automatically. Difficulty rating: harder"

+cardog kitchen there is this recent version which does it fine now sov there came this newer version which marquees arounde the screen

well said

+Sidharth Satheesh But he does have alot of subs, many more than when i subscribed.

+Sidharth Satheesh But, OwnagePranks only has 3M... and there is no other prankster channel better than ownage...

DOGE™​​ vitalyzdtv

Sidharth Satheesh You sure? Can he change his voice? It's he really that hilarious?

Are you high?

shht.. they might wake up

I wonder if latinamajor is concious of the fact that he is an idiot?

So true.

latinamajor yes youre right, they are called democrats

He actually cares for his audience you are a LEGEND my friend

May you do a video about how big is Microsoft?

+Luca Bisi not bigger than deez nuts

+Coldfusion Because you said you found this subject fascinating, I think you might also be interested in this: hplusmagazine.com/2015/09/04/we-need-a-legal-definition-of-artificial-intelligence/

+ColdFusion Sorry, but it does not clear anything up. It's still the same sensationalism found elsewhere on the topic. We actually can not mimmic consciousness yet, let alone program a robot to properly learn by themselves. In a programming sense we actually do not even know how to tackle the problem. Most AI we have now is still state machine based and database focused. Most stuff 'claimed' to learn, like Google Now or Apple Siri, is based around gathering data to be able to respond to the most common questions. It's *not* artificial intelligence, nor does this test make much sense when it comes to consciousness. The pitfalls are with how you're making the robot come to any conclusions, which might as well be purely random. Contrary to popular movies like Terminator, robots do not 'suddenly' become self-aware and autonomous. There are universal rules and truly extensive programming required, most of which should come into existence in an inevitable sense for it to prove self-consciousness. Some even argue self-programming is required, which really still requires a true scientific breakthrough we have not seen yet. I'm not arguing against AI in any way and I actually think the current state of AI would be extremely functional in many contexts, but to say we've come closer to self-consciousness in robots is simply false.

same here. I freaked out when I saw the back of his head

Tamera I thought his head got blown off. 😂😂😂

anyone knows where to find him now?

reminds me of westworld

Same!

+Thang Nguyen dem robots better learn to whack me one off

+Thang Nguyen I agree apart from the possibility of at some point hopefully within my lifetime uploading our consciousness to robots when the rest of us dies of old age. But If many robots were built sentient like us we would have to treat them better pay them give them a pension and break down insurance ect.

+Tomas Jasevicius Yeah, murderous slaves. Not sure that's such a good thing.

+PHeMoX We already have murderous slaves serving life in prison and just like A.I. they learn a little more each day. Cops who abuse their power also can be classified as murderous slaves that serve the corporation known as America.

+Thang Nguyen curiosity killed the cat

Thats a really good idea...

+Loren Booker Look up: Baby X

AI is needs based. The AI system has needs such as friendship, energy, happiness, etc. Certain inputs raise the need to full while others lower them. AI is actually very simulated and not even close to real intelligence. Maybe 20 more years away. A good simulated intelligence can be created now.

+Loren Booker AI doesn't need rewards, we developed emotions to help us learn and adapt because there was no other way for us to do so. Robots are directly programmed to assess and evaluate their performance from the start, so there is no need for rewards. Even if we wanted to, it would be a shame, without the biochemical system that humans have robots are incapable of emotion.

Ryan R​ Yes it assigns positive or negative values to attributes called needs based on pre programmed values. We can garantee the robots never violate the 3 laws by hard coding them as attributes above max value. It will work in all cases except the very out of the ordinary as written about in 82 books decaded ago by Asimov.

ex bad networkima

+Twisty Melon Gaming touché

Yeah... I caught that, too. For shame, for shame...

Get with the program we all have waifu's we don't need sex.

kim pirihi lol there dicks will break

I already can.

Having sex with a computer/robot is not having sex, it's masturbation by using toys. As long as they are not having sex with another human, they are none step closer at all.

sex is outdated. or it will be soon enough. self-replication, cloning / breeding vats and recursive genetic improvements will dictate the future of this species.

That's just your input if they're trying to make a human-like robot why not make them look human as well? Besides you can tell their facial movements aren't as fluent and natural looking

It’s because they want to mate with it; they’re sick.

