Poll: Would a "real brain CPU" represent artificial or actual intelligence?
Poll Options
View poll results: Would a "real brain CPU" represent artificial or actual intelligence?
Yes
6 17%
No
9 26%
Lieutenant Dan!
20 57%
Voters: 35.
Page 1 of 2
#1
Suppose it were feasable to create an actual brain, separate from a body, from stem cells that became neurons.

Now say that brain is connected to technology in a way that allows it to act as a super processor and hard drive. It's only function is to store and process data. (Not too dissimilar from how it is used normally)

Is that artificial or real intelligence?

edit: Just realized my lack of attention in the poll. Assume that the question is: "Does a real brain CPU represent artificial intelligence?", then answer yes or no accordingly.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
Last edited by eGraham at Sep 27, 2013,
#2
artificial in the sense that it is contrived rather than arising naturally

if god mades us intelligent, does that make us artificially intelligent though?
#3
A splendidly rousing point
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#4
Artificial.

Artificial, if I recall english class properly, comes from artifice, which comes from the latin artificium, which means art/craft/trade/etc. Something that someone would make or sell or design. It doesn't mean something inorganic as much as it means something created by the hands of man, or in this case, the test tubes of man. Therefore, it would be artificial.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 75-87
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 4-5
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 92-54
#5
So even if, hypothetically, the brain spontaneously developed the power of individual thought, you would still consider it artificial? Because it was crafted?
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#6
From a computer science standpoint, artificial intelligence is still making decisions based on equations. So, saying something becomes able to make it's own decisions, is it then still artificial intelligence? Or true intelligence?
#7
^Edit: By the computer science definition, no, by the textbook definition, yes. Figuring out which of those is more valid is why I'm not an English major, although you can argue that for something that is made of organic material - which the theoretical brain is - isn't under the field of computer science.

Quote by eGraham
So even if, hypothetically, the brain spontaneously developed the power of individual thought, you would still consider it artificial? Because it was crafted?


By my definitions, yes. If we create something that can think, feel, imagine exactly as we do, it was still fabricated by humans, and therefore is artificial.

It makes more sense if you refer to our intelligence as "organic intelligence", since artificial intelligence, if equal with us, is still intelligence that is very real.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 75-87
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 4-5
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 92-54
Last edited by necrosis1193 at Sep 27, 2013,
#8
come on mate, just play mass effect like everyone else and learn all about it
It's over simplified, So what!

Quote by eGraham
I'm going to be on top of what is called a knob
Quote by theguitarist
Big ones can be fun in some ways but generally, they are a pain in the ass.
Quote by Wolfinator-x
I don't know what is going on in this thread or why I have an erection.
#9
What's the difference between calculations made by an A.I. and the meat machines that are our brains? It all comes down to logic gates in the end. The only difference as of now is that our brains can decide what's worth making decisions about.

edit

that and the overwhelming computational capacity
#10
Quote by necrosis1193
^Edit: By the computer science definition, no, by the textbook definition, yes. Figuring out which of those is more valid is why I'm not an English major, although you can argue that for something that is made of organic material - which the theoretical brain is - isn't under the field of computer science.

It's organic, but this practice would be related as much to computer science as it would biology and neurology.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#11
I think the distinction between artificial and actual intelligence is a specious one. Right now we use "artificial intelligence" to describe a system capable of learning that still lacks the human capacity in many ways. Once that gap is closed, I don't think there will be a real distinction. Intelligence and learning capacity are what they are, regardless of what they're called.
#12
Quote by eGraham
say that brain is connected to technology in a way


Quote by emad
jthm_guitarist
Warned for trolling!


Quote by metal4eva_22
Didn't you say that you had a stuffed fox that you would occasionally fuck?

Quote by Axelfox
It's not a fox,it's a wolf.
#13
Quote by eGraham
Suppose it were feasable to create an actual brain, separate from a body, from stem cells that became neurons.

Now say that brain is connected to technology in a way that allows it to act as a super processor and hard drive. It's only function is to store and process data. (Not too dissimilar from how it is used normally)

Is that artificial or real intelligence?

edit: Just realized my lack of attention in the poll. Assume that the question is: "Does a real brain CPU represent artificial intelligence?", then answer yes or no accordingly.


If it's just being used to store and process data it's not really 'intelligence' anyway. It's data processing.

