PioneerQuestion on Terminator-Robot, Skynet vs Science: What is lacking?

There is also reference to transportation of matter being a reality, based on quantum states, as I understand it. I understand transportation of organic matter results in instability. Agian, I have no proof of this point, so it is subject to independent verification.

Interesting thread.

I understand that there are rules on artificial intelligence, in that any machine which is designed to have artificial intelligence must be chained in some way. I heard this, but have seen no proof either way.

I also understand somebody programmed Asimov's three rules into a machine, and it just failed to act, as it was unable to do so without potentially violating one of the rules.

As to humanity, it is easy to say that all aspects can be improved upon by machines, but this is not in fact true. A telescope is good at seeing the man in the moon, but not so good for navigating in rush hour traffic. Nor is the microscope. As to computers beating humans, mine can beat me at chess, but can't do so well at kickboxing. In addition, and more seriously, Deep Blue lost to Kasparov in the first round as the programming was flawed, and the machine was too piece-hungry, so it was reprogrammed. It did not have awareness as such, it had to be overhauled to deal with its issue. Next evolutionary round, Kasparov (or his successor) will win, and Deep Blue will need recourse to humans to teach it to play again. Unless artificial intelligence is interposed first, of course. In any event, what does it prove to say a PC can beat me at chess? Big deal. I know someone who memorised pi to 5,000 decimal places. Impressive, I think, but a life skill it isn't. A PC would have a bit more difficulty painting an impressionistic sunset, or playing a jazz solo with "feel".

As to the existence of free will, there is a thread dealing with the point, so I won't rehearse the arguments here, but I haven't seen any definitive proof either way, so I won't state my unfounded beliefs on the point.

@Rudolf: Please found your viewponts or provide evidence for it. On Starmind there are many clever people and you disappoint them by just stating subjective viewpoints without providing evidence for them:
a.) Where do you take the 10-15% from? It seems rather unqualified, hence what is a human? If you take the aspect of computing, the deep bnlue has beaten humans. If you take the aspect of being able to view, then a microscoope or telescope is better. If you take... - every single aspect you take can be built better artificially.

b.) About free will: You can also brainwash a human with some kind of dogma or there are addictions where you seem to act as if you were driven by something (alcohol addiciton). Please be more specific. I also beleve that there is no free will and hence your argument may break apart if the free will discussion is resolved.
Looking forward to mroe specific and scientifically based statements.
Cheers, Anita.

my PC certainly does have a free will :)
but you're right, T-1000 has an order....

@ Marc Z
WoW, i never knew that was exist now (lol), tanx for the info ....
Now i can guest that we r not that far at all to have humanoid robot to be a part of our daily life, but i still think that it will be just some automated robot with no free will that can do or mimic human daily job....(just my opinion^^)

humaniods are just 10% of a real human. yes you can make humaniods close to 10%-15% of a real human but that as exact human.
to do this you need to violate the laws of nature.

T-1000 has a mission right!?
cos someone programmed him to kill conor. thats not a free will. btw does your robot complain everytime you program them? if no, then they dont have "free will"

what i'm reading here i guess the T-1000 from terminator is quite possible. i'd have to watch the movie again to see whether it has a free will, but just the robot itself would be possible then, not?

thats true. AP is 'information movement', TP is 'matter movment'
i once heard that funny thing about inventing a timemachine: i won't have to invent it b/c if i'm going to invent it, i'll travel back in time and bring the machine to my younger myself, ergo i won't have to invent it again :)
but i think we should focus back on the question :)

Astral Projection is true but Teleportation is a fiction. in science you cannot transfer in an instant a "mass" to a different place.
I would like to continue my research for the whole science but i dont have the capability to do it.

im very familiar with Astral Projection. it is very different between AP and Teleportation. AP is just a soul left your body for some time then goes back.
Teleportation is a process with a Thing (with a mass) will be move on a certain place in a mili second.
the funny thing is not the heart nor liver is the home of our soul. it is the whole body!