Nick Moore they have a reason for this,and it's not in man's best interest, this technology is leading to a bad place, a very demonic force is behind this,the demons are creating themselves in our image and wants to replace human beings, this goes back to our creation, Angel's were and still is jealous of all human beings, thinking god loves humans more then they, the whole objective is to recreate themselves in our image, all this over love, Satan had a fit when god created us,he told god he would not bow down to us humans, that's when it really all hit the fan,then Lucifer said I'll be my own god and place my throne above the most highs,and that's just what he's been doing all this time,now he wants to recreate the Angel's in human likeness, an you as humans be replaced, aliens don't look like us but they want to so bad they will go to any length, have you ever thought why aliens experimented on human beings, it's to be like us,the ones god loves so much, they can't stand especially Satan the love and creation the most high has bestowed on and for us,these beings have a diabolical plan ,and through the white man's vanity and wanting to be like god himself, is helping them do this with this technology,? why would you want to create something that's already created perfect, mam and Satan has a plan for us and its not what there trying to make us think, demons are not trying to help us,there wanting to replace human kind,look at all the ways they have to reach into your mind life privacy their almost at total control, if we don't Wake up we are doomed, these evil beings and evil men with there good change promises our going to render us ex stink, god help us peace

Nick Moore Agree with you. This is how blade runner started.

Nick Moore What if the robot wishes to identify as a Human? Or an Attack Helicopter?

well we know what motivates the tyrants that run the world today the question is what is the motivation for the artificial intelligence do they love us because we tell them to because we brought them into creation

In other words, It might become a tyrant but our tyranny is certain.

We are not as close to artificial intelligence as some people feel we are least a good 30 to 50 years away. But we do have to keep in mind we could have General artificial intelligence within 20 years.

Bearing in mind when we have general-purpose robots or Androids that can replace most labor that is done by hand, the cost of everything should drop to near zero, since labor is the primary cost driver. Also a general intelligence Android or robot will greatly enhance our ability to explore our solar system and find new resources since they don't need food they don't need water they don't need Air" they can go out get things done and come back. like go get asteroids full of minerals. So overall it is in our best interest to drive forward as fast as possible our fourth Industrial Revolution since it will free mankind And then the only thing we will have to worry about is population control

Rock Steel Even then, once we have Fusion the carrying capacity of the Earth will rise into the Trillions.

+Chinmay Gupta Thanks mate, really appreciate that, I'll see what I can do :)

I agree with this person, you should go bigger then RU-vid, honestly this presentation was amazingly good & definitely Television worthy too. Keep up the good work Mate..,:)

Robocop

By doing something they never expect anyone to do. Example: Flying (not possible which is also why they don't expect it)

camouflage as a robot.

Rr You would think they would have sensors to sense humans. Unless you're a robot and you committed the crime.

+pedo spiderman EMP Grenades.

***** That's a good question. There seem to be more to it than just collecting and processing. When neurologist pin points the essence of consciousness (if they ever do), only then we might say what we _"just"_ do or not. Until then I think it's a pretty vague position to say that a robot is conscious _just_ because they collect and process data.

Hexyl Cinnamal Oh well lol

+Able D-G I agree and disagree. First how I agree. I don't quite get their distinction between self-aware and not self-aware sort of for the reason you mention. If you simply have a sensor that tells the computer when it is or is not talking, does that make it self aware? If so, I'm not impressed, but your thermometer example doesn't even have that, and I strongly suspect we're both just misunderstanding what they really mean because the video didn't explain that too much. I disagree with what you said about consciousness. You may not have defined the word the way they did, but the video makes a clear distinction between their notion of conscious and what I suspect yours is. That's what the whole last section of the video was about, what they refer to as phenomenological consciousness and sentience. They are not claiming to have come anywhere close to that.

laminarlad I guess it all comes down to the way we define "consciousness" or "self-awareness" but I know you get the point.

+Jeremiah Liggins of course not, there's a whole different dimension, you need to understand the outside world, to understand yourself, your impulses, and the data itself!!! our biology / our body sensors connect us to this world and passes us the data though touching, hearing, smelling, seeing, feeling. But then it's not only collecting the data, you judge it, and think about it, what it means, its place in this world. You are aware of yourself and this very data you're judging.