'Artificial' and 'real' are not antitheses. 'Real' only means that it works.

Your scenario is not 'artificial' because the functionality of neurons is natural.

My question is: why would you use huge, slow, oxygen and nutrient-hungry animal neurons if you could achieve the same function using artificial ones? The brain is remarkable because of its mind-boggling interconnectivity. If we could replicate that using super-fast artificial neurons, then we'd have a supercomputer.
#14
This is like labeling produce grocery stores as 'organic'. I should hope it's organic, I don't want to be eating any of that plastic fruit or anything.
#15
It would not be artificial intelligence because it would not be algorithmic. Brains don't work like that. Even if you simulated neural activity as a software object, it wouldn't be AI in that sense of the word. Also, would it be ethical to create a human brain? It's kind of like experimenting on a human prisoner.
#17
eGraham has gone mad with science
Quote by korinaflyingv
On the come up we were listening to Grateful Dead and the music started passing through my bowel and out my arsehole as this violet stream of light. I shat music. It was beautiful.
#18
Our faith in God is testing us.
Quote by Dave Mustaine
If you want to be treated intelligently, act intelligent.

#19
I finished reading the Cyberiad the other day and it was set in a universe where robots had become so advanced and so much time had passed that most thought they existed first and they treat organic life as a robot creation.

What is 'alive' or 'real' anyway?


I like to think that at some point AIs can be considered to be 'real' and equally that we can model, program or build an organic intelligence that is on the same or higher level as humans.
O.K.

“There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want.”
~ Bill Watterson


O__o
#20
You've given a pretty vague and odd choice. Of course it's "artificial" in that someone has built it, but that doesn't really seem to tell us anything interesting or important about the nature (or existence) of that mind. Being artificial doesn't necessarily exclude it from being qualitatively different from an "actual" intelligence, in the same way being natural or organic doesn't guarantee intelligence.
#21
It'll always be artificial. No matter how advanced it is, it'll always rely on algorithms and equations to produce results. Human brains do not rely on these techniques to make decisions.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Sep 27, 2013,
#22
Surely it would depend on what the "brain" was doing. If it was merely processing information in the same way that a computer's processor does then no, it isn't intelligent in the slightest. If it was thinking for itself and making decisions based on the input and wasn't being told how to make the decision then I think it would be a form of intelligence. I think AI is a bit of a misnomer in any case. If the criterion for artificial intelligence is merely being man made then what does that say for human or natural intelligence?
<--- This is Wally. Not Waldo.

Gear List:
Ibanez RG570
Fender MIA Strat (in black, HSS)
Godawful Marshall MG practice amp

My Youtube
My godawful blog
#24
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
It'll always be artificial. No matter how advanced it is, it'll always rely on algorithms and equations to produce results. Human brains do not rely on these techniques to make decisions.


Why will it always rely on algorithms and equations?


On topic: if we could make a brain that was identical in function and form to a human brain then not only would it not be artificial, it would be a human brain. If two things are equal to the same thing then they are equal to each other.
...Stapling helium to penguins since 1949.
Last edited by Todd Hart at Sep 27, 2013,
#25
Quote by Todd Hart
Why will it always rely on algorithms and equations?

In terms of what is typically thought of as computer hardware as opposed to the human brain, there always will be a distinction. But if a computer becomes a bio-molecular entity, it shouldn't really be considered a computer at all, but be considered an organism.

If we're talking about an intelligence created using the typical algorithmic medium, it'll always be an artificial intelligence, as it is only simulating what it has been programmed to do.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Sep 27, 2013,
#27
It's kind of a grey area (lol brain joke), but if you grow an actual brain that's indistinguishable from a human one, then I'd go with 'actual intelligence' and say you've just performed some form of cloning. However, once you put it into a system with non-human parts, I'd say that system was some sort of hybrid intelligence system.

Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
It'll always be artificial. No matter how advanced it is, it'll always rely on algorithms and equations to produce results. Human brains do not rely on these techniques to make decisions.

The term 'algorithm' is system independent. So yes, human brains do use algorithms. Anything that does anything does.
Last edited by captainsnazz at Sep 27, 2013,
#28
Quote by Godsmack_IV
Is not building a brain according to a DNA blueprint an algorithm?