Rudolph: about teleporting...ever heard of 'Astral Projections'? oke you might say that's esoteric humbug, but proove me the additional sense of the heart...
(interessting by the way is that certain cultures belive that the liver is the home of the soul, not the heart...donno where either comes from)
but again, thats way off topic :)

But im open to new breakthrough, tech and other scientific ways that doesnt violate laws of nature. hey btw my father applied to CERN but i bet he wont get there LOL ^_^

I will bet that no "one" even genius humans can make a perfect humanoid that moves, talk, think like a real human. Terminator Movie is just a dream.
Lets put it this way, if you manage to teleport your self into another place then i give up you win. No one can beat the power of god.

ok "heart"
yes there is a artificial heart, but! it doesnt connects to a senses (5 senses of human sometimes 6) to create flexible and suave movement.

great idea, cheers :)
http://www.starmind.com/question/14766/

Hey Josh
I think that would be a perfect question for Starmind. Mind that you have 3 free questions anyways.
Good Luck!

woow. was not aware of neither the battery-issue nor the current developments with legs. but, as usual, defense agency sponsored :)
btw, could someone pls shorty outline me how 'free will' is defined? to me, free will is just a paradigm, a simple answer to the quite complex mechanism of decision making...

@Roy Khang: Please see here an impressive video about moving robots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67CUudkjEG4

or about robots copying the inner structure of a human body:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI9H4FoA0b4

Do you really think we are that far away?

Ciao Rudolph
Thanks for your input - do you have, however, any foundations or logical proof fostering your viewpoint? There are various researchers within the Starmind community arguing that it may be just a matter of time until we can build artifical humans and such. By the way, artifical hearts can be built since several years, and if you refer to the "soul" concept by pointing to the "heart" I suggest you provide evidence for it.
Thanks a lot!

luck of psychological and bio engineering concepts.
for me robots are evil.
robots cant have free will and self consciousness even tho you want it bad.
only real humans can have it because of they called "Heart"

What must not be given to a robot is free will and self consciousness, a robot with those attributes is, the so Predicted by Nietzsche perfect "human", by definition, the next "step" in evolution or simply the top of the evolution chain.
this unnatural monarch will reclaim his right to rule over every human soon or later.

Lucky for us, is too hard to reproduce all human biological functions. But God save us if this "life form" or "mind form" I may say can have access to global telecommunications.

sense and feeling
Regarding that the main goal of building the robots are for wars so they can be too dangerous.

i think the missing thing is the balance system that can make the robot stand, walk, run, knee like humans do without falling.
about the time they r with us, i dont know.XD

If you can create an intelligent system, that can be aware of its own existence, logically separate itself from the environment, comprehend the environment as a set of individual objects, learn the physics and logics of objects and learn to judge the objetcs by their looks, their position towards another, identify illogic relations, question them and solve them... then you may be awarded with some nobel-price.... but you still have a long way to go before you create a "terminator".

Nuclear power cell?
Humans use about 10,000 Joules / day, a Lithium Thionyl Chloride battery has an energy density of 2.5 MJoules / kg.
The power source isn't the issue - two lantern batteries will give you 500 watts in 4 kg (1 horsepower ~ 700 Watts, so I'm assuming humans output something below 500 W peak), although you'd probably have to increase that to account for mechanical inefficiencies of your effector mechanisms.

By far the hardest problem is the artificial intelligence (assuming we're not talking about the robot made of 'liquid metal'). We can currently create fairly decent 'insect bots', but I still don't know of anyone who has created anything as adaptable as a small mammal yet.

Our world is already full of robots - why would we particularly want to make "humanoid" robots? It's certainly a prestige goal for robot labs, but it's hard to see how a robot that could operate a car would be superior to a robotic car that anyone could operate (ditto washing machine).

Computers are a big part of daily life in the developed world - they didn't need to become "humanoid" to do that, they were just useful.

first of all, humankind should never leave off the last decision to a computer, allthough a well designed system is more failure-proof than a human :)

i think the bodywork itself is a bit a problem as well. Terminator aims torward human pyhsiology like leg movment, hand operation, etc. replicating the way a human walks is not possible yet, and then being able to drive a car, run, steer a truck, is all not so makeable yet. the way he learns and talks is also something that needs more work.

but in general, i agree. Powersource is the biggest problem, and secondly i'd guess the physical assembling of the body.