an atificial mind

Mister Le has said an android, fembot, or whatever you wanna call it, won't have true feelings and emotions, just imitate these things like Furby dolls.

One has to wonder if the source of this (an active brain, AKA mind) can be duplicated in some way.
I believe soon the answer will be yes in nanotechnology and/or nano/biotech.
We can already clone part of the brain, so is it impossible new pathways and neurons can be formed using nanites?

The answer is "yes" there are already numerous studies into this and funding is underway (I'd look up my source, but it's 1 am and I am tired). The possibilities from this are phenomenal: basically something akin to immortality, not just for the "android" but also for us humans. Basically the android would treat it like an actual brain, whereas a human could have their brain basically scanned and then uploaded into a neural base that then makes a nanobio brain. If we took that tech and then applied advanced robotics and such, we could basically achieve immortality.

However, don't expect any major breakthroughs for at least the next 20-30 years...

In early years I might have blown that off as being too far fetched, but I think it's very plausible and maybe probable that it will someday happen, which will give us a series of questions about the ethics of playing God.

When I said we can clone part of the brain, it would be more accurate to say we can synthesize it.
The basis of brain cloning is taking an animal (such as a monkey, lemur, or koala) and making a human brain hybrid.
Like the Star Trek replicaters, a healthy human brain (from same family) is mapped and overlaid on the monkey's brain.
Stem cells create new pathways for the subject to live as normal, however the subject's short term memory and thought process will never be the same.

Don't forget that the technology is advancing faster than anything we had seen over the past hundred years, so whose to know what AI will evolve in to, or be capable of in the next fifty years.

Don't forget that the technology is advancing faster than anything we had seen over the past hundred years, so whose to know what AI will evolve in to, or be capable of in the next fifty years.

You can give NASA (MIB) the credit for making the mid - late 1800s more advanced than it should have been.
Think of everything we had before the Internet.

Guest wrote:

Don't forget that the technology is advancing faster than anything we had seen over the past hundred years, so whose to know what AI will evolve in to, or be capable of in the next fifty years.

You can give NASA (MIB) the credit for making the mid - late 1800s more advanced than it should have been.
Think of everything we had before the Internet.

It's sorta funny you mention that. I was just thinking yesterday it was amazing with the level of technology we had in the 40's and 50's it was amazing we didn't blow ourselves up with the early development of nuclear power.

We almost did in WWII, but that was atomic.
I don't think nuclear radiation appeared until the mid or late 60s, when nuclear powered compact ovens (the start of the microwave oven) came out.

Guest wrote:We almost did in WWII, but that was atomic.
I don't think nuclear radiation appeared until the mid or late 60s, when nuclear powered compact ovens (the start of the microwave oven) came out.

There was a hell of a lot of radiation that killed quite a few Japanese after the bombs were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Mister Le has said an android, fembot, or whatever you wanna call it, won't have true feelings and emotions, just imitate these things like Furby dolls.

One has to wonder if the source of this (an active brain, AKA mind) can be duplicated in some way.
I believe soon the answer will be yes in nanotechnology and/or nano/biotech.
We can already clone part of the brain, so is it impossible new pathways and neurons can be formed using nanites?

What is true feelings and emotions? How do you prove that a machine can be Sentient? For that matter, how can you prove that YOU are sentient? What is 'true' feelings for one may be different for another. And that's without getting into debates about different moral codes. What everyone on this forum is forgeting that Aiko is a machine. A (hopefully) very sophisticated and complex machine, but a machine nontheless. If you are wanting human level emotions, you'll likely be disapointed. But what about machine level emotions? I remember the last matrix film, where Neo is talking to a computer program:
Neo- What do you know of love?
Program- It is a word, like any other. All that matters what it means to you.
Please note I'm paraphrasing slightly as I don't have a copy of the film to hand at the min, but the gist is right.

Just something to think about (I get philosiphical when drunk).

What is true feelings and emotions? How do you prove that a machine can be Sentient? For that matter, how can you prove that YOU are sentient? What is 'true' feelings for one may be different for another. And that's without getting into debates about different moral codes. What everyone on this forum is forgeting that Aiko is a machine. A (hopefully) very sophisticated and complex machine, but a machine nontheless. If you are wanting human level emotions, you'll likely be disapointed. But what about machine level emotions? I remember the last matrix film, where Neo is talking to a computer program:
Neo- What do you know of love?
Program- It is a word, like any other. All that matters what it means to you.
Please note I'm paraphrasing slightly as I don't have a copy of the film to hand at the min, but the gist is right.

Just something to think about (I get philosiphical when drunk).

I've been looking at some stuff on mind control recently, including subliminal suggestion, brain washing, cults, grooming, excessive stress, torture, shock treatment, and false memories.
A question was brought up: "What is reality?"
This is pretty much what you are asking.

Konrad13 wrote:The answer is "yes" there are already numerous studies into this and funding is underway (I'd look up my source, but it's 1 am and I am tired). The possibilities from this are phenomenal: basically something akin to immortality, not just for the "android" but also for us humans. Basically the android would treat it like an actual brain, whereas a human could have their brain basically scanned and then uploaded into a neural base that then makes a nanobio brain. If we took that tech and then applied advanced robotics and such, we could basically achieve immortality.

However, don't expect any major breakthroughs for at least the next 20-30 years...

