The first sentient computer

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

willpittenger

Guest
<p>Gene Roddenberry made Data the first (or rather, the second/third/whatever) sentient computer into a fully mobile humanoid android.&nbsp; To me, the first sentient computer won't fit into anything the size of a human.&nbsp; It will be the size of a small room and be barely sentient.&nbsp; True androids will take at least another century.&nbsp; Even then, their brains might be somewhere besides their head.</p><p>What do others think? </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Gene Roddenberry made Data the first (or rather, the second/third/whatever) sentient computer into a fully mobile humanoid android.&nbsp; To me, the first sentient computer won't fit into anything the size of a human.&nbsp; It will be the size of a small room and be barely sentient.&nbsp; True androids will take at least another century.&nbsp; Even then, their brains might be somewhere besides their head.What do others think? <br /> Posted by willpittenger</DIV></p><p>Well, if we're strictly considering digital technology, then you'd probably be right.&nbsp; At least, the aggregate would be the size of a small room.&nbsp; It could be several machines, linked togther from remote locations as well.</p><p>There's always the possibility of new technology introducing new capacities or processes that enable complex computations.&nbsp; Even bio-matter based computers that "grow" circuits as needed or crystal structures that continue to add branches could be waiting in the wings.&nbsp; Other forms of storage could greatly enhance speed and processing power.&nbsp; It's all dependent on technology.&nbsp; In fact, it might not be possible using today's technology.&nbsp; A digital computer just might not be able to be sentient where another, operating on something more complex, could have that ability. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
D

docm

Guest
<p>Things are moving fast on many fronts that would highly "cointract" the size of any near-sentient computer.</p><p>First is the recent development of a 3-value memory &nbsp;(0, 1, 2) using nanowires.</p><p>Second is quantum computing, for which there have been many recent developments that bring it closer than previously thought, including the use of diamonds (Science abstract)&nbsp; (ARS Technica article)</p><p>Third, and most interesting to me, is the development of a molecular machine/computing&nbsp;unit (Link to abstract) (Link to MSNBC Cosmic Log article)</p><p><span><strong>Quote:</strong></span></p><p><span>"Within one and a half years we will have 1,024 machines connected," </span>></p><p>"The second application is building a massively parallel supercomputer based on the working principle of our brain. The computer that we are going to build is based on the proposal of L. Chua and Roska&rsquo;s work on cellular neural networks (CNN) in 1989, which is a combination of cellular automation and the neural network of our brain. In this concept, highly interconnected arrays of cells communicate with&nbsp;all their neighbors at a time, following a&nbsp;particular equation. In principle, these unconventional processors are astronomically powerful compared to existing processors.</p><p><strong>Unquote</strong></p><p>These rings are not the end; they propose using them in 3D clusters and plan on moving in that direction immediately.&nbsp; Imagine millions of such clusters acting in parallel and Moore's Law looks pessimistic.</p><p><strong>Image of a single ring</strong><br /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/7/11/375b95d4-dcc4-49fe-bb27-795ead0fdb01.Medium.jpg" alt="" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
Here's a thorny question for the lawyers out there: In which countries would that sentient computer be eligible for citizenship? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Even then, their brains might be somewhere besides their head.</p><p>Posted by willpittenger</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>So you're saying the first android will be male? <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;So you're saying the first android will be male?</p><p>Posted by derekmcd</DIV><br />No.&nbsp; Rather, I expect that the brain could fill the entire torso -- and the head. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
D

