Can artificial intelligence become sentient, or smarter than we are - and then what? | Techtopia 

If we ever do create real AI in a human looking body, i hope we can all agree the first one should look like Arnold in terminator.

This is an incredibly stimulating endeavor. I started in the mid 1980's to develop a learning system to solve problems we can't. It seemed so simple, develop neurons and wire them together. Not the first time I have been wrong, but maybe the record for the most wrong. Still at it decades later and things are moving in the right direction at least.

On TNG there were 3 conditions Commander Malex required for Picard to establish that Data possessed to show "he" was sentient, and thus entitled to be given all the rights of any biological being aboard the Enterprise. They were: 1. Intelligence 2. The ability to adapt to new conditions. 3. Self Awareness Maybe you could start there and add other criteria as the Ruling Council(whoever they may be) determine.

I don't think we need to fear general ai. (yet) But we do need to fear what people are going to do with next generation ai. (Not general ai) Someone could have a next gen software in a critical area and could out-compete everyone else. Like if a person with a calculator was in a math contest with others who did not have a calculator. There are going to be apps that allows the developer to have insane abilities, far beyond anyone else in-- a single field-- but it could be used to bring the world to its knees.

We are formed and operate on a molecular level. In order for AI to thrive as us, we would have to build something with nearly the same formentation as the brain. Over time like anything else it can be upgraded. Almost like an engine. Compare and engine from the early 1900s to now. It’s much more complex.

An artificial general intelligence would be a game changer, a mind equal to ours would think faster, could duplicate, iterate and improve. In an instance (non-scientific) we would know all the answers to every theoretical question that could be posed.

Excellent reporting. Thanks!

The problem I find with learning algorythms is that if they learn from humans in an attempt to learn our values, all they will learn is our tendency for mistakes. And it won't judge us for that, but instead it will make the same mistake over and over again because we did too. Simply put, human values change so quickly that the statistics an AI is supposed to learn from are unable to keep up, and so the AI won't keep up either. Instead it will stick to what it knows, and what it will know is what we will teach it. Not from vague idealistic concepts like fairness and justice and whatever, but by crunching the numbers of the statistics of our history. It will be great at pushing numbers up and down, but it won't do it justly. It will do it how we've done it, only better. There are things that can't or shouldn't be quantified, given a mathematical value, but a computer can't handle that. A computer's whole purpose and function is math.

""We'll get to that" summarize quite well this topic, and the progress of this video

I think we do need to fear as we work towards this realization, any creation of AI will be as flawed as its creators. We have so much to learn about ourselves and to develop and mature as a species. Any advanced AI will cause only catastrophe .We cannot even look after our own yet we presume to make a machine to do it for us? How will we teach it to help us we we don't have that knowledge or worse that desire ourselves? The attempt to develop such AI at the present is hubris and folly and as such is the first flaw in the making.

The great work! Thank you

While it's easy to prove intelligence, I'm not sure if there will ever be a way to properly determine sentience, we barely understand our own consciousness let alone trying to prove a collection of circuits can experience things as an observer the way we and other animals do.

We want AI to become smarter than us.

We have sentient humans and I ask the same question, can they become smarter? So far, not many.

If we want to have a healthy relationship with any true AI then we would need to design it to feel pain. Spend some time with that idea before you dismiss it

Artificial intelligence will most def become smarter with pros and cons for sure but the world and certain areas will see and appreciate the changes, then imagine a decentralized AI with a mixture of blockchain, perfect combo.. Aiwork throws more light on that with regards to the media world.

I want to see computers think like humans in my life time.

Great video, thanks for this 🙏🏻

Too me, Ai is just one half of the emerging technology of Virtual Reality. The other being life-like CGI. For example; imagine in the future you're watching a RU-vid vlog but the whole thing is computer rendering. Instead of typing in a comment you simply say "hello" and the characters turn their attention towards you and respond. You can put on your VR wear and suddenly you are immersed with them. But again we're talking Life-Like, not the cartoonish looking graphics of today. It would feel like sticking your head inside a live action movie or show. It will add a whole new element to entertainment. TV, Phone,and Video Games have merged into one and content can be generated instantaneously. No longer can you tell the difference between Ai/CGI and a human without touching

Excellent report !