nah it's true, we are made of cells and each function independently and each responds to external or internal stimulie. I think we as humans are aware and consious because we have a brain which is devided in a lot of sections and each sections can respond to different situations or the cells of the brain can react to melatonin, adrenalin and stuff and makes you feel a certain way. I mean in a way we don't feel that, it's more like a part of our brain detects a dangerous situation for example by understanding it. for example if someone is talking trash my brain might detect that I might need to fight him so it orders the release of Adrenalin which changes my perception of the world for a certain ammount of time so I focus more about my self than anything else and it makes me ready to fight. It also makes blood pressure go higher and shit but wtv. I think other feelings are the same but why we "feel" hapiness for example I have no idea. I know that laughing isn't voluntary in most cases where you really feel that a joke was funny but you don't just laugh you also feel something like for me i feel something right between my eyes/upper nose and it's like i'm being tickled there and that's what makes me cry if I laugh too much etc. it's biological and i'm sure people could find this stuff out if they really put their heads into it personally though I prefer philosophy ;p

Furlow Torent they can do it. an probably already have. but we as the HUMAN RACE dont even know our true origins or even the meaning to exististance. we know more about our galaxy then we do about our own planet. but yet some of us feel the need to not only pro create but to be the creator. Do we have the right to create conscious life, when we cant even decide whats best for human life or decide on human origins or ends?? Do we have the right is the question to be held accountable.

Asap Hustle Morals of is it right or wrong to create conscious life. The bigger issue would be how to teach them so they don't just turn on their creators. And then, is it right to reject them for being what they are even though we created them? I find the only ones afraid of creating intelligent life, let alone with consciousness, are those that fear the wrath of god kind of mind set. I personally find nothing wrong with it, but has to be done carefully so we don't just have some hateful creation that decides we all need to die.

Furlow Torent obviously your whipping thy Austin red car noddy like with a large bush tree fir how your going too teach this RU-vid too stay under the bonnet of your large amounts of ram,therefore total control?

Steve Bez I really can't understand WTF your even trying to say there.

Damn man, I'm sorry.

I feel the same way. I can imagine they would program a robot to be loyal like a dog, but have human features without the negatives.

I hope you are doing okay.

A robot or communication device can't love you back. Maybe go volunteer at the local animal shelter, where the warmth in your heart will not go to waste.

Get a dog

Best comment ever.

trying WAY too hard

nice imagination bro

@@adamizghouti4777 Thanks sir!

burn the house down or get your nearest gun and go crazy.

To be fair scientists have yet to explain why we are conscious or have the ability to be conscious so it's possible. However if we knew what is was then we would know what to call it.

The problem is that most of these words/concepts were invented well before Darwin and people haven't been willing to place them under scrutiny - now matter how little reason there is to believe that they comply with reality. It is deplorable how many otherwise intelligent people claim they accept evolutionary theory (of course, duh!), but when you start talking about humans they will deny the consequences. Sentiments like a "subtle difference that robots could never *actually* experience", that there *must* be something that only humans have (like sentience), are seen as axioms and everything else is build upon that premise. A network of weigthed connections i.e. a brain isn’t any less deterministic than an if else script, the cause and relationships are just less obvious. Sentience/consciousness didn’t _evolve_ , we simply decided to call the level of complexity/intelligence we arrived at that way and declare it something fundamentally different from anything any other animal or machine could ever experience.

DJSbros Robots are programmed. At best, they have algorithms. We have free will, think philosophically, etc.

+DJSbros I am sure scientists know this very well. But coming to terms with that fact is no help to fully understanding what makes up consciousness.

obligatory username I don’t want to sound like a smartass, but aren’t we programmed too? If someone throws something at you, you almost have no choice other than flinching and preparing for it, unless you actively try to go against your instincts.

I want to disagree with you but I don’t really know how to. Love.. it can be called a programmed thing when we think it in respect of evolutionary requirement.. survival of species. But I don’t like to think that the love I have for my nephew, crush that I have on a girl, its all programmed in some way.

You do want a robot with emotions. They let us control their actions without re-programming.

Like Ava?

it's the next step in evolutin, creating a self-conscious, self-aware robot

I want my robot to remain barefoot and pregnant.

dinnerandashow they are going to make the robot out of you,man you tube the movie the stepford wives this is there goal.

+Harry Pink Their learning potential would be limited by their database. They could only learn so much.

+Jaymz Boykin our database is also limited. self awareness is the ability to know limits.

True, but our database is huge. Our brains have a calculating ability unmatched as of now.

+Jaymz Boykin the concept of huge or infinite is just a concept. does it take a smart person to know they are stupid?

You gotta keep an open mind

True.

we are nothing more than Fish Out of Water looking for an easier way to eat and not get eaten

WasabiKitKat agreed. but how can we as a species that is most likely a genetically altered sub species, be the creator so to speak when we as a whole still have no idea at all about our origins. yes we have arceological evidence, but there is disillusion to the deplictions and what they ment. we know more about our galaxy then we do about earth. we cant/dont make fully funtioning electronics that last for more then a few years, but we want to make conscious AI's...... Is that fair? Or do we even have the devine right? Im at a mindboggle right now on this subject. But more so interested in what happens when we achieve the goal. And what happens when the AI figures out that only way, in its eyes, to solve tbe delima of human extinction if it will not try to lets say link us with AIs. Then basically like a parasite, take over humanity. Hell, id rather go out with a bang then be fed off of like a parisite. Imagine the possibilities that an AI would have with a human interface? It would or could be the destruction of man kind as we know it or an evolutionary event that could save us......mindfuck.

It's all an illusion. Nothing of which you described cannot be attributed to mechanisms put in place to best safeguard our existence. Nothing special about any of these. It's all a giant program, us and the environment that we perceive.

"Life comes from life, and not from matter." This claim is in itself false because there is a beginning to everything. From the first abiogenesis we already know that life does not HAVE to come from life. In fact, there are computers currently in the works that use biological molecules for computing and DNA for data storage. To claim that it is impossible to create consciousness is just hubris, and ignores the fact that we know very little about what makes us "us". Is it possible that there exists a soul in every living being that cannot be bestowed into a mechanical construct? Maybe. But to claim that is our reality without even knowing of the existence of the soul is just wrong.

Argument is feeling is a biological thing or spiritual thing ? If you say spiritual thing what about Dopomne Harmon ? Taking things a logical way of approach is like a bunch of if statements 😝😝 My understanding is everything is "x" time evaluated by our Brain. Through that evaluation we are (simulation) pick a particular thing ..😛😛🤥🤥

Life doesn't come from matter, it is matter.

You get it

yeah, what's the point of cyborgs when we have people who are already easily programmable

Unfortunately?

***** Well I'd like to hear that from him. It sounds to me like he is dodging the soul debate.

***** The effects of the chemicals are part of the way the brain works. The brain is functional, every advance continues to support that. The medium does not matter. The only argument you can make is that there are some quantum effects that the brain is making use of-that I can support. There might be a kind of soul but not the type of soul put forth by religions.

Dan Kelly Our body is an organic machine. We as human beings are a reflection of the the light that created us. Religion is bullshit, spirituality is real. We will never know until we die what we as human beings are truely capable of, unfortunately. Unless we could somehow follow the mind of someone who has recently died. which i hate to say it, may take a computer to compute the programs that will imploy such technologies. Thats the catch.... We dont know because we are alive and want answers so we create computers to crunch all statistics and create a program that would allow such a thing.....or die and never get to exploit what life truely is, but know for yourself.....

Humans do have a unique aspect that's difficult to replicate in machines. Humans create their own goals based on emotions and desires. The thing with an AI is that it effectively does nothing without a human giving it a well-defined goal of some kind and a means to objectively score how well it did at that goal. A human on the other hand may want to become a doctor or astronaut without anyone specifically telling them "This is your goal and how you measure its success." AI on the other hand really don't care about anything, it's just an emotionless problem-solving tool trying to get a high score based on the scoring system the programmer gives them. As algorithms advance, AI will be able to better maximize their scores on more complex problems, but fundamentally AI are still just very advanced calculators. This is due to a lack of emotion. AI can try to emulate emotional responses, but never truly feel emotion. Thus far, living things are the only thing to feel emotions and that's not something that can be replicated using binary logic circuits. It may or may not be possible to replicate emotion using some other hardware setup, but computers as we know them just can't do that. AI is and will always be 100% logical. It's why even advanced AI wouldn't be able to create unique works of art, because art doesn't have an objective means of measuring how good it is. Good art influences emotion... something AI will never have. By contrast, living things, even animals, are capable of developing their own goals.

I think AI would certainly be able to develop it's own goals eventually. Goals are based on needs, so let's go with food for humans. The equivalent would be power for robots. If you make a robot that is aware of its own need for electricity, then it could potentially develop its own goals towards that end. The only limitations on what means it develops towards obtaining that goal are the limitations placed by the programmers. But within those limitations the robot can theoretically generate its own goals, in support of its main preprogrammed goal which is power. Humans also have a "preporgrammed" goal for food because we can't survive without it. Therefore we seek it when we are low on energy and we develop goals to support our obtaining food, such as storing it for later. Of course humans have multiple goals, including food, reproduction, safety, etc. which all effect each other. Robots could develop something similar. AI already has things like behaviour trees which simulate this, and with machine learning and neural networks and all that jazz, and some time, I really don't see why AI couldn't generate its own goals based on its inherent needs.

