Party of Citizens wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, J. R. Molloy wrote:
>
> > Define intelligence as the ability to solve problems and answer questions
>
> How much of Hawking's work entails solving problems and answering
> questions in mathematics? How much of that can be programmed into machines
> now? Why shouldn't Cambride replace Hawking with a robot? See why he might
> be worried?
Moreover, intelligence, contrary to JR's assumption, is not the be-all
and end-all of sentience, though it is a part. Creativity, for example,
and the ability to make the value judgements that filter 'good'
creativity from 'bad' creativity, are a hallmark of human sentience.
When a computer can look at another sentients work and say "That
is/isn't art", with some rational explaination for it, as well as create
art that a) is not derivative, and b) critics can say IS definitely art,
then I'll accept that AI computer as sentient. It cannot do so without
values.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:27 MDT