Mind by nano-bio brain you mean a programming where the brain is specifically designed to the function it has to perform.
Just like this amazing project its a car so the bio-brain thinks behave and builds the specifics of the car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqrQqna52t0

WulfCry wrote:

Konrad13 wrote:The answer is "yes" there are already numerous studies into this and funding is underway (I'd look up my source, but it's 1 am and I am tired). The possibilities from this are phenomenal: basically something akin to immortality, not just for the "android" but also for us humans. Basically the android would treat it like an actual brain, whereas a human could have their brain basically scanned and then uploaded into a neural base that then makes a nanobio brain. If we took that tech and then applied advanced robotics and such, we could basically achieve immortality.

However, don't expect any major breakthroughs for at least the next 20-30 years...

Mind by nano-bio brain you mean a programming where the brain is specifically designed to the function it has to perform.
Just like this amazing project its a car so the bio-brain thinks behave and builds the specifics of the car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqrQqna52t0

Exclusive: A robot with a biological brain
Now all it needs is emotions, which can be remotely stimulated with a flood of neurons.
Kevin Warwick

Guest2 wrote:Mister Le has said an android, fembot, or whatever you wanna call it, won't have true feelings and emotions, just imitate these things like Furby dolls.

One has to wonder if the source of this (an active brain, AKA mind) can be duplicated in some way.
I believe soon the answer will be yes in nanotechnology and/or nano/biotech.
We can already clone part of the brain, so is it impossible new pathways and neurons can be formed using nanites?

What is true feelings and emotions? How do you prove that a machine can be Sentient? For that matter, how can you prove that YOU are sentient? What is 'true' feelings for one may be different for another. And that's without getting into debates about different moral codes. What everyone on this forum is forgeting that Aiko is a machine. A (hopefully) very sophisticated and complex machine, but a machine nontheless. If you are wanting human level emotions, you'll likely be disapointed. But what about machine level emotions? I remember the last matrix film, where Neo is talking to a computer program:
Neo- What do you know of love?
Program- It is a word, like any other. All that matters what it means to you.
Please note I'm paraphrasing slightly as I don't have a copy of the film to hand at the min, but the gist is right.

Just something to think about (I get philosiphical when drunk).

This may help in any case:
Robot and android rights

i think, therefore i am. we are sentient because we are truly self-aware. basically, we are aware of our own existence. a robot doesn't look at an arm and realize "that's my arm" it realizes motor 3 needs to be moved 3 degrees to the left.

does this help any?

Discoman wrote:i think, therefore i am. we are sentient because we are truly self-aware. basically, we are aware of our own existence. a robot doesn't look at an arm and realize "that's my arm" it realizes motor 3 needs to be moved 3 degrees to the left.

does this help any?

If the robot knew motor 3 needs to be used to reach the door handle, and doesn't think the door handle should be reaching motor 3, then it may be considered self aware.

personally i think we should leave this discussion to metaphysicians and the religious. they might have a better answer.

Discoman wrote:personally i think we should leave this discussion to metaphysicians and the religious. they might have a better answer.

I'm inclined to agree. Man himself has made the same debate for himself for thousands of years.

I prefer "Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum" over "Cogito, ergo sum," because computers "think" already, but to doubt something, ah, that is where mankind and the basis of our sentience lies: the ability to see all the facts before us, and still doubt whether they are true or not.

and maybe also as we are illogical. a computer recently beta beat a human at poker for the first time. chess is easy, as only so many moves can be done and simple brute force wins that. poker requires deductive reasoning and drawing conclusions from your opponents behavior. Wired ran an article about it, rather interesting.

Shashinka Ichiban wrote:

Guest wrote:

Don't forget that the technology is advancing faster than anything we had seen over the past hundred years, so whose to know what AI will evolve in to, or be capable of in the next fifty years.

You can give NASA (MIB) the credit for making the mid - late 1800s more advanced than it should have been.
Think of everything we had before the Internet.

It's sorta funny you mention that. I was just thinking yesterday it was amazing with the level of technology we had in the 40's and 50's it was amazing we didn't blow ourselves up with the early development of nuclear power.

not to mention one of the top ten tech flops came from that era. nuclear powered vacuum anyone?

Discoman wrote:
not to mention one of the top ten tech flops came from that era. nuclear powered vacuum anyone?

Nuclear vacuum?
I only remember a nuclear portable oven, which started the modern microwave oven.

I'm glad this thread was bumped 'cause I just learned of another energy weapon that was used.
First atomic energy, then hydrogen, nuclear radiation, and finally microwave technology, but the one I just heard about was the E-bomb, an electro magnetic pulse that can wipe out everything that uses electricity (planned for space race, ended up with a movie title).
It can use a narrow beam now with pinpoint accuracy, but when it was tested, the affects were much larger than they thought, and added to the Bermuda Triangle stories.

try a HERF generator with microwave parts, freeinfosociety.com has some interesting stuff.

It seems to me that the best one to ask these question would be the robot. Let her prove that she has the emotions.

Artilects rule! wrote:

Discoman wrote:
not to mention one of the top ten tech flops came from that era. nuclear powered vacuum anyone?

Nuclear vacuum?
I only remember a nuclear portable oven, which started the modern microwave oven.

I'm glad this thread was bumped 'cause I just learned of another energy weapon that was used.
First atomic energy, then hydrogen, nuclear radiation, and finally microwave technology, but the one I just heard about was the E-bomb, an electro magnetic pulse that can wipe out everything that uses electricity (planned for space race, ended up with a movie title).
It can use a narrow beam now with pinpoint accuracy, but when it was tested, the affects were much larger than they thought, and added to the Bermuda Triangle stories.

i recall reading this stuff previously. did a report in 6th grade on EMP and the Ebomb for science.

Kthomp06 wrote:It seems to me that the best one to ask these question would be the robot. Let her prove that she has the emotions.

like the Jules(did i spell that right) robot? anyone know the video i'm talking about?