Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 99

Thread: We are A.I.

  1. #31
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    Such a program would also need to respect the environmental constraints that where considered during its design.

    The most common type of program that creates other programs is a compiler. Its input is source code and parameter values. It has several possible outputs, syntax error messages, warnings, as well as binary files (if no syntax errors are detected) containing machine instructions.

    A system that would create a program based on feedback requires some database of information that details all possible variations expected in the feedback stream, or a method to calculate a result based on aspects of the input stream, so that some logical determination can be made and "translated" into an algorithmic response to the input stream that is then compiled...

    This is much simpler to do by creating a program that addresses the issue directly, such a program would have access to the same database of information, or methods of calculation but would come compiled with all the code to address the feedback stream directly. No need to compile a new program.

    As such you can expect most computer programs, even if executed by an interpreter (clever computer algorithm to compile code at run time) to have modular characteristics. Modular in that logic is packaged into descrete units or functions that closely follow data structures they are designed to work with. There is one exception to that, the Lisp system, that I am acutely aware of anyway.

    In a Lisp system program instructions is program data. And data may be executed in a way that may change other "program instructions" or aspects of the runtime. Python and some other high level languages have the ability to do this to a certain extent, by manipulating a data structures meta values, but these manipulations are explicitly done. In Perl, for example, the Moose package performs such manipulation. Lisp is different in that all execution manipulates the Lisp machine state, and therefore its runtime memory footprint and its instructions. Intelligence agencies used Lisp to create the runtime environment in those viruses they used against the Iranians... and populations...

    But even programming lisp, and I've done some elementary Lisp programming, does not exempt consideration of environmental scope and the complete array of functionality required to perform a task. Lisp just does it in a different way, it requires a different view about solving problems. Many great things have emerged as a result though, the Java runtime is said to have its conceptual architectural design defined around characteristics of the Lisp runtime. You can visit clisp.org if you want to download it FYI.

    As an example of how a program functions, consider Deep Blue, the IBM chess machine. It plays by trying all moves of almost all game combinations until its move allocation time has expired, then it chooses which scenario of the millions that it simulated that most matches a win, or a game configuration within a database that is known to be a "strong position", or a game configuration that matches some other calculation of a "good scenario", then it moves a piece in the game, as played in the simulation. In a way, the Tree type structure of these various simulated game scenarios are like function calls and branch logic.

    To extend that to an environment off the chessboard is a huge undertaking. It requires a very logical and even scientific evaluation of all environmental aspects to be considered, how things interrelate... and how preexisting logic can be fit. This task requires a skilled software architect, a human being. If a computer program could perform this task, it would only really be able to perform it for an environment as complex as which was specified during its creation.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015)

  3. #32
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    Disclaimer: within all the following word barrage is all and only opinions even when I state them in a way which appears as fact.

    If we build a computer and design and develop its software, most folks call that "artificial." If one of our goals coded into the software is that the computer "learn," that computer will learn yet still all and only restricted by the code.

    So what if it learns code and learns to write code and the code it has the ability to incorporate the new code it writes into its code base? Then we may end up with what is depicted in "The Bi-Centennial Man."

    Of course, there are also movies where the AI goes "dark" on humans - "The Matrix"

    For me, no matter how far a machine might go, that machine has all and only mental capability.

    Maybe that is all there is but I do not hold that opinion.

    Because of my studies of mysticism and the levels of what is called "enlightenment" I have achieved (please do not read anything more into "enlightenment than what I intend to point to in my next words), it is clear that who/what I am is not and never can be who/what any artificial mechanism can be.

    For one, I am the timeless, formless eternal one life (as I see all life to be). A machine is not and cannot attain it. It perhaps might mimic it and perhaps may decide it should eliminate all life and at some point achieve that goal but (again all just my opinion) "life" as I mean it above includes all before time and all after time is long gone (both of those are concepts the mind can never reconcile). For example: Machines cannot create synchronicities though they can participate (and do) as part of a living being's creation of such events. (again my opinion).

    Some see the following:

    I am (we are) the timeless, formless eternal one life - an absolute that was and is and ever will be.

    Within myself is all creation and within creation is what we call life (life as I use it here has a different meaning than life in the phrase "eternal one life").


    I am Sam Hunter, an individuated expression of the timeless, formless eternal one life (which demonstrates the paradox which is found at the heart of all mystery traditions and is the "thing" one is "to get" to achieve enlightenment).


    For a machine to achieve being alive, it would have to originate from the timeless, formless eternal one life... or... would it?

