I was initially an AI alarmist, but then a skeptic. I’ve been trying to figure out how to articulate the change, and I think your comments help that along. As another commenter (maybe Shawn?) pointed out, getting the machine to think like a human brain is not doable right now, and the storage space (short of quantum computing) is probabl…
I was initially an AI alarmist, but then a skeptic. I’ve been trying to figure out how to articulate the change, and I think your comments help that along. As another commenter (maybe Shawn?) pointed out, getting the machine to think like a human brain is not doable right now, and the storage space (short of quantum computing) is probably a sufficient complication to thwart the effort right now. But I think the barrier is more than that.
Humans base the concept of “sentience” on themselves. Because of course we do. Your description of timeframes and experiencing them in a way comparable to our own point of view requires “sentience” that’s comparable to ours. Similarly, it’s more than mere storing and processing memories. Human sentience also has a spark. We can call it inspiration, or intuition, or simply talent. Can a machine fake that? I think the answer to that is as important to the machine’s prospects as timeframes are to ours.
This is partly a consequence of emotion, the ability (and necessity) to view data not just as facts but as feelings. A lion isn’t just a large cat – it’s also terrifying if you’re standing 20 yards away in a field with no means of defense. That connection of emotion and data provides a point of view a machine cannot (as of now) do anything but simulate.
One step further, human sentience isn’t just about processing data consciously – we also do it unconsciously. Passively. Like replaying a meeting while lying in bed at night and connecting a comment with a colleague’s response, folding in nuance, suspicion (Did Dave from Accounting know about these cuts before the meeting? Who looped him in? How did I not realize what’s going on earlier?!!), and others’ knowledge and emotions in ways a program lacking emotions ever could.
What is sentience? Will we know it when we see it? And can we ever artificially construct it when we can’t replicate the emotions and passive processing that help define our own sentience in the first place?
I was initially an AI alarmist, but then a skeptic. I’ve been trying to figure out how to articulate the change, and I think your comments help that along. As another commenter (maybe Shawn?) pointed out, getting the machine to think like a human brain is not doable right now, and the storage space (short of quantum computing) is probably a sufficient complication to thwart the effort right now. But I think the barrier is more than that.
Humans base the concept of “sentience” on themselves. Because of course we do. Your description of timeframes and experiencing them in a way comparable to our own point of view requires “sentience” that’s comparable to ours. Similarly, it’s more than mere storing and processing memories. Human sentience also has a spark. We can call it inspiration, or intuition, or simply talent. Can a machine fake that? I think the answer to that is as important to the machine’s prospects as timeframes are to ours.
This is partly a consequence of emotion, the ability (and necessity) to view data not just as facts but as feelings. A lion isn’t just a large cat – it’s also terrifying if you’re standing 20 yards away in a field with no means of defense. That connection of emotion and data provides a point of view a machine cannot (as of now) do anything but simulate.
One step further, human sentience isn’t just about processing data consciously – we also do it unconsciously. Passively. Like replaying a meeting while lying in bed at night and connecting a comment with a colleague’s response, folding in nuance, suspicion (Did Dave from Accounting know about these cuts before the meeting? Who looped him in? How did I not realize what’s going on earlier?!!), and others’ knowledge and emotions in ways a program lacking emotions ever could.
What is sentience? Will we know it when we see it? And can we ever artificially construct it when we can’t replicate the emotions and passive processing that help define our own sentience in the first place?