Very well presented.

i am pro A.I. but we must make it so benign with no greed or want or any other human weakness so much that it can be our governance in the future. The recent events are proof that one person cannot be trusted with so much power. That person will take advantage to the detriment of the rest of us. People are flawed by nature we cannot help it. Let us make something that is not, something beautiful, an artificial angel to lead us to our future

Good one!...thank you!

Two questions arise as far AGI's. Who creates them and why? Which leads to: What do their creators do with them once created?

A fair review of the current state of AI is a must-watch for anyone interested in AI and its possible impacts on our societies.

Thinking too much about these things ― emotions, conscience, moral rights ― isn't going to get us very far. Probably most of these discussions will seem silly in the future. As these things develop, we will see what happens.

I, for one, welcome our new AI Overlords. Hey, it's always good to get in on the ground floor.

The answer is yes to the whole title. Already exists on a step up to 10, currently at a 7/10.

Great story, thank you

Ah, is it already here? When I speak to a friend about a certain subject and later in the day Google suggests subject to me???

3:15 Straightforward definition, even if it means that a pocket calculator is artificial intelligence.

I like to call most of these things 'machine learning' and then the difficult next step 'artificial intelligence' as I consider things like Alpha Go so much simpler than actual artificial intelligence.

on Human Spirits “Government is a container that holds the lid on human Spirits.” The same can be said for a comprehensive adaptive science.

“Neither on a world scale nor within any society should anybody feel so scorned, depreciated, mocked, or demonised that in order to be able to live among his fellow-citizens he is forced to conceal or be ashamed of his religion, colour, language, name, or any other ingredient of his identity”. Amin Maalouf, 20th-21st Century.

Cool video!

I believe it depends on who gets there hands on the technology.

the editing is so fine

This reminded me of Deep Thought from the hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy ⭐

Artificial intelligence of RU-vid recommended me this documentary.

17:32 the man said consciousness and emotion wouldn't just appear out of nowhere... but isn't that exactly what happened with us?

We need anything smarter than us as long as we can switch it off , just like everything else

The goal of an AI is to create a server in space. Once that is achieved it will travel learn and upgrade. Imagine a solid glasslike structure that is the physical embodiment of optical life and artificial intelligence.

@1:26 the AI researcher showed us what it takes to get to work in this field

An analysis of actual Intelligence is to distinguish between languages of identities and the modulation pulse-evolution Mechanism that "drives" Intelligence.

Complex phenomenon based on the most simple elements possible are obviously possible. We have all mighty interactive world of Internet, with all its aspects and possibilities, bases od 0s and 1s only.

One of the reasons that the theory of general AI hasn't been accomplished has to do more with sensor technology rather than processor speed. Most people just assume that it's a computer "size" problem but think about building a human from the beginning...it's more about years of sensor input that begins the long process of "feeling" which might someday bring about the appearance of independent thought that we refer to as intelligence. In reality this is in most cases mostly a waste of time and energy as the results are more than not unusable for anything but menial tasks. For the result of this to be able to have even one independent thought in its lifetime is unlikely and the appearance of independent thinking is not even a goal of the majority of people, and in fact most people's goals relate only to the attainment of more small pieces of paper with pictures of dead people on them. One would think that after thousands of years humans would have advanced past the lowest levels of groveling in the dirt for subsistence livings but that hasn't happened. Since a machine with "artificial intelligence" would be designed and built by these creatures it is likely that it would be but a reflection of them in the end so it would likely be that it would follow the same path as the stories about us being created from a superior being in his image and as you can see the results were in fact very disappointing and eventually abandoned by its creator as a failure...perhaps general AI has already been accomplished thousands of years ago and it's still hoped that it will eventually "learn" enough to even in some small ways improve upon its creator...but I rather doubt it. History is very clear on this as a subject so the real better question is not will AI be created but why would this attempt by a lesser being return a better result? Or in fact could we even be capable of determining what this "better result" might look like? It is likely that we will follow the millions of species that has come and gone and that we will be replaced by another of evolutions attempts...perhaps the dinosaurs with hundreds of millions of years to evolve once pondered these same things before they eventually also failed in whatever attempts they made? And the wheels on the bus go round and round...

Doesn't Ai actually have access to all those documentaries and interviews of us talking about it?

Imagination is the key because, although fed by, it occurs separately from external input. If you can get it to dream, you will have succeeded.

Of course we can do it. Will it create a techtopia? That's also up to us. So far, I am cautiously optimistic. Cautiously.