docm

Guest
<p>The brain could be a remote unit with higher capacity, not unlike the MIT's NEXI "social robot".....</p><p><img style="width:300px;height:447px" src="http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/7799_Sad%20Robot.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br /><br />MIT page<br /><br />MIT technical video (WATCH THIS ONE!!) (MOV format)<br /><br />Save/As and watching it in Quicktime at 2x size is recommended.<br /><br />YouTube video (shows expressiveness etc.)<br /><br />Daily Tech story.... <br /></p><div style="margin:5px0px0px"><div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px"><strong>MIT Develops Advanced Humanlike <span class="highlight">Robot</span></strong><br /><br />Like something straight out of the movies, MIT's NEXI body has human-like expressions and speech, which is either really cool or really creepy<br /><br />Scientist continue to push the boundaries of artificial intelligence, deploying robots and computer AIs into increasingly complex and varied situations. <br /><br />Many observers on robotics and artificial intelligence, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, remain skeptical that robots will ever be able to perform human like tasks and interact with humans on a social basis.<br /><br />However, seeing is believing, and if MIT's startling new video is any indication, it appears that researchers at the MIT Media Lab are much closer to overcoming the latter obstacle than previously thought. The product of the Lab's team, directed by Dr. Cynthia Breazeal, is a human-like <span class="highlight">robot</span> named Nexi that speaks and features complex hand movements and facial gestures.<br /><br />Nexi is an Mobile Dexterous Social <span class="highlight">robot</span>, or MDS. The <span class="highlight">robot</span> is mobile as it can navigate via wheels. It features a mobile base that is self balance, akin to a mini-Segway. It can travel at human walking speed.<br /><br />The <span class="highlight">robot</span> is dexterous in that it has two highly agile arms. The arms have four degrees of freedom (DOF), are elastic, and are based on the DOMO/WAM style arm design. They support position and force control via force sensors. The arms together can pick up a 10 pound object, fully extended. Several of the robots can "team up" to lift heavier objects. The shoulder chassis of the <span class="highlight">robot</span> is mounted on a torso pivot, giving it full freedom of motion.<br /><br />A DSP and FPGA control the motors while the balancing and force control are achieved via an embedded PC running Linux OS mounted near the base. The Linux PC features wireless communication. A laser sight is used to avoid obstacles.<br /><br />The hands are one of the robot's unique features. They feature five degrees of freedom. The forearm can roll and provide wrist flex akin to a human forearm. Each hand features three fingers and an opposable thumb, with the index finger and thumb independently controlled and the other two fingers coupled together. The <span class="highlight">robot</span> can grip objects and make hand gestures to convey emotions. The arms are developed by Meka, Inc. with help from MIT, and also feature protection against collision and slips.<br /><br />The most interesting and perhaps most disturbing part of Nexi is its expressive face. The face, design by Xitome Design with MIT, features complex expressions. The four degrees of freedom neck can bend low at the base and the head supports a pan-tilt-yaw, allowing for human-like motions. It can nod, shake its head, or move its head as if orienting itself with its surroundings.<br /><br />The face has 15 DOF and features expressive eyebrows, gaze, eyelids, and mandible. Each eye has a color CCD camera and the head also features an active indoor IR camera. Four separate microphones allow it to localize sounds and another microphone is used to detect speech. It has a speaker to allow it to synthesize speech.<br /><br />For the robot's human-like behavior and interaction, MIT is focusing on a human-robot interaction approach, which seeks to identify what average citizens want in a <span class="highlight">robot</span>. MIT will be deploying a team of four robots during a two week pilot program at the Boston Museum of Science in the summer of 2009.<br /><br />The <span class="highlight">robot</span> will interact with visitors within a "robot playroom." It will engage listeners in conversation and express emotions. During these interactions the <span class="highlight">robot</span> will try to learn conversation and new behaviors. At points the MIT operates can elect to tele-operate the <span class="highlight">robot</span>, Wizard of Oz style to give it more complex behavior, or help conversations from getting to boring. The <span class="highlight">robot</span> supports many emotions including sadness, anger, confusion, excitement, and boredom.<br /><br />If the video Nexi independently demonstrates its basic conversational skills, greeting the viewer and informing them, "But I hope you can see that I am very happy that I met you. Thank you for visiting me and I hope to see you again soon!"<br /><br />While the MIT researchers admit that human level learning and more complex conversational skills remain currently unsolved challenges, Nexi certainly represents an amalgamation of exciting and exotic advances in robotics. With robots like Nexi that can learn and interact, the world may soon become a very different place.<br /><br />The MIT team's research is sponsored by an ONR DURIP Award "Mobile, Dexterous, Social Robots to Support Complex Human-Robot Teamwork in Uncertain Environments" and by a Microsoft grant.
 
