Why artificial intelligence is not possible

[Pengwin]

Quite simple: the ai would be stumped trying to answer the question of why it exists.

It, unlike humanity, has a an answer, if it asks.

And A.I. is nothing likely purely rational.  Think of it like a toddler with a set of blocks, only it plays will knowledge instead.

 
 

[FOS]

It, unlike humanity, has a an answer, if it asks.

And A.I. is nothing likely purely rational.  Think it like a toddler with a set of blocks, only it plays will knowledge instead.

Uh...i am humanity and as you can see I have an answer.

What answer would AI give me? 'I was created by humans for...'

[Pengwin]

Uh...i am humanity and as you can see I have an answer.

What answer would AI give me? 'I was created by humans..'

..to understand all that can be understood.  And the A.I. it creates will have a different answer, and so will the one after that.

And the answer you gave yourself is entirely subjective as humans have no objective reason for why they exist.

They have an obvious biological impulse, like all living things, but that's it.  Not much meaning in **** like rabbits...
 
 
 

[sooted up Cyndi]

It, unlike humanity, has a an answer, if it asks.

And A.I. is nothing likely purely rational.  Think it like a toddler with a set of blocks, only it plays will knowledge instead.

I know it. it thinks like a two year ol. not in our life time. It cracks me up?

[FOS]

..to understand all that can be understood.  And the A.I. it creates will have a different answer, and so will the one after that.

And the answer you gave yourself is entirely subjective as humans have no objective reason for why they exist.

They have an obvious biological impulse, like all living things, but that's it.  Not much meaning in **** like rabbits...

That is my point. Nothing has an objective reason for its existence. Nothing.

[Pengwin]

That is my point. Nothing has an objective reason for its existence. Nothing.

A.I. does.

Anything physical created by man does, even if it doesn't know it.  Even art, which just hangs on the wall.
 

Here is both together:


 

[FOS]

A.I. does.

Anything physical created by man does, even if it doesn't know it.  Even art, which just hangs on the wall.

Art is not objective

[GeorgeWashington]

Why do you assume AI would not also conclude that replication is its prime directive?

We would have to hardwire that. Anyway that would preclude the ai being some perfectly rational being.

If we would have to hardwire that, then we would have to hardwire everything, and it would no longer be AI.  It would be just another program running its routines - like this forum. 

[Pengwin]

Art is not objective

It doesn't need to be objective to have an objective reason for existing.


 

[FOS]

It doesn't need to be objective to have an objective reason for existing.

Well
..what is that then?

[Pengwin]

Well
..what is that then?

Human enjoyment, human pleasure, human expression, human impulse, or, any conscious living being that can express whatever ____ it wants to in the form of artworks.

Here is an elephant:



https://thaielephantart.com/#sthash.ixIKEcEI.dpbs
 

[FOS]

Human enjoyment, human pleasure, human expression, human impulse, or, anything conscious living thing that can express whatever ____ it wants to in the form of artworks.

Here is an elephant:



https://thaielephantart.com/#sthash.ixIKEcEI.dpbs

Literally subjective by definition.

[Pengwin]

Literally subjective by definition.

The form of expression is, not the reason for it.  Two different things.
 

Imagine a child in rain boots jumping up and down in a puddle.  It serves no objective purpose, it's just fun to do so so - they do.
 

[FOS]

The form of expression is, not the reason for it.  Two different things.

No. Both.

Stones exist. Show me a painting by a stone.

[Vegas]

Humans do know why they exist. It just is not concious knowledge. We exist to reproduce.

We exist to continue our existence? Why do we need to exist at all? Says who and under what authority do they get to say that?

[FOS]

We exist to continue our existence? Why do we need to exist at all? Says who and under what authority do they get to say that?

Exactly. It is totally irrational.

[Pengwin]

No. Both.

Stones exist. Show me a painting by a stone.

 

It is not a conscious living being, as far as we know.

Show me a child who doesn't make art?  It's human nature to do so and we know this objectively even though the act itself is - subjective.

 

[FOS]

It is not a conscious living being, as far as we know.

Show me a child who doesn't make art?  It's human nature to do so and we know this objectively even though the act itself is - subjective.

Well. That is the difference isn't it? Subjective vs objective.

[Pengwin]

We exist to continue our existence? Why do we need to exist at all? Says who and under what authority do they get to say that?

1. Selfish Gene theory.
2. No reason.
3. Lots of people, and there is no "authority" as far as we know.  It's just being objective.

War and Sex covers most of what humans get up to.  Most of them are good for little else.

[Pengwin]

Well. That is the difference isn't it? Subjective vs objective.

A teenage boy masturbating? Objective.

His fantasy? Likely subjective (but it could also be objective, like a pair of panties he is _____ing.