Comments on: Artificial Intelligence http://www.thoughtclusters.com/2008/09/artificial-intelligence/ Software Development and Management Sat, 13 Mar 2010 04:01:11 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Krish http://www.thoughtclusters.com/2008/09/artificial-intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-327 Krish Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:25:00 +0000 http://www.thoughtclusters.com/2008/09/artificial-intelligence/#comment-327 Thanks for your comment, Peter.<br/><br/>We do tend to trust ourselves even though we have a significant chance of failure, because we wish to take responsibility for ourselves. Only when someone or something is <b>much</b> better than us in a particular activity, we allow them to handle it.<br/><br/>For example, we may not allow our friend to drive a huge truck in which we are sitting, but we are ready to entrust ourselves to a professional truck driver. Thanks for your comment, Peter.

We do tend to trust ourselves even though we have a significant chance of failure, because we wish to take responsibility for ourselves. Only when someone or something is much better than us in a particular activity, we allow them to handle it.

For example, we may not allow our friend to drive a huge truck in which we are sitting, but we are ready to entrust ourselves to a professional truck driver.

]]> By: Peter Raitt http://www.thoughtclusters.com/2008/09/artificial-intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-326 Peter Raitt Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:44:00 +0000 http://www.thoughtclusters.com/2008/09/artificial-intelligence/#comment-326 Regarding your paragraph beginning "In a situation where a negative outcome, however improbable, can be grievous harm or death, what users would trust technology?"; it rather implies that no-one would choose a technology with a very small chance of lethal failure or misjudgement, and yet we choose ourselves - who have a very significant chance of lethal failure (well, as regards driving anyway). Should the question not be whether we will choose technology with a lesser chance of disastrous negative consequence than we would have on our own?<br/><br/>I would presume that robots could (not yet though!) come out of the factory with the equivalent of a 21 year old brain since as we refine computer learning techniques, they can learn very, very fast, or alternatively they could be pre-loaded with the learning of a previous robot. The latter of course leading to the "similar" brains which you point out.<br/><br/>Anyway, nice points and an interesting points. Regarding your paragraph beginning “In a situation where a negative outcome, however improbable, can be grievous harm or death, what users would trust technology?”; it rather implies that no-one would choose a technology with a very small chance of lethal failure or misjudgement, and yet we choose ourselves – who have a very significant chance of lethal failure (well, as regards driving anyway). Should the question not be whether we will choose technology with a lesser chance of disastrous negative consequence than we would have on our own?

I would presume that robots could (not yet though!) come out of the factory with the equivalent of a 21 year old brain since as we refine computer learning techniques, they can learn very, very fast, or alternatively they could be pre-loaded with the learning of a previous robot. The latter of course leading to the “similar” brains which you point out.

Anyway, nice points and an interesting points.

]]>