L

lampblack

Guest
<p>You guys are so limited by 22nd Century technology.</p><p>Of COURSE Data's positronic brain is entirely within his head (as it were). To believe otherwise is to be beholden to ancient 22nd Century paradigms. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
J

jmilsom

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>You guys are so limited by 22nd Century technology.Of COURSE Data's positronic brain is entirely within his head (as it were). To believe otherwise is to be beholden to ancient 22nd Century paradigms. <br />Posted by lampblack</DIV></p><p>Then why did they call him data? It's like calling an orange, orange juice. <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...The second application is building a massively parallel supercomputer based on the working principle of our brain. The computer that we are going to build is based on the proposal of L. Chua and Roska&rsquo;s work on cellular neural networks (CNN) in 1989, which is a combination of cellular automation and the neural network of our brain. ...Posted by docm</DIV></p><p>This approach would be a lot more credible if anyone had the slightest idea what the "working principle of our brain" is.</p><p>It most certainly is not a neural network, which is just a hyped-up term for an adaptive control system.&nbsp; Neural networks exhibit nothing that I would call intelligence.</p><p>The area of artificial intelligence came into being about the same time that computer science emerged as a separate discipline.&nbsp; Unfortunately it has come nowhere near living up to its early promise.&nbsp; We have been able to make very large parallel computers and they can solve some difficult problems, notably in fluid dynamics and code breaking.&nbsp; But we are a long way from a machine that can actually think creatively or is in any sense sentient.&nbsp; Even the best computer chess players are not creative, but perform by brute force evaluation of a myriad of possibilities.</p><p>I think we have a very long way to go before we see an android like Data.</p><p>I will be impressed with artificial intelligence when and if a computer proves the Riemann Hypothesis.<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
L

lampblack

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I will be impressed with artificial intelligence when and if a computer proves the Riemann Hypothesis. <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>Yep... I'll admit it if nobody else will -- I had to google that one.</p><p>Anything involving the use of "non-trivial zeros" sounds pretty scary to me. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>You guys are so limited by 22nd Century technology.Of COURSE Data's positronic brain is entirely within his head (as it were). To believe otherwise is to be beholden to ancient 22nd Century paradigms.</p><p>Posted by lampblack</DIV><br />Actually, I was never talking about Data there.&nbsp; Rather, I was talking about the first <strong><em>re</em><em>al</em></strong> android. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
E

eburacum45

Guest
<p>Yes, the first human-equivalent artificial intelligences will be much bigger than the human brain, so will not be mobile. These AIs might have access to robotic bodies, so that they are not entirely immobile; these bodies could be controlled by radio or&nbsp;infrared data transfer, or more likely&nbsp; via an umbilical of some sort. </p><p>As AIs become more sophisticated they might be able to control many robotic remote bodies at once. On the other hand AI systems will also become more miniaturised, until they become similar in size to an equivalent human brain; they can then become smaller, until a human-equivalent mind is contained in a sphere a centimetre in diameter. Human equivalent robots might eventually be the size of GI Joe.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>---------------------------------------------------------------</p><p>http://orionsarm.com  http://thestarlark.blogspot.com/</p> </div>
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
The more I think about it, a remotely controlled body doesn't turn a sentient computer into a android.&nbsp; It only makes the body a physical avatar.&nbsp; In Lively or Second Life, do you truely think of your avatar as part of you?&nbsp; Or just your representation in that world?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
A

Arion

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Gene Roddenberry made Data the first (or rather, the second/third/whatever) sentient computer into a fully mobile humanoid android.&nbsp; To me, the first sentient computer won't fit into anything the size of a human.&nbsp; It will be the size of a small room and be barely sentient.&nbsp; True androids will take at least another century.&nbsp; Even then, their brains might be somewhere besides their head.What do others think? <br />Posted by willpittenger</DIV><br /><br />I'd settle with a normal non-sentient android. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts