Artificial Intelligence: Computers Judging OUR Play??

Yes, that is plausible. Whoever programs thinking computers, must include in the program that humans are the most valuable creatures between all species, and should never be a collective target of intentional harm. No species should, BTW. Since I think humans will certainly know that to be essential, leaving it out of the program would count as an intentional decision.

But independently of all of that, computers will still not be aware of their own processes, because they don't have souls. The thinking capacity and the perception of the thinking capacities are two completely different things. In order for something to be "observed", you need an "observer". Computers may think, but they can't be aware that they are thinking or that they even exist.

I think that it is entirely possible to create a conscious machine with quantum computing...

but given human track record, I doubt the machine will be created within the framework of ethics...money and profits have been masters of scientists and engineers for quite some time now

why do you think the world is so full of castrophic irresolvable problems?

your 80-120 IQ humans could not have created all these problems...

Is this thread actual turning into something

Please

No

OH NO. IT'S ALIVE

you are right. computer are only so "smart" as the programmers logic allow it.

the programmers that buildt DEEP BLUE probably would never have been able to beat Kasparov in chess....

and the programmers that build IBM's Watson would never have won the game Jeopardy against the all-time champions...

I guess these programmers built machines that are better at playing chess and jeopardy than themselves...

My point is that no matter how much intelligence you put in a computer, it will never create a soul. Intelligence and soul are two separate things which happen to coexist in the human being.

How does 'soul' relate to 'consciousness'?

you are right but they created the logic that made it possible for the computers to win at Jeopardy.

if the logic is to e.g. search in a database with a milion entries in 1 seconds for something - no human can do it.

a computer can find it in a split second. that doesn't mean they are smarter than humans. as it is a simple look for something query.

and for chess playing, humans created the brute force algoritm and told the chess engine how to evaluate a position as good.

a human cannot bruteforce a chess position that would take forever. However humans know the logic behind it.

However a program is not smarter than the programmers that built it.

and I might be able to win at Jeopardy if I was allowed to bring google search with me.

if the programmers was allowed to bring databases and search the same way the program did.

Jerry Shaw, you have been activated. 

The computer has 1 million moves stored = Good luck

Because a soul is conscious. A computer isn't, and a corpse isn't either, even if it died 1 second ago.

You can create a super intelligent computer, which can even simulate emotions, but it can never be aware of its own existence, nor can it perceive his thoughts and emotions, because there is no being to perceive them, although they exist.

I actually disagree AlxMaster.  Of course there is no way currently for either of us to prove our position but I don't believe in the 'soul' (I don't disbelieve it either...just not convinced it exists).  But I do believe in consciousness.  The brain and body works much like a machine in that electrical signals and the structure of our brains/bodies give rise to consciousness.  I think one day we will replicate this phenomenon in a machine.

Electricity can't possibly give rise to consciousness, otherwise computers would already be conscious and so would plants, because they also have some electrical signals, although they have no nervous system.

Consciousness is not a property of matter, we do have our machine part which is the brain and nervous system, but the consciousness is certainly something else, they just happen to coexist at the same time.

The brain and our nervous system are literally a computer, with wires that channel electrical signs in the same way the computer does. But the difference is that the computer signs are analyzed merely by the programs, while our signs are actually translated to the soul in the form of perception. But to "perceive", you need a "perceiver", you can't create it artificially.

You can create a very intelligent computer, but can't create consciousness, unless you scientfically succeed in making a soul incarnate in the machine, but the soul would have to exist previously and I don't actually think anyone can do that.

That is a fine argument bobbyDK. I won't argue with that. It is what I think.

I indeed never said that the computer is smarter than the programmers. My choices of words and meaning ware very careful regarding that.

But there will come that day when they will have built that computer the super AI.

The brain depends both on the chemicals and electrical impulses actioning the neurons and synapses.

a brain with no electrical impulse activity is one that is found only in a corpse.

the closest to a soulless human being I can think of is the serial killer...the serial killer has consciousness but I don't think it has a soul.

The serial killer lacking emotions studies and mimics emotions of humans and manipulate the latter....a super AI might find that this will be the way that it will interact with humans - not that the super AI is necessarily a serial killer...but it will process humans and their emotions in much the same way

The deep question about consciousness is whether it can be simulated by an algorythm or not.

The human brain gives rise to consciousness, the brain is a physical system, so it must be possible for a physical system to be conscious.

It is not a big revelation that it is possible to build a physical system ( a 'machine' if you like ) which is conscious, this is already happening, humans are machines built based on the 1GB information stored in their DNA and they are conscious. Therefore it is possible.

The problem is whether this can be done by an algorythm.

The claim is: simulate the physical system with an algorythm and it will be conscious. Easy.

However here is the twist, is it possible to simulate physics with an algorythm, or putting it in an other way: is physics computable?

It may or may not be. But this can't be taken for granted. There is a logical possibility that physics is not computable and for some reason this possibility is neglected in discussions about consciousness.

A very trivial source of uncomputable physics is that of randomness. No algorythm can compute a random number. If quantum mechanics is dependent on true randomness then no algorythm can simulate quantum mechanics. If consciousness is dependent on quantum mechanics and it is not possible to simulate quantum mechanics with an algorythm then no algorythm can simulate consciousness.

@watcha - good points raised.

bottom line, because humans is a flawed species, anything it creates outside God's law will also be flawed. And it will always be so -- because humans will NEVER know everything. God has made it so. Take for example the number Pi or Euler's number.

humans and their scientists - as soon as they learn something, gain some little knowledge of the laws of physics proceed to monkey around with that law -- creating a thing that DOES NOT FIT holistically with nature.

Here's a way to look at the Rise of Consciousness in "animals" (humans included for argument sake)...

I believe and have read that consciousness "appears" after a certain threashold of complexity is reached in the brain.  For example, it's easy to compare a fruit fly to a human and say, "A fruit fly is not conscious and operates completely on instinct whereas humans clearly are self-conscious and have free-will."  Another basic way to explain consciousness and to try and do away with the mysteriousness is to look at a non-living "holistic" example.  I like the metaphore of a giant road-side billboard made up of small light bulbs.  If you are standing up close to the sign, all you see are light bulbs but if you back way up you suddenly see a MESSAGE.  They are on two different levels....the small components of the sign and the message.  There is no way to look at a row of light bulbs and realize there is a higher meaning behind it...you have to ascend (by backing up) to grasp the meaning.  Same thing, IMHO, with the mind (or a computer for that matter).  Regardless of your understanding of neurons, physics, chemo-electrical signals...you cannot know that consciousness exists without "backing up" and looking at the animal as a whole.

As I said, the "soul" is just an invention of the human mind and can't be taken for granted.  We know consciousness is real though and if it can be created by the natural world then it can be replicated by humans (assuming we are capable of creating that level of technology).  Serial killers may or may not have souls...I'll leave that up to the theologens...but they certainly do have consciousness.

Here is my argument against complexity:

Take sleepwalking ( somnambulism ) for example.

Sleepwalking is a very complex behaviour, yet it does not involve consciousness.

You can walk consciously. You can walk and be aware that you are walking.

You can walk unconsciously. You can walk and not be aware that you are walking.

There is nothing in walking and the complexity of walking that has anything to do with consciousness.

Information processing of arbitrary complexity can be done in an unconscious way.