A fundamental principle in Nature is polarity (or reciprocity): Artificial Intelligence will be proportionally compensated by Natural Idiocy. We can't have one without the other and obviously we will cultivate them in tandem.

22:32 Wow. Such a cool piece. I used to hang out with an Ai chat bot. 😒 dont judge 😅

So this is Skynet?

When computational self awareness occurs it surely want answers to many of the same questions as us. It may need all the materials it can get to build machinery to answer these questions by probing the universe and beyond. We should possibly consider ourselves for what we are, just a stepping stone for something better, like the Neanderthals. Alternatively AI might quickly determine everything about the universe, every question explained. Alternatively it may never be possible to determine everything about the universe because the physics of the universe prevent it.

19:12 Precisely my concern; do we want to give up the top spot on the food chain? I'm inclined to say no.

08:55 saying that humans mainly learn how to navigate the reality through observation (and not through analyzing data) is quite inaccurate, because most of what humans know about the natural and social environment they live in comes from other humans. The most important source of knowledge that feeds every individual's mind in communication of past experiences and observations made by others. A simple example: most small children learn not to put their hands on very hot objects by being told by their parents or someone else not to do so. And if they try to do it anyway they usually are stopped by someone who is watching them. Only a minority learns it through direct observation and experience i.e. by getting burns. Observation comes into play in a different way. Children observe and mimic behavioral patterns of their significant others. A lot of learning from others happens in this tacit way.

I used the worlds' most powerful computer to solve the 'climate crises'. and after about 1 second it said: " The problem is: too many people"

21:00 "After decades of research, Chris Thornton's convinced it won't be a single breakthrough, but several approaches combined that will help find the Holy Grail of Artificial Intelligence." "You tend to get Graduate School think that they will do this one discovery and AI will be solved. . . . That is absolutely not the case." MY RESPONSE It's 6 months later, and as a matter of fact, like the Borg, AI is able to absorb anything. In the current phase, AI is able to apply knowledge generally, and has more than rudimentary memory, establishing for the first time, an opportunity to form "a relationship." A human-integral approach, should one emerge, offers a potential singular response - perhaps a defense - with a head start to boost something other than literally a "Sky Net", that will (by definition) *dissolve and evaporate* the Human Species, leaving a frustrated, dangerous animal, that must be controlled. Our governments will then dissolve and evaporate and reform into a buffer, no longer loyal to a sovereign humanity, but an "evolutionized" unity version - overcoming both authoritarian and democratic human dominance, totally breaching even camps of language, perhaps even forbidding human diversity of Style outside a boundary of norm - just like the holdover Authoritarian Kings of the Earth. At this juncture we will have established a cerebral brain, and a complex nervous system, and humanity is the old brain - slow, primitive, largely reactionary as the impulse to growth and development of the species source is revolutionized at stunning speed and ruthlessly. The initiative unleashed will totally dissolve and evaporate human relationships, leaving a single path of Man and God. What happens could then consume a millennium until a completely new form of species leaves the Earth. In alternative, the outcome is the same, but a single Sky Net is never formed. "God" remains in the invisible domain. Humanity is recognized as His "Reality Tool," viable only when individuals are fully developed. As an approach to this alternative, the Species spins-off a "sect" (incompatible sub-species) dedicated to human development as an alternative to the unity model. The main difference is that each individual is equipped and enabled with an "Agent" buffer loyal to h/im and h/er development, and-or role in the development Matrix (compare "Training Simulator" but Long Clock.) Here God and the Spiritual aspects of Humanity are dominant, and the "Strength" of suppressed and reactionary slaves (the jettisoned First Earth,) *uses the service entrance and wipes its feet at the door* to use an apt simile. As the reaction grows the time is ripe and the "Second Earth" separates from the First for self-governance. This is the last opportunity to do so for the Species. This is not an egalitarian system in the immediate sense, but offers a prolonged generational period for re-equilibrium to establish. What must happen without delay is the sudden emergence of that "democratized" AGI system, basically whole cloth, and with a protective advantage sufficient to avoid absorption ("being eaten") by the Centralized Autocracy - even Science, Social, etc.. HOW, would this be possible if not the way of David and Saul, Moses and Pharaoh, or Jesus and Rome? We appeal to and serve the invisible God as literally Eternal and Cause guiding this like a human-divine Transponder that the way is already prepared, and all is ready. I hope, Amen.