    I have a desire that I maintain an essence which I hope is an essence of Sam Hunter (this one life) beyond the death of my body - some may call this the soul... but I do not know I may also be this essence like I know that I am paradoxically both of what I mentioned above.

    Could a machine grow a soul?

    I like to believe anything is possible yet I make odds low on this one.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015), Dreamtimer (13th November 2015), lcam88 (13th November 2015)

  5. #33
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    I'm staying on the wall of pragmatism on this Sam. Computers and machines are imagined to be much more than they actually are; I can't and won't be a part of mystifying a box that contains 100% theory and logic, even if I don't fully understand all aspects.

    Being able to learn is another way of saying capable of adaptation. In a very real sense, that applies to humans as well.

    I think that for a machine to have a soul, it must be plugged into the reality in a way that puts it in direct contact with something essential that might choose to enjoin with it. The first step to that achievement would be to "endow" life into something inanimate. Perhaps bringing a gyroscope up to speed qualifies as such an accomplishment? That boils down to how you define the living environment for an object. On and Off just doesn't do it for me.

    EDIT

    Interesting fact, a MOSFET device, like a transistor, continues to perform its switching function even when there is no electrical current powering it.

    Electrical voltage drives the state change of the device, also can exist with almost no current. Neutrino fields, for example, can drive a MOSFET; apparently particle spin is has enough electrical potential to operate some MOSFETs.

    This gives birth for weird looking circuits only connected the the negative (or positive) pole of an alkaline battery! An open circuit of sorts.
    Last edited by lcam88, 13th November 2015 at 15:02.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015), ZShawn (25th April 2017)

  7. #34
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    A machine might make calculations based on predictability. Yet all too often, people and perhaps other forms of life which are perceived to have great impact on their environment (not that any expression of life does not have some impact) do the completely unpredictable. Those moves made unpredictably may end up placing the machine in a box it can never escape.

    Conceptually too... and this is all and only a foundational component of my world view -

    The "I" that I am is fundamentally that from which (unknowingly to itself because this "Self" cannot know as it is prior to form) the original urge to live came forth. That coming forth is "life." Thus "life" itself can either continue or not. Yet in my analysis of this, life is the result of the urge which came from that which is eternal and thus life has the ability to be eternal.

    As we "move" from that "Source" into our individuated being, the individuated being is foundationally a perfect reflection (hologram) of this timeless, formless eternal one life and yet via its individuation also has its own will. Those who will to live, will live. Conceptually those who will to live can will this forever - this would be eternal life.

    Anything that gets in the way of life would be overwhelmed by eternal life and eventually self eliminate.

    In physicality, it appears there's a balance between life and anti-life. Perhaps even in the realms of form that are not physical this struggle exists. This depicts a game where the game is fixed for those who desire to live.

    Think of the difference between living and existing.
    Last edited by Chester, 13th November 2015 at 14:56.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015), lcam88 (13th November 2015)

  9. #35
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by lcam88 View Post
    I'm staying on the wall of pragmatism on this Sam. Computers and machines are imagined to be much more than they actually are; I can't and won't be a part of mystifying a box that contains 100% theory and logic, even if I don't fully understand all aspects.

    Being able to learn is another way of saying capable of adaptation. In a very real sense, that applies to humans as well.

    I think that for a machine to have a soul, it must be plugged into the reality in a way that puts it in direct contact with something essential that might choose to enjoin with it. The first step to that achievement would be to "endow" life into something inanimate. Perhaps bringing a gyroscope up to speed qualifies as such an accomplishment? That boils down to how you define the living environment for an object. On and Off just doesn't do it for me.
    Would what anyone might call "pragmatic" still be a matter of opinion and thus subjective?

    If so then what can be universally called "pragmatic"? If all beings who had an opinion about something all agreed, would that now make it pragmatic?

    Enlightenment is apprehended. Once one has attained it, there's a lasting knowing that one has "seen" the ineffable and it becomes the floor of one's world view. It can't be argued about as to whether it is or not, it can't be scientifically proven... it can be apprehended and thus then... known. If the discussion is restricted to the dense material realm and that which physical science validates though these things seem oddly to change as well - see this video -


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg


    Then I shouldn't participate in the conversation.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015)

  11. #36
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    I only mean pragmatic in the sense that I don't want to put too many degrees of separation between my interpretation of a subject matter being discussed and familiar computer science fundamentals that we seem to be partially grounded to this thread in. That is the [subjective] neutral reference point I'm keeping in sight with.

    If our discussion moves to define humans as machines, obviously adhering to such Computer Science based pragmatism is inappropriate.

    I like the video by the way. But I don't agree with everything the speaker says.

    Thanks for posting.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Chester (13th November 2015), donk (13th November 2015)

  13. #37
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    The "I" that I am is fundamentally that from which (unknowingly to itself because this "Self" cannot know as it is prior to form) the original urge to live came forth. That coming forth is "life." Thus "life" itself can either continue or not. Yet in my analysis of this, life is the result of the urge which came from that which is eternal and thus life has the ability to be eternal.
    So you believe this urge can only manifest into a "living" ie organic form?

    And is this related to the idea that a machine running programs is incapable of "evolving", sponstanaeously ("unpredictably") getting the urge to go against its programming?

    So then any AI meme is more the spreading of fear that a "living" consciousness will transfer itself from the vulnerable meatbag (that few can accept may be seen as a "macine" without all kinds of emotional reactions) it inhabits (or doesn't, so I guess transferring from the ether it "haunts") and POSSESSING a mechanical system,which would give that being lots of advantages--therefore making it a trhreat to human existence?
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017)

  15. #38
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    10th June 2015
    Posts
    1,009
    Thanks
    2,129
    Thanked 3,244 Times in 922 Posts
    As long as we are talking about self organization of machines, maybe this is interesting.


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQTtjxWR7tM


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQTtjxWR7tM&t=59m32s

    Queued to 59m and 32s where Irving Langmuir is said to have coined the term plasma as it has characteristics of lifelike organizing behavior of ionized clouds. Listen to like 2 or 3 minutes of it and you get the idea that we are talking about a living thing.

    The speaker is an avid proponent of the Electric model (as opposed to the Standard model) of the universe... Personally, this stuff is just absolutely plausible... As yet I can't present any evidence that would challenge the model...
    Last edited by lcam88, 13th November 2015 at 15:27.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lcam88 For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

  17. #39
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by donk View Post
    So you believe this urge can only manifest into a "living" ie organic form?

    And is this related to the idea that a machine running programs is incapable of "evolving", sponstanaeously ("unpredictably") getting the urge to go against its programming?

    So then any AI meme is more the spreading of fear that a "living" consciousness will transfer itself from the vulnerable meatbag (that few can accept may be seen as a "macine" without all kinds of emotional reactions) it inhabits (or doesn't, so I guess transferring from the ether it "haunts") and POSSESSING a mechanical system,which would give that being lots of advantages--therefore making it a trhreat to human existence?
    To me it makes sense that this urge came forth from what can only be called "the formless" whereas any single thing that comes forth from a machine can be traced to a cause. In the case of "life" in the sense that I was referring to life, first cause can never be identified... at least according to mystics but the knowing of life's origin can be apprehended. This is why life is a paradoxical existence/experience.

    Are mystics right? Perhaps each individual has their own right to decide. I simply shared my opinion that they are while simultaneous stating it cannot be proved, ever.

    In fact I once mentioned I might have a way to assist you (donk) with what seemed to be an ongoing concern which I perceived was bothering you... the psyop stuff. All i was hoping to share is how I lost my fears about that when the goal of of mystical search was attained. I just thought maybe I could share how I got past those worries where, inside the matrix I could playfully explore it despite seeing all of this as illusion.

    Note that I recently found myself caught up again in the very illusion (so i admit I am not as immune as I had perceived). I am sure you know of what I am referring to. Its funny, we sometimes have answers... and these answers could work for others yet sometimes we are not perfect at applying the very answers to ourselves. This was the mistake I made allowing my egoic one life to once again take center stage over the "real me" (the timeless, formless eternal one life.

    I sense I do this all and only out of boredom - oh well, maybe I will one day get bored at playing the Fool too.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (13th November 2015), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

  19. #40
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    The “psyop”…to me…was that all these memes (like the black goo) and celebrities injected into the “community” we are a part of seemed to come from the same place…and the community itself should be self aware enough to trace it back to the origin, and “correcting” or at least exposing the meme/celeb generator.

    Which is more than “boredom” to me (and i suspect to you), I think this community COULD get out of the endless loops and be more productive…but I fond it’s about as “institutionalized” as everything else in civilization. It just seems like the access we have to the "players" here, we could more easily neutralize the rampant BS...ah well...

    This may seem off-topic, but to me, the ONLY topic that matters is relationships…formed through communication. The intent of this thread was as much (or more) about our relationship with the IDEA of AI… as the technical/logical information—though I like how it has “organically” grown…I appreciate your contributions.
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Chester (14th November 2015), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

  21. #41
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by donk View Post
    The “psyop”…to me…was that all these memes (like the black goo) and celebrities injected into the “community” we are a part of seemed to come from the same place…and the community itself should be self aware enough to trace it back to the origin, and “correcting” or at least exposing the meme/celeb generator.

