Ray is an amazing person, to say the least! I really hope sometime within the next 500 years I could sit down and have a talk with him....I know he'll make it. ;)
Ray is a fascinating luminary. If even half his projections turn out to be accurate, they'll have fundamentally transformed our species and our destiny. We're entering a New World, one with unparalleled opportunities and transformations more significant than the Industrial or Information Revolutions.
Well there is a logic in that. We didn't have computational capacity in the 60's or 70's, we are only now starting to have enough of it. Hardware requirements should never be underestimated. AI is a kind of field that you would really need to be an expert to have a sophisticated guess, but I think we are going forward. The machines are now actually learning, and neural networks have reached a point where their real use has become possible. The progress of hardware might still be the key point.
I think you should take into account that we haven't had the hardware to make real progress until now. Also, we started from scratch and progress tends to be exponential like Ray uses to make clear. From mouse's intelligence there wouldn't be an awful lot of distance to that of a man's. This might be the thing: progress in AI development isn't clear because we still take baby steps. I believe by next decade we are able to make something that we can truly say is intelligent.
I like the analogy of Israel's 10 year plan for total reliance on sustainable energy and Kennedy's 10 year plan for landing a man on the moon. Even though it is a lot easier and cheaper to have total reliance on sustainable energy.
Thanks for the tip. I was aware of the research by IBM when I wrote my posts. My argument still stand as the research involved the simulation of circuits blindly copied from nature without understanding its functioning fully. The analogy would be :imagine a primitive caveman trying to replicate the functioning of the working of a jet engine,by drawing the outline of the engine on a stone, do you think the caveman is any closer to creating a jet engine.
I agree that exponential progress is real as far as computer hardware is concerned. But my argument is that in order to have any progress ( linear or exponential) you need to have a starting point, and as far as creating intelligence, we haven't even started yet as i said in my previous post we don't even know how to define it. The AI systems you see today are only calculators with nothing to do with intelligence.the definition of intelligence is still in the realm of philosophy and dreams
And by this: "AI is a kind of field that you would really need to be an expert to have a sophisticated guess" I was mostly talking about myself. I bet there is someone that knows this stuff rolling his eyes no matter what I write haha. But yeah speculation and making a little predictions is fun.
Something is fishy here. Ray says that technology doubles every year, though Dr. Michio Kaku says it doubles every 18 months, though people say 18 month is a myth and technnology doubles every 2 years -,-'
im of the idea intelligence is an emergent property in complex systems; can a lone neuron develop intelligence?; can a lone ant build a colony?; there is an interplay between a myriad of units and the way they organize themselves; but i wager understanding all intricacies of the brain isnt even needed; they just need to come up with the right ideas to get the ball rolling, then build a sufficiently complex system capable of improving itself; can a lone man build a civilization?
What I mean by true AI is an intelligence at least comparable to that of a human being.I don't need to be an expert in the subject ( even of i have been closely watching it for some years now) to know that we are very very far from even making an intelligence comparable to a mouse one.We don't even have a definition for intelligence. How can we create something we can't even define is beyond me : expert or not!
very likable man although I don't agree on his time frames of all these amazing technologies . and I don't think we will have true AI in this centary. My reasons are very simple. None doing research on AI is anywhere closer to it than 40 years ago. Ray seems to think that there is a direct link between computers computational capacity and creation of AI. Has he looked at how a very tiny brain like that of an ant can enable colonies of ants to create underground cities with air cooling systems.
Nothing fishy, experts never agree on anything. If we all agreed all the time, there would be one style of clothing, one car, one phone, etc. I'd put my money more on Kurzweil though, Kaku is brilliant but Kurzweil has been doing these predictions since the 1980s, and his only time proven wrong so far was a flying car as far as I know of. (they exist, but are massive gas hogs. Big oil is the reason you don't have a flying car yet, but the technology is coming as batteries advance rapidly.)
Ray is an amazing person, to say the least! I really hope sometime within the next 500 years I could sit down and have a talk with him....I know he'll make it. ;)
Imagine what the iPhone 6 will be like when it comes out in 2015
Hi from the future, we have the iphone 15 pro max and the apple vision pro!
