The machine that invents

"I machine that can think like us but has none of the weaknesses that we have."

The processes he provokes at the 'neuron' level are happening more or less randomly, generating garbage as well as valuable information.

There's no reason to think that resulting ideas developed will not have any weaknesses or problems.

The processes he provokes at the 'neuron' level are happening more or less randomly, generating garbage as well as valuable information.

There's no reason to think that resulting ideas developed will not have any weaknesses or problems.

Look at how many bad ideas humans have. There is a quote credited to Einstein claiming he said that if one of his ideas out of a thousand was a good one, he thought he was doing well.

Unless the computer can analyze what is desirable--without a man-made model--then it is not creative. I would argue that you need self-awareness and consciousness to have that trait. Dr. Thales, if I understand it correctly, inputs some basic rules to weed out totally useless combinations, IE a car must have wheels on the undercarriage.

This machine, on a basic level, is the 10,000 monkeys typing scenario. Just like that scenario, you need a conscious, intelligent being to determine when Shakespeare has been produced.

The New Scientist article confirms these things and adds that Thales finds this to be his "personal religion." Don't misunderstand me; religion is good (I myself have the Conviction in Christ), but not when you rationalize and lie about it--as Thales and the writer are about Creativity Machine. We need to be critical of all things. This is especially true of the journalist and "transhumanists."

This creativity machine is old news and is not as dramatic as the journalist's sensationalism conveys. It is a random combination generator with a programmed filter to weed out outrageous combinations. Still, the human inventor determines what is usable and not. These have been around for years, according to the New Scientist article.

Exactly. This is what those on this board who crack wise about AI and computer code, yet didn't go to school for computer science, need to understand:

Nothing comes out of a computer that isn't put in it. Let me say that again, to ensure there is no misunderstanding: Nothing comes out of a computer that didn't go into it first.

This computer invents nothing. It is programmed with a set of rules, and generates random combinations according to those rules. The inventor still determines what is useful and what isn't. We have a term for this kind of software: CAD. CAD stands for Computer Aided Design, with maximum emphasis on the 'Aided' part. The only thing this software does is take care of some of the more mundane and repetitive aspects of engineering and design that the inventor would normally have to do on pencil and paper and does it for him. But the software doesn't design anything.

This is no different than on those TV shows when the cops use a computer to 'enhance' a blurry image to the point it becomes clear. It's total BS. If the information isn't there, it isn't there, no matter what you do. To use one of my grandma's old sayings, you can't get blood from a turnip.

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.