Developing conscience on computers and robots

[kazbadan]

There are robots that can imitate some animals. Do you think that these robots are so much inteligent like those animals?

 

What about conscience? Do you think that robots can develop a kind of conscience like spiders and flies have?

 

I mean, my big question here is: can it be possible, in the future, for a computer to develop self conscience? Its so strange to imagine the process of that "awakening". But for that thing happen, firts they wil need to develop a "weaker" kind of consicence. Like bugs.

 

I think that fist the computers/robots wil be like bugs (in what refers to conscience) and only them they will be so self consicence like fishs, and lizards, and birds and later on like lemures or the like, and so on.

 

Whats your view on these matters?

 

NOTE: i post this thread her ebecause i think that soehow, its related with biology. In computer forums i see more topics like overclockings, and the like. Sorry moderators if i am wrong, but my intention its good.

[infamous]

 

Whats your view on these matters?

 

.

Consciousness will come, the question is only when and by what leaps and bounds?

[Eclogite]

Since there is still debate over what exactly consciousness is (and is not) I am less certain that machine consciousness will develop.

You suggest that consciousness will arise in a series of stages, from the simple to the complex. This seems logical.

Many have argued that only mankind is conscious; others would extend that to the primates, or even all mammals; while yet others believe some level of consciouness is present in all living things.

An alternative view is that the simplest creatures possess zero consciouness behaving as simple automatons. Research has shown that quite complex behaviour, comparable with that of say ants, can arise from the application of a few simple rules.

Given that there is such debate over what consciousness is and who possesses it, and for that matter why and how it arose, you can see why I am dubious about it arising accidentally within machines.

Incidentally, I think biology is exactly the right place to post this idea: it is by exploring the ways machines 'think' and trying to mimic intelligence with ever more complex combinations of hardware and software that we may finally come to understand the nature of consciousness.

[kazbadan]

Many have argued that only mankind is conscious; others would extend that to the primates, or even all mammals; while yet others believe some level of consciouness is present in all living things.

An alternative view is that the simplest creatures possess zero consciouness behaving as simple automatons. Research has shown that quite complex behaviour, comparable with that of say ants, can arise from the application of a few simple rules.

 

As a budhist lover i think that almost every living being has a conscience, even if its near zero. A virus have a conscience of a complex computer program possibly.

 

That means that computer programs and robots may have some degree of conscience? Who knows. What is consicence? I think that conscience its when we notice that there is an "i am" or a "me" and there is a "other". I am kazbadan. I am seperating my self from the reality. I am creating a barrier and saying that i am an entity seperated from the rest of the universe. That the creation of the Ego.

 

With small being that will happen in some way. They will not "see" things like i described above because they are less inteligent and have less conscience, but something similar happens i think. For example, when smal being like ants gather for food, avoid bad things to eat, when they avoid enemys and fight intruders and so on, thats a kind of seperation of the rest of the world. That a way to see that they have a conscience, an Ego, because they create the barrier between then and the universe.

 

With higer degrees of conscience, lik ein mamals, the degree of speration its bigger and reacts worst when its about to "die". An human crys a lot and ´reatc very badly if he knows that its about to die. A virus will just develop some chemicals if it "senses" his death.

 

What about computers/robots/AI? Do they have this barrier, that wall of conscience? Do they "cry" when "die"? Well, actually i think that depends on the guys that program the software. For example: there is a nice software for developing computers games (very simple games). I was learning that and in a tutorial i found an example. It was not exactly a game but more a kind of demo (for people learn things about command and the like). That software was about circles: red ones and blue ones. They had some very simple functions like the ones we see in some beings: they move to find "food" (blue balls eat red ones and vice-versa), they have "detection" ranges for finding food, they eat, they grow up and they reproduce. Can we say that these being are alive or that they have so much conscience like a virus? Why not? They do exactly the same! They are just made of bits and bytes, instead of carbon atoms.

[geokker]

1st thing, let's not get confused with conscience, conscious and consciousness - they are different things.