Ray is a fascinating luminary. If even half his projections turn out to be accurate, they'll have fundamentally transformed our species and our destiny.
We're entering a New World, one with unparalleled opportunities and transformations more significant than the Industrial or Information Revolutions.
Well there is a logic in that. We didn't have computational capacity in the 60's or 70's, we are only now starting to have enough of it. Hardware requirements should never be underestimated. AI is a kind of field that you would really need to be an expert to have a sophisticated guess, but I think we are going forward. The machines are now actually learning, and neural networks have reached a point where their real use has become possible. The progress of hardware might still be the key point.
I think you should take into account that we haven't had the hardware to make real progress until now. Also, we started from scratch and progress tends to be exponential like Ray uses to make clear. From mouse's intelligence there wouldn't be an awful lot of distance to that of a man's. This might be the thing: progress in AI development isn't clear because we still take baby steps. I believe by next decade we are able to make something that we can truly say is intelligent.
What did he said about the Cambrian explosion? By the way, what happened in the Cambrian explosion?
I like the analogy of Israel's 10 year plan for total reliance on sustainable energy and Kennedy's 10 year plan for landing a man on the moon. Even though it is a lot easier and cheaper to have total reliance on sustainable energy.
Thanks for the tip. I was aware of the research by IBM when I wrote my posts. My argument still stand as the research involved the simulation of circuits blindly copied from nature without understanding its functioning fully. The analogy would be :imagine a primitive caveman trying to replicate the functioning of the working of a jet engine,by drawing the outline of the engine on a stone, do you think the caveman is any closer to creating a jet engine.
I agree that exponential progress is real as far as computer hardware is concerned. But my argument is that in order to have any progress ( linear or exponential) you need to have a starting point, and as far as creating intelligence, we haven't even started yet as i said in my previous post we don't even know how to define it. The AI systems you see today are only calculators with nothing to do with intelligence.the definition of intelligence is still in the realm of philosophy and dreams
0:34 ooo steady cam
And by this: "AI is a kind of field that you would really need to be an expert to have a sophisticated guess" I was mostly talking about myself. I bet there is someone that knows this stuff rolling his eyes no matter what I write haha. But yeah speculation and making a little predictions is fun.
@isamelbou you may want to google "IBM Researchers Go Way Beyond AI With Cat-Like Cognitive Computing"
Something is fishy here. Ray says that technology doubles every year, though Dr. Michio Kaku says it doubles every 18 months, though people say 18 month is a myth and technnology doubles every 2 years -,-'
im of the idea intelligence is an emergent property in complex systems; can a lone neuron develop intelligence?; can a lone ant build a colony?; there is an interplay between a myriad of units and the way they organize themselves; but i wager understanding all intricacies of the brain isnt even needed; they just need to come up with the right ideas to get the ball rolling, then build a sufficiently complex system capable of improving itself; can a lone man build a civilization?
i'm not sure what you are trying to say but i'm going to let time settle this argument :) take care.
What I mean by true AI is an intelligence at least comparable to that of a human being.I don't need to be an expert in the subject ( even of i have been closely watching it for some years now) to know that we are very very far from even making an intelligence comparable to a mouse one.We don't even have a definition for intelligence. How can we create something we can't even define is beyond me : expert or not!
very likable man although I don't agree on his time frames of all these amazing technologies .
and I don't think we will have true AI in this centary.
My reasons are very simple. None doing research on AI is anywhere closer to it than 40 years ago. Ray seems to think that there is a direct link between computers computational capacity and creation of AI. Has he looked at how a very tiny brain like that of an ant can enable colonies of ants to create underground cities with air cooling systems.
Nothing fishy, experts never agree on anything. If we all agreed all the time, there would be one style of clothing, one car, one phone, etc. I'd put my money more on Kurzweil though, Kaku is brilliant but Kurzweil has been doing these predictions since the 1980s, and his only time proven wrong so far was a flying car as far as I know of. (they exist, but are massive gas hogs. Big oil is the reason you don't have a flying car yet, but the technology is coming as batteries advance rapidly.)