Comments on: Blank’s First Three Theorems of Artificial Intelligence

By: r

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:50:44 +0000

@Cortexelus
- The fourth one. I like it.
Thank you. The post actually started with the fourth one. But then I figured it needed an intro. Hence the first three. So yes, 75% of my theorems are filler

- Also, I wonder to what extent other intelligences consider humans lacking in intelligence?
Exactly my point.

By: r

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:48:03 +0000

@Gerard Toonstra
I don’t really think about this stuff enough to use these sorts of labels. But they are interesting. I suppose the opposite of ‘computational’ intelligence would be ‘emotional’ intelligence? In which case, I do see a use for this separation. It seems to me to roughly correspond to the left-brain/right-brain dichotomy.

So, if I had to make a more structured definition of ‘computational intelligence’ as opposed to ‘emotional intelligence’, it would be this: ‘computational’ intelligence tells you that I’m wearing a red plaid shirt; ‘emotional’ intelligence is what would tell you that the shirt is hideous. In essence, I would argue that computational intelligence involves pattern detection (that’s red plaid), and emotional intelligence requires the cross-modal translation of those patterns (red plaid is ugly and makes me think of my great aunt Martha, who smelled bad, and thus this shade of red smells bad).

I think it’s inarguable that we have achieved artificial computational intelligence in any number of realms. The ‘emotional’ intelligence is definitely a cooler trick to pull off (though, again, I think we’re there already).

I’m actually trying to work on a bit of sample Flash code right now, to accompany a talk I’m writing for 2010. This code represents an attempt to execute some simple emotional intelligence by executing cross-modal translations. So I s’pose, stay tuned!

And yes, I do believe that intelligence implies awareness (and I do believe that awareness and consciousness are essentially synonymous), and that both exist in degrees. An entity could not be said to be either intelligent/aware or not; instead an entity’s intelligence/awareness could be said to be measured on a scale from diminishing to increasing intelligence/awareness.

By: Cortexelus

Cortexelus — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:13:33 +0000

The fourth one. I like it.

Also, I wonder to what extent other intelligences consider humans lacking in intelligence?

By: Gerard Toonstra

Gerard Toonstra — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:01:16 +0000

What are your thoughts on intelligence requiring consciousness and/or awareness? Some AI experts have now divided AI into different fields and called one of them “computational intelligence”. This is an interesting division to make, since it suggests they believe there are other forms of intelligence that are not computational and this also ties in with discussions on whether thought is computational or not.

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:43:30 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by rblank9: Got time to waste? Blank’s First Three Theorems of Artificial Intelligence: http://is.gd/4DhKG...

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (75.101.186.211) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (72.47.254.135) and so is spam.

By: r

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:52:00 +0000

It’s worth adding that ‘treating an entity as though it is intelligent’ is a different thing from ‘agreeing that the other entity is intelligent’. The point is this is about individual respect more than a rigorous scientific definition.