Sign in to follow this  

what is considered AI?

This topic is 4304 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

hi, im new here, im sorry, im just confused and i did not want to post a stupid question like it says in the forum rules, i was just wondering if, it is possible to lets say manipulate a program, like make some kind of program to do what "I" would do, like if im at work, and i make a program to do all my jobs, and it requires telling the program to press buttons and put in numbers and what not, __would this be considered artificial intelligence___?, because i was thinking AI was something that thinks on its own, this program would be doing exactly what i tell it, and all events are included, and no random activity, all activity solely depends on what has happend last... thanks, im sorry again, im a newbie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could make an argument that you don't really think on your own. We're just machines whos external behavior is too complex to infer much about internal processes, but still totally deterministic.

As for an attempt at your actual question, artificial intelligence is just intelligent behavior shown by something, well, artificial (ie. a computer). Yes, it's vague, but such is life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no clear and standard definition, even among researchers. AI tends to focus on making complex decisions based on real-world data, but this is by no means always or even usually the case. "Learnable" algorithms are common, but much of AI consists of non-learning algorithms, and of algorithms which are hand-tuned. The layman's definition of AI would usually be restricted to simulations of human activity such as chat-bots--and, in particular, simulations which encompass human traits such as randomness and fallibility--although modern researchers dislike this characterization.

I'd say that what you're talking about sounds more like automation than AI, because it doesn't seem to involve any complex decision-making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One difficulty is that it's not the task that is artificial intelligence, it's the program. So you can't really qualify it as "AI" or not by the result or output of the program.

The problem is that a lot of real world tasks that are done by "artificial intelligence" programs, are currently better done by analytical methods anyway (perhaps what Sneftel says is automation) and so things are a little fuzzy.

What happens is, as soon as you can develop an AI with sufficient "reasoning" or complex decision-making, you understand enough of the task being solved that you can apply some analysis and simplify the AI. When does it stop being an AI and start being an automation or automated program? The line is hard to draw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Think about it, a good AI program is a non-programmable one, which you neither give it orders nor goals to complete, and no pre-defined algorithms as well. Goals are defined and completed by itself.

When it comes to the real AI development, ask yourself some questions: What makes human human, and how comes our most advanced computers not as 'intelligent' as some basic creatures, does an arbitrary being needs any pre-defined solid 'algorithms' to exist ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Skeleton_V@T
Think about it, a good AI program is a non-programmable one, which you neither give it orders nor goals to complete, and no pre-defined algorithms as well. Goals are defined and completed by itself.

"Good AI"? Heh. Again, this is an area where there are as many definitions as you want. I'd note, however, that your definition of "good AI" does not really seem to be "useful AI".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is an unproven theory that I'm working on, while quick-and-dirty AI algorithms produce acceptable results in some meanings, it againsts the learning nature of human. As a result, these algorithms may seem to be useful at first, but at harsh speech, they're incompleted imitations of human knowledge.

Without evidence yet though, I'll just have to agree with what you said [wink] and keep silent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would the sole purpose of AI be to imitate human intelligence? Being good at things which people suck at is one of the main strengths of AI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Sneftel
Why would the sole purpose of AI be to imitate human intelligence? Being good at things which people suck at is one of the main strengths of AI.


Because we(in general) make ourselves out to be the highest form of life, ever,(not including those who believe in a god nor those that really take the time to think about things realisticly), just the general opinion) we model thing off ourselves; all the time, why not AI also?


To the original poster:
There is a test I read about in a sci-fi book, which I am not sure whether it is an actual test or not, but the AI programmers test all their robots or programs by putting them on a computer and letting them chat with another person(say the janitor who knows nothing about the robot/program) and watch and see whether the Janitor or whoever realizes it's not a human. I realize that it isn't the best test in the world, I just thought it was interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Why would the sole purpose of AI be to imitate human intelligence?

Because we'll develop that program once and for all, I believe that is the ultimate goal which have been kept flying around AI reseachers (and psychologists) for several decades.

I'll quote myself here:
Quote:
... and how comes our most advanced computers not as 'intelligent' as some basic creatures ...

We haven't chosen the right 'algorithm' ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Skeleton_V@T
Quote:
Why would the sole purpose of AI be to imitate human intelligence?

Because we'll develop that program once and for all, I believe that is the ultimate goal which have been kept flying around AI reseachers (and psychologists) for several decades.

So what? Thinking that AI researchers should only ever concentrate on imitating humans is like thinking that engineers should only ever concentrate on inventing warp drive. There are more attainable and useful things to be done, many of which have practically nothing to do with such an "ultimate goal". Again: one of the primary usefulnesses of AI is that algorithms can be really good at doing things that humans are really bad at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
one of the primary usefulnesses of AI is that algorithms can be really good at doing things that humans are really bad at.

Fair enough, I don't deny their effectiveness either. But do you really think that goal has little places in AI development ?. Questions have been answered, algorithms have been developed by human only. Wouldn't it even better/be the right time to let computers raise and solve them, or support us discover things which aren't accounted ?. People can not be duplicated, but computers can be.

Time, money and effort have been put into imitating parts of human intelligent, some have evolved fairly good indeed. Don't they really need these advanced/complex/imperfect algorithms, however ?, or just something really simple that we couldn't find out ?.

I'd like to note that man in general (not to mention disability or unsuitable environments) can be taught to do everything that others can. Why do we have to transform every single algorithms to computers, instead of building a real learning algorithms ?. We could't find it yet, I think.

Sorry to be (if any) off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Skeleton_V@T
But do you really think that goal has little places in AI development ?
Nope. When did I say that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Sneftel
Why would the sole purpose of AI be to imitate human intelligence? Being good at things which people suck at is one of the main strengths of AI.


Because we're interested in making games - and a good AI for a game tends to be one that acts naturally, not one that is excellent at playing the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Sneftel
Quote:
Original post by Skeleton_V@T
But do you really think that goal has little places in AI development ?
Nope. When did I say that?


Quote:
There are more attainable and useful things to be done, many of which have practically nothing to do with such an "ultimate goal".


I probably have misinterpreted that line. We can discuss all day about this but none of this make sense until one of us propose a solution - a life time project really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Nitage
Because we're interested in making games - and a good AI for a game tends to be one that acts naturally, not one that is excellent at playing the game.

Sure, and acting naturally is another part of AI. Of course, quite often "acting naturally" is best accomplished for a particular domain by supporting it with "excellent" algorithms which it then steps down from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4304 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this