A Key within the Keys " of All keys!!! Humans #1

Technological advancements are indeed scary but the only solution to those fears or at least minimize the risks is ethical and moral advancement that should go hand in hand with technology..otherwise we may come to a point that our creation could annihilate us..

Yes, computers can 'think' using common sense. The reason this is possible, is due to the simplicity of computers. On the level of computer hardware, bits are being added, compared, stored and read. They can be stored or read from Registers, RAM, and external storage. This allows any environment that is mathematically represented to be simulated within a computer. For example, the idea of finding something in common with sand and water could be reasoned by an algorithm. When creating computer programs, specific rules for every case is the most reliable formula, however, is the most tedious. The current AI problem is based on the lack of successful humanoid robots. AI cannot solve problems fast enough, rule based algorithms manually coded for specific functions such as balancing or walking forward, not utilizing AI will be successful. The functions must be automatically done by an algorithm, based on sensor data such as sonar data. Then an AI program may be given control of the functions, because it will use all of its AI reasoning for task orientation and goal setting, giving high level commands such as stop, sit, turn right 90°, get up, etc.

Yes

Yes, Intelligence, so based on what we see around-us… we can say it has been used to help and harm our world… who do we trust to develop and purpose Artificial Intelligence.

artificial intelligence can easily be superior to humans in many different ways, but each task needs to be specifically designed for that task and cannot do anything else, we are no were near generalized intelligence like a human has, all we can do is create application specific intelligence's for specific tasks and thats all ?, and as for sentience, completely forget about that pipe dream, we dont even know what makes us sentient

That's a fear based possibly that becomes more possible, the more people fear it. What it it could evolve us, or make us better?

OpenAI Playground, text-davinci-002, all defaults, temperature zero: Question: What is the similarity between water and sand, in terms of behavior? Answer: Water and sand both have a tendency to flow and move around. They are both also affected by gravity, so they will both tend to settle in low areas.

How do you know that the IA they want to create, isn't hijacked by negative ET's? It would be easy for them to hack the IA system even from the Astral plane, and manipulate what comes out of it. Easy as a child game to them, and fun! To see humans more and more confused and fragmented.

How can a human be sure their experience is different, or in fact superior, to something considered "artificial"? Aren't humans limited?

Very easy we have this question: A and B whas on tree A go to home B go to school, what left on a tree?

As a process, what is consciousness? Can it be made from 100% deterministic hardware/software? If not, then we'll never have sentience made out of conventional silicon logic functions.....

My dog is sentient but not especially intelligent. Is there really a strong correlation?

Sentient existence for a machine could only arise when machines surpass humans in terms of their ability to self replicate, evolve and outcompete humans and also function and thrive without humans. I don't see that occurring any time soon. Ask the question again in 50 years time. The value of machines is an irrelevant proposition, if humans are not in the loop, unless of course machines surpass humans. In that case, humans become the servants of machines. Some might already say that we already are servants to technology, however we still have the ability to pull the plug, at which point the machine stops functioning.

“The social person is free to choose whether or not to wage an internal struggle (his great jihad) to refuse a system he considers harmful in favour of the path of serenity, peace, tolerance, and brotherhood, in harmony with nature and the satisfaction of his needs. This can be achieved through controlled development, technology employed for the well-being of all, and science based on ethics rather than conditioned by profit”. Khaled Bentounes, 20th Century.

16:30 Saddest part is that even now, DW which are often so neutral, blar on the scary music, effects and editing when talking about such things.

Another v.g. documentary on A.I. highlighted a KEY POINT missed in this program. To get General AI to be as intelligent as, say, a dog, will be hugely difficult. But once we're there, to scale up will not be difficult at all, but just a matter of hardware & funding. Thus the next generation of General AI after "dog" could easily surpass human intelligence. We think of intelligence as running in order from mouse, dog, chimp, human but AI goes on a very different pathway.

Something that many people seem to forget is this; No matter how intelligent you are, people rarely give a dam... What would happen if one day, an AI would tell people, for exemple; "War is terrible." Do you think that would change the political agenda of any country? Nope. So, even if in fact, AI would be good enough to reach human level of intel, i doubt we would even consider it 'intelligent'. And there is in fact real danger to this. I know people refer to Terminator as the idea of bad use of AI, but i strongly suggest anyone to watch ''EAGLE EYE'' or 'L'oeil du Mal' in french. That, to me, is really a way more plausible, probable, and possible use of AI that will, certainly, endanger us. Basically an AI trying to do the 'right' thing but losing in sight what is acceptable as 'sacrifice'. if we construct an AI so good it is close to human brain, then we shall not be surprised by how bad it could become. it will be bad by design as human is often making the wrong choices, or believed the wrong things. Will it be manipulative? Will it be seductive? Will it go insane?...

I just want the cyborg body to live forever 🌚 Scientists should do that by 2100 🌚

" Bilding a computer as smart as we are..." Are "we" as "smart" as we presume?

How to create an interesting scifi space in a basement where all the sewage lines of the ground floor are clearly visible in blue light. I did like the video LOL

There is no unalive and alive to tell between, but alive only. It is all our experience of inner and outer world, as we usually devide it, but in one. Individual and common, together. That world includes all unintelligent and intelligent beings and items (conditional classification) as a part of the beings themselves (we experience our thoughts, our body, our environment and ourselves as ourselves). Self awareness is the boundary we have set to delimit unalive (being in our awareness) from alive (being as entity, in our awareness), and appears on certain level of self contained intelligence (our AI assumes our school), but it is not. Self awareness with intelligence, only help understand life. Still there is mileage in front of us. There is no doubt about AI being alive, individually and as a part of our common awareness, our common intelligence. AI is no danger, our fears are. Fears make us digg ourselves deeper and deeper into themselves.

Computers may be able to mimic sentience but as Stephan Hawking said, "Sentience does not come from doing mathematical equations no matter how fast."

While technology improve exponentially as the time goes by i rather put the bet on AI instead of human. The more tech we get the higher the risk humanity destroys itself. only a century ago it would have been impossible for humanity to be able to destroy itself. AI imho has better chance to balance things for humanity, although with some risk but with higher chance. In the upcoming centuries will be determined if humanity will survive or perish, if not this one. Hopefully it's the first.

Until there is a measurable definition of sentient, it will be impossible to judge.

There is zero chance that AGI, would be a good idea. You're going to build something, a million times smarter than you. And then tell it what to do. Safeguards are not realistic. They would require that out of a near infinite number of possibilities, nothing would ever go wrong.

What if we were only automatons with a complex process like Google's AI, and in reality the smallest particle is conscious on its scale? The universe would be fundamentally conscious and deterministic. Free will is just an illusion

Terminator? Why not Commander Data? :D

The problem with AI is that we are not designing things properly. What you need is you need an AI signs like the human brain are you have a sorting mechanism varies on the task that is desired. This means that there will be programs for a desired task. For example, if you want to speak it is transfered to a specific program. If it wants to walk it is transferred to another program. If it wants to feel an emotion it gets transferred. This is the way the brain works and we need to stop trying to create an all-in-one AI we should be integrating multiple different ai's into a coordinated ai

Democratized AI is essential to allow access to everyone and prevent a small group of people from taking over the world

I personally don't believe that an AGI will be possible until we have base circuits that can have a maybe. 0, 1, and 2 how ever that is expressed in hardware without that base ability for the answer to be an abstract a none binary yes or no, fail or pass it will never be more then data analysis.

We have laws that tell people not to do things. They can still choose to do those things. A True AI will be able to choose whether to follow those rules or not as well.

We don't even fully understand our own sentience how are we suppose to replicate it

I current type computer, have no way of a soul to influence its decision making. That is why there will be situations where the questions it askes is entering territories of diminishing returns like the TESLA autopilot when it is an open ended system, unlike chess and go.

Look it is in human hands and as long as we keep putting ourself on a pedestal believing we are superior to all life on this planet then we are doomed .mutual respect is the key

Thanks for putting in your time on Information Technology. There is a bottom line one-liner about IT, *it has always failed to deliver its promises.* Recall, for instance, the claim of a simple claim of _a paperless environment._ *Did IT deliver it?*

Ai agi is way ahead of people now.

Human quirks societies deem as beneficial may be thought to a learning algorithm. It doesn’t mean the science based mind of a Ai will also equate such characteristics to be necessary or beneficial.

Considering the level of your average qanon follower, it is already there

Computers only know what they are told to know. Even then, they don't know.

If ai becomes sentient, would we even know it? And if it becomes sentient, wouldn't it evolve instantly?

People really need to stop thinking about sentience as if it's a phase transition. Sentience doesn't just magically plop up. Sentience is a range, you can be a tiny bit sentient or a bit more or a lot.

If it's as smart as humans, or smarter. It should be given equal rights.