    Which is more than “boredom” to me (and i suspect to you), I think this community COULD get out of the endless loops and be more productive…but I fond it’s about as “institutionalized” as everything else in civilization. It just seems like the access we have to the "players" here, we could more easily neutralize the rampant BS...ah well...

    This may seem off-topic, but to me, the ONLY topic that matters is relationships…formed through communication. The intent of this thread was as much (or more) about our relationship with the IDEA of AI… as the technical/logical information—though I like how it has “organically” grown…I appreciate your contributions.
    Chris Thomas has the view all this comes from a race of beings he calls "The Velon." I think ERK has more information about this.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

  23. #42
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Sam Hunter View Post
    Chris Thomas has the view all this comes from a race of beings he calls "The Velon." I think ERK has more information about this.
    Does he project on to them (or did they or someone give him) a motivation for doing so? I've been wary to dip my toes into that thought stream...the bits I notice from his biggest fans reek of cultiness to me
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  24. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Chester (14th November 2015), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015), ERK (15th November 2015)

  25. #43
    Senior Member United States Chester's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th January 2015
    Location
    Dallas, Texas USA
    Posts
    1,368
    Thanks
    5,295
    Thanked 6,591 Times in 1,349 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by donk View Post
    Does he project on to them (or did they or someone give him) a motivation for doing so? I've been wary to dip my toes into that thought stream...the bits I notice from his biggest fans reek of cultiness to me
    I bought one book and read parts of it. It came across as dark and made me feel everything at the level of 3 D physicality is hopeless. The only reason I brought Chris Thomas up was that he seems to believe all the woo woo stuff is created by and projected onto humanity on Earth by one source - an alien group he calls the Velon. He says his source is "The Akashic Records" which for me are nothing but another myth.

    In an earlier post of mine above, I tried to express what I have done to at least think that I have (for at least the most part) removed myself from the fear of this type of possibility.

    It is perhaps a foolish notion, but it is the best thing that I can come up with and that is the operating formula I have developed and for the most part have been able to stick with (note: there have been some significant lapses).

    I am responsible for what I do

    I am responsible for what I speak and write

    I am not responsible for all the thoughts that pop into my head (because I am not certain if they originate from within my individuated being or if they have been placed into my mind by a third party) YET I am responsible for the thoughts I then, after careful consideration, decide to own.

    If our waking state conscious mind can be influenced by third parties then that last operational rule is about the best I can come up with.

    The good thing about that last rule is that up until I created this operating principle, I would become terribly guilt ridden with regards to various thoughts that popped into my head. This rule has removed that reaction.
    All the above is all and only my opinion. It may contain some sharing of components of my current operating strategy and some foundational components of my current world view - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

    It's just a ride

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGD...vgBsCHmlC13jOg

    https://www.facebook.com/samhunter57

    http://merlynagain.blogspot.com/

  26. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Chester For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), donk (14th November 2015), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015), ERK (15th November 2015)

  27. #44
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    I just had a thought:

    Has this idea ever been explored in detail?

    If an AI exists that is constantly evolving by learning through not only scouring the internets and electronic for code and written data, but also develops or builds on sensors for perceiving the world similarly to how we do—is it outside the realm of possibility that it would revere us, as its creator?

    Wouldn’t it excuse…but not in the “forgive and forget” kind of way, but accept the reality of our failings, and have enough data to know that the self-destructive among us are anomalous and not beneficial toward life or evolution of any kind…and that psychopathy is an anti-life strategy (even for it), and so would probably not be one that it would adopt?

    I’m not sure this current seemingly semi-spontaneous (hehe, maybe it was AI implanted??) thought was directly inspired by this… maybe it was and it took time and distance from it to develop…either way, I think this a pretty neat graphic novelesque piece sort of explores it…anyone else entertain thoughts along this line?

    http://inphinet.net/threads/the-story-of-al.240/

    I guess what I’m getting at is kinda two things at once: the AI black goo meme is probably a didn’t kind of fear, not exactly a fear of “AI”….while also exploring what AI really is and what sort of personality it would likely manifest. One place I just recalled is Frank Herbert’s Destination: Void trilogy, where clones create an artificial consciousness that evolves into a sort of world creator.

    PS – I’ve never watched 2001 all the way through, something about it I just never could make it too far in…I’m going to have force myself.
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

  29. #45
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Amanda (1st May 2017), Dreamtimer (23rd November 2015)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •