Posted on 11/13/2010 5:28:58 AM PST by RogerFGay
From the High Level Logic (HLL) Open Source Project blog.When are we going to have AI, one survey asks? It's a question relevant to HLL because so much of the thought behind the HLL design comes from the history of AI research and current technology that has come from AI research. The answer to the question when, with reference to HLL, is now. (Or at least as soon as version 1.0 is ready.) And that's no reason to get worried. As the description of HLL claims, you don't even need a high-powered computer science background to build applications with it – just some (OK, but at least reasonably good would be nice) programming knowledge.
The AI question is actually a bit tricky. It really depends on what you mean by AI. Way back in the cave computer days when I was first introduced to the subject, artificial intelligence research was defined as trying to get computers to do things that humans currently do better. Applying that definition, it seems as though the answer may be never. As soon as computers can do something at least as well or better than humans, it's no longer the subject of AI research. Object oriented programming is an example of something that came from AI research. Now a mainstream programming paradigm, many people don't associate it with AI at all.
The variety of ways of thinking about AI is also why some researchers predict AI won't exist far into the future while others (like me) are much more optimistic. People who answer the question may have something very specific in mind and think it will be a long time before it will become reality. You can also think about all the things computers do now – such as mathematical calculation – and make a case that AI already exists (something humans and computers both do, and computers do well). The great variation in predictions on when AI will come, has to do with both the particular set of things that the guesser thinks needs to be done before “AI exists” and how optimistic or pessimistic they are about doing them; while basic AI research always looks ahead.
You've probably heard that human intelligence is linked to the fact that we have opposable thumbs and other peculiar physical characteristics like standing upright and walking erect. Researchers recognize that in living creatures, intelligence and the characteristics of their physical bodies are linked, which makes robotics fertile ground for AI. Not all researchers focus exclusively on human intelligence and capabilities however. Some of the most interesting advances have come from looking for ways to mimic the behavior of other creatures, from insects and snakes to mules. The intelligence of a lower species is still intelligence, and some of the developments that come from mimicking their behavior can be applied in layers when mimicking behavior in higher ones.
Where does HLL actually fit in? Twenty-five years ago, when I was first thinking about the “high level logic” problem, I thought of it as a subject for advanced research. Since then, computer languages have advanced considerably and in ways directly matching the requirements of HLL. Strong networking support is a must, which has come from focus on Internet applications. Relatively recent additions to Java (which I've used to build HLL), such as strong support for generics and reflection have transformed some of the challenging bits into stuff that's just pretty cool.(Once again, application developers are not required to have expertise in these techniques – although it's quite alright if they do.)
To some extent, even the concept has been encroached upon (so to speak). The short descriptions of HLL have called it an “agent system” and I worry at times that it will be perceived as nothing more than an alternative to existing agent systems (which I won't mind so much if it becomes a popular one). The overall HLL concept is the thing that remains new. While fitting into the current modern software development world well, I still think it has potential as a tool in advanced AI research and application development.
HLL development has been proceeding as an ordinary software development project. With use of modern software technology and twenty-five years of thought behind it, not much experimentation is now required; less than the ordinary amount for development of a complex software system, because even details and how it all fits together have previously been thought about. And all that is why it (version 1.0) will be a powerful, light-weight system that is easy to use.
So, is it AI? When people are using it regularly to build applications, I certainly hope it's thought of as AI just as much as rule-processing or object-oriented programming and all the other things that have come from thoughts on developing AI; and yet, fully accepted and integrated into mainstream applications development. Why not integrate HLL support directly into programming languages?
For most people, thoughts on what AI is continuously focus on the future. With twenty-five years of history, I think I've earned the right to use a tired old cliche to end this note with a response. As far as HLL is concerned, the future is now. (Finally!)
Artificial Intelligence.
We need it as soon as possible now that human intelligence is on a steep decline.
When will we have artificial intelligence?
“We” elected it on 11-4-2008.
Its either I think, therefore I am, or its I am, therefore I think. Intelligence in the proper respect should always be pointed to God in its end point.
I think the best we’ll ever see is simulated AI.
“Its either I think, therefore I am, or its I am, therefore I think.”
Actually, to get Descartes meaning, it would be best phrased as “I think therefore I know that I am.”
It is already here in the form of the Democrat Party and their followers, that is if you use the Websters Dictionary definition
Artificial - Humanly Contrived often on a Natural Model
Imatation, Sham, False
This author has obviously never seen our Congress in action.
Did a quick scan of this article, and I’m not that impressed. It looks like an expert system (which have been around since the 70s) with JMS to facilitate message passing. No big deal. There are a lot of technologies that have been refined over the years that are peripheral to true Artificial Intelligence (AI). Some (to name a few) are speech recognition, natural language understanding (to a limited degree), pattern recognition, and image processing. Some approaches, like Genetic Programming, can even emulate creativity by evolving new programs to solve complex problems.
But, in the end, the tough nut to crack in AI is being able to incorporate and interpret new knowledge in an existing knowledge base. This involves being able to take an observation (no matter how simple), understand its context and successfully relate it to other facts and rules. Doing this will involve creating new rules and/or intermediate (inherent) facts to be able to use the new knowledge in a flexible manner. You can incoporate the fact by itself, but unless you integrate it correctly, it will be brittle and become just so much garbage in memory. It would be as if you saw a piece of paper on the floor and just noted that fact without giving it context or trying to analyze what the paper was about. As such, you might mistake it as scrap paper when, in fact, it was part of a critical document.
This type of learning is really the Holy Grail of AI and it is the hardest thing to do. Humans do it all the time, we just have no clue how. In the end, in order to understand a little about something, you have to know a lot about everything. Humans gradually pick up and assimilate this knowledge during childhood. We have no such patience with computers.
If computers ever really learn how to learn, then watch out.
> When will we have artificial intelligence?
> “We” elected it on 11-4-2008.
No... That’s Fake Intelligence. Not the same.
We already do. And it’s living in the White House and several seats in congress.
hee hee
Skynet.
After they DO indeed develop AI, how long will it be before we see ‘Artificial Stupidity’?
I think Artificial Stupidity will be an even more impressive innovation, because to have artificial stupidity, something would have to be artificially intelligent, and do things against its artificial better judgment.
I wonder if Obama could pass the Touring Test... I mean, without using a teleprompter.
We already have artificial intelligence.
It’s the Stroker Regime and the dnc.
Now, we need to get rid of it.
The other thing is do you really want smart machines? Did you ever see the movie The Terminator?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.