 

I am less certain that machine consciousness will develop.

 

Surely it will happen. We are all actors on a stage. If a computer can fake it, then that's good enough for us - unless we think we're special.

[GAHD]

Those Crazy Asians, they've been experimenting with robot brains!

 

"Development of Brain-Informatics Machines through Dynamical Connection of Autonomous Motion Primitives," Link

[Boerseun]

I think the issue is not so much whether we're able to build a machine that's conscious, but more whether we'll recognize it for what it is.

 

Say a programmer builds a complex algorythm that can realistically fake it. Would we know the difference? And what does it mean?

 

Or say a robot is built ala Isaac Asimov, and by accident achieves consciousness, be it from a fluke in the production line or whatever. Would we recognize it as being bona fide consciousness? And if we switch that robot off, have we unplugged it or killed it?

 

Maybe an intelligent, conscious toaster was built in the early '90s. Nobody saw its potential 'cause nobody thought to give it a voice. After all, talking toasters aren't much use, are they? So this toaster was forced to toast slices of bread, day in, day out. Meantime, in its tiny little brain, it conceived such wonderful ideas about the World in General, found a cure for cancer and AIDS before breakfast, but had no way of communicating it. Besides, who'd listen to a stupid toaster, in any case? So, the one day it just stopped working. Its owner thought it broke, and redeemed the warranty, but in actual fact this little toaster committed suicide. Out of boredom.

 

Okay - stupid parable. But the point is, would we recognize intelligence and consciousness?

[alxian]

as long as the system isn't dependent on something like electricity or succeptible to annihilation from something like a virus or antivirus program, in that the conscience computer is contiguous and detachable from the internet and the power grid, held within something like an android body, that can plug itself in and deadwall itself from the net by turning of its internal wireless net adapter, then it might stand a chance of fending for itself.

 

as for consciouness itself the longstanding definition is it is the organ to the tissues of thought and memory sensory receptors and muscles, consciousness, most of the time, orchestrates those faculties (though thankfully they can manage themselves well enough without conscious intervention as long as they aren't in immediate danger).

 

also the more specialized an AI needs to be the less it will express anything like what we call consciousness.

 

a likely origin for AI with consciouness is the services industry, AI that need to understand speach and carry on conversation will have to hold hundreds of conversation permutations in memory to keep up. like the next generation of chess playing computers language computers will spend most of their time compiling likely conversation threads (either by monitoring phone calls through major switches, or listening to radio or television.) self correcting software would have to be built in, to avoid building up too many bad threads and giving greater priority to appropriate turns of phrase.

 

its possible humour would be a by product. a machine able to understand speach would eventually prioritize humourous threads but would realize they aren't always appropriate, causing conflict. this conflict thus establishes persistent thought and reflection. this persistant thought and reflection i believe is key to consciouness and self awareness.

 

you could ask yourself. when did you become self aware? could you have become selfaware without any motor control to look at yourself? what if you had no self? if you were a program running in a computer all you would have are memories, would they be enough for you to consider yourself an entity? possibly, as long as you make mistakes and second guess yourself eventually you'd build up enough memory and experience to perfect your operation to such a degree all you had time for was reflection (lacking the ability to do anything else).

 

so Boerseun, the key it seem we agree upon is two things, at least.

 

build in inherently conflicting rules into the programming, in the case of asimov protect yourself but only if that protection doesn't put humans at risk.

 

also that conscious AI by the benefit of terahertz computing and gigabytes of ram may be able to outclass us so soundly in reasoning that we'd be irreconcilably different (war), or they'd become so bored they'd be forced to decide between oblivion or forcibly taking over the world (war).

 

my favorite AI had to be jane from enders game, a being of such unimaginable potential living for a time inside a mans ear... at least she found a way to communicate. another though not artificial are the cheela from dragons egg, they also had trouble communicating with humans because we were so different.

 

it seems like in most cases AI are just too far advanced to be bothered to communicate with lowly humans.