A very different kind of algorithm to the typical for computers.
Quote by captainsnazz
The term 'algorithm' is system independent. So yes, human brains do use algorithms. Anything that does anything does.

I know. I was associating 'typical algorithms' with what is used in computer languages. I should have clarified a little.
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Omae wa mou
Shindeiru



Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Sep 27, 2013,
#29
I'd like to believe, ironically perhaps, that our intelligence is shaped by our stupidity.

Stupidity of trying/dreaming of stuff that is not feasible at the given time, in turn developing and/or evolving to make it feasible.

We humans adapt, because we dream of something better, without any scientific fact and/or current technology that makes it possible.

A great deal we can do now, was once laughed upon, or even called witchcraft.

So in order to make AI true intel, machines need to dream, but a human evolves over time to become better, machine naturally does not.

So the 2nd part would be finding out how motivation stimulates cells to diverge.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
Last edited by xxdarrenxx at Sep 27, 2013,
#30
Computational theory of mind breaks neuron connections down into groups of AND, OR, and NOT gates. Everything your mind does is a sequence of AND, OR, and NOT. Computers are the same way except that they tend to use NAND/NOR over AND/OR for practical reasons.
#32
Quote by jthm_guitarist


Quote by MadClownDisease
You've given a pretty vague and odd choice.

My intention was ambiguity, so that some theories might be thrown out there when people try to support their decisions.

Quote by hriday_hazarika
I say we let the CPU brain decide.

CPU BRAIN SAYS YES
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#36
Quote by Godsmack_IV
What's the difference between calculations made by an A.I. and the meat machines that are our brains? It all comes down to logic gates in the end. The only difference as of now is that our brains can decide what's worth making decisions about.

edit

that and the overwhelming computational capacity

the difference is logic, yes. say we're faced with an equation like 51 x 200, we would figure out the answer by using logical 'tricks' we've been taught, for example isolating the two zeros at the end of the number 200, then multiplying 51 by 2 (102) and adding the two zeros onto the end of that to make 10,200. or as I do with many math questions you can transform the problem into a simpler one, eg. in this scenario solving 50 x 200 first, which is a simple 10,000. then you add the extra 1 x 200 to that answer and get the solution. This approach to calculating is what separates the human mind from A.I. which merely accesses stored information. I guess you could argue that simple problems such as 5 x 5, could be solved in a similiar manner to A.I. as the answers are memorized and we don't do any calculating, we've just solved the problem several times before and are recalling the answer
Quote by Night
wtf is a selfie? is that like, touching yourself or something?
#37
It would be impossible to distinguish the two at some point. So, I don't really know. I could be part of an advanced simulation and never know the difference since my perception of what I believe to be intelligence is caused by a very limited number of factors. If there is a real intelligence beyond my perception of artificial intelligence there would be no way of knowing.
"Dude, am I really thinking or am I, just like, thinking that I'm thinking?" -Bill Nye

CHIMPS>WOLVES

Quote by progdude93
I don't believe the Big Bang
#38
Quote by Wiegenlied
the difference is logic, yes. say we're faced with an equation like 51 x 200, we would figure out the answer by using logical 'tricks' we've been taught, for example isolating the two zeros at the end of the number 200, then multiplying 51 by 2 (102) and adding the two zeros onto the end of that to make 10,200. or as I do with many math questions you can transform the problem into a simpler one, eg. in this scenario solving 50 x 200 first, which is a simple 10,000. then you add the extra 1 x 200 to that answer and get the solution. This approach to calculating is what separates the human mind from A.I. which merely accesses stored information. I guess you could argue that simple problems such as 5 x 5, could be solved in a similiar manner to A.I. as the answers are memorized and we don't do any calculating, we've just solved the problem several times before and are recalling the answer


We're dealing with A.I. here so it isn't limited to preset methods.

When doing math, at a high level you are choosing how to approach it, either by falling back on mental math tricks you have learnt / in memory or by creating new ones. A.I. is capable of doing both of these. It can either rely on preset methods or it can create new methods via genetic programming algorithms and then evaluate their computational efficiency. At a low-level, neurons/computer architecture, the components seem to similarly perform boolean operations.
#40
Never has there been a more psuedo-intellectual thread in the pit. Literally no qualified or educated opinions. Entirely assumptions and conjecture.
Page 1 of 2