Remember, 40 years ago we couldn't even store a few megabit on a drive now we are at terabytes, it will be closer than you think

+Fransisco Wiles well you could make a pc with a certain aspect of consciousness and then make it write its own script to a server and when its hardware starts degrading you just replace the hardware and then repeat the process and that way it could create its own brain and if you get it to achieve a certain state of consciousness you could copy the script and multiply

+jbuggieee but this would be cool if there would be a huge A.I. that could organize and govern people without corruption and greed

*****​ It would be a lot of work, but in my opinion it would be worth it, these a great minds here,

Can T that would actually be scary as hell lol. But I guess you have a point, but who would run the robots if they run the governments?

jbuggieee the A.I. itself i guess :D

Baby steps.

You must think A.I is going to open up with one door. The singularity will occur by machine. We have only to throw the pebble into the river and watch the ripples spread.

Hezekiah Domowski but thats not alive thats kind of an if statement

TheMrPancake yeah, that's sort of my point.

Why is knowing your own voice and movements so hard? Don't you just have a nerve ending going to the vocal chords, facial muscles, and tongue, and if the voice has the electrical pulses going to it, then you "know" you're speaking? If you watched the video in its entirety, you would have heard him reference that it's a result of clever programming and not true self-awareness as it lacks sentience. The robot does have consciousness, but only for a specific scenario. It lacks sentience, a branch of consciousness we don't even truly understand. Science can't explain it, and we may never be able to. The question isn't, "Are we nearing robotic consciousness?" We're already there. The real question is, "Are we nearing robotic theological consciousness?"

Mikeyguy94 yeah, I mean, we know how processors work. They use ones and zeros. By this fact they will always be limited to output the input. But it heavily depends on what you think the interaction is between the mind and brain. The mind seems to be able to think about concepts, not just process 1s and zeros. A robot will never be justified in what it "knows" because it cannot think about reality as reality, it processes it as ones and zeros.

We cannot think about reality as reality. We process reality as light with a certain wavelength, and sound, etc. so basically vibrations. We form mental constructions based on these vibrations. Even our "concepts" are based on our sensory input, which is based on these vibrations.

Feeling emotion requires a nervous system coupled to a biological organism. Detection isn't equivalent to feelings. Feelings can be mimicked and claimed however.

Evil Anvil and as you said when you achieved Windows dream machines its in your hands, it is in your tab,again? Hi brows?

Evil Anvil

Evil Anvil ...yeah

olav fosse .

then this "just feeling right" thing is nothing but biological algorythms of yourself.

Everything is an algorythm. The statement is without meaning.

BJ Vynz following an algorythm might have no meaning in some situations, EXACTLY like this "just feeling right" thing. therefore, my statement has the following meaning: robots could relatively easily be programmed in a way that makes it possible for them to "make a decision to act on something that has no immediate logical benefit".

Dave Jacob Of course it's possible, I never implied it wasn't. They just aren't there. It is by no means "relatively easy," and I'd challenge you to do it yourself if it's that simple. Actually, it is and will remain very difficult for a long time. What can be done easily is faking it, by feeding the code conditions that we already know in humans. Which is not how genetics or evolution work. Making a machine have the basic potential to develop its own possibilities in this way, and be consistent about it, is no easy chore. As it is, our understanding of our own human mind and behavior is severely limited. Stating that "it's simply in the code/DNA" only reveals an ignorance of this fact.

BJ Vynz you can challenge me all day if you want, i´m not a programmer so i don´t give a fuck about your challenge. give me a reason to believe it is hard. something with no IMMEDIATE logical benefit? robots do that a lot. chess-computers. or give me a reason to believe that the thing you want to see in robots REALLY exists in human behavior. something with logical benefit.

hey dude, this man is working hard to create good content for free! At least let the guy have a home and switch off ad-block.

@@MiloScheppie lmao no

Did you expect a black robot ?

Didnt care.

Seems you care.

BillCosbyEatsBabies why he gotta be black? from the sound of it he is Australian, mate.

+BillCosbyEatsBabies I never noticed, you must have an inferiority complex.

thelegend 27 more like the institute

skynet isn't real

Skynet is real and here now. It is the 5G network, along with artificial intelligence.