Androids and Gender--Resurrected 11/19!

If you chose to build them as less intelligent, would they still be intelligent enough to know this? If they would value intelligence as we do (either through logic or emulation), that'd be another cause for resentment.

This 20 questions program is very interesting, but you can see it's still got a lot of misconceptions, and this is just in identifying objects (or abstract concepts, which is really admirable when it gets them right). Judgement calls would be far more complicated, but this shows you how it's not impossible - it's just a matter of how many issues it has to factor in.

Computer programming resembles human brain development in many ways - there's actually coding methods theorized that, if a program ends with the correct answer, strengthen the pathways that were used in reaching that decision, and weaken the paths used with incorrect answers. We call that showing approval or disapproval when we use it on other humans. Eventually in a lot of decisions, the coding has shown that generally one answer is correct far more often than the other, and the computer could cut down on processing time by taking the far more likely paths - a step towards intuition.

To add a little support for my speculation on future mergers of human and machine intelligence, check this out

http://mentalhealth.about.com/cs/mindandbody/a/artbrain403.htm

Some techie stuff to add to the discussion:

The fanfics I wrote went up on the site last night (YAY! Thank you Krang and Shredder!)

The story I have in mind is Beneath The Surface

Even if you aren't into fanfic or think I am a terrible writer, try giving it a quick once-over because I fill in some technical details about why an android should be able to feel, how this "feeling" would work and how it would evolve, and the nuts and bolts that would make it possible.

I haven't raised some of these points because I didn't want to give the story away before anyone had a chance to read it, LOL

I don't know if I am remembering this correctly, but I believe the chess computer was called Deep Blue. The only reason I am revisiting this subject is because I remember an interesting thing happened during one of the games against the most recent computer, Deep Junior. Junior's decisions and movements during all of the games took a matter of seconds to complete. Except for once. After Garry Kasparov made a move, it took Junior twenty five minutes to decide what to do next. Not even the computer techs know why it took Junior so long to respond.

Many years ago a computer engineer named Alan Turing pondered the idea of what would constitute artificial intelligence. He came up with what is now called the Turing Test. "If a person could converse with a computer via a keyboard and monitor, and could not tell wheather he or she were computing with a computer, then a degree of artificial intelligence had been achieved."

quote:

Originally posted by Danial Many years ago a computer engineer named Alan Turing pondered the idea of what would constitute artificial intelligence. He came up with what is now called the Turing Test. "If a person could converse with a computer via a keyboard and monitor, and could not tell wheather he or she were computing with a computer, then a degree of artificial intelligence had been achieved."

I believe that current thinking is that the Turing test is more limited than previously believed, but it is fascinating stuff.

Here's a good link about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Zola The fanfics I wrote went up on the site last night (YAY! Thank you Krang and Shredder!) The story I have in mind is Beneath The Surface

Yes, everyone go read it. It moves right along.

Pygmalion, founder
Zola fan club

Zola, your fanfic kicks ass. )

Yeah, Zola! I loved it! Thanks for taking the time to write. Adding in all those fantastic little details much have taken a lot of research.

Good stuff Zola. Really good.

I've been thinking about the original thread topic. Instincts are one reason why you might very well provide your androids with gender. Humans dont process all inputs in realtime, and actually rely on instincts and reflexes more than most of us recognize. It is likely that androids will have aritificial instincts programmed into them, the counterpart of naturally evolved human ones. And gender roles provide a handy way of clustering instincts/reflexes for social situations. It will provide a shorthand for androids responding to humans emotionally without having to process every single detail. And equally important, it will provide a shorthand for human social interaction with androids.

Has anyone thought about the fact that human nature is untrusting and fearful of what is different from us.

This can be seen throughout all of recorded history. Anything that is different. Anything that we do not understand is treated with fear, hatred, and violence.

As we become more understanding of one different group, a new one always emerges to take it's "unwanted" place.

Machines that are self aware would just become one of these groups. More then likely the outcome would not be a good one considering that we create machines for the sole fact to do things better then we can.

quote:

Originally posted by R Trusedale Good stuff Zola. Really good. I've been thinking about the original thread topic. Instincts are one reason why you might very well provide your androids with gender. Humans dont process all inputs in realtime, and actually rely on instincts and reflexes more than most of us recognize. It is likely that androids will have aritificial instincts programmed into them, the counterpart of naturally evolved human ones. And gender roles provide a handy way of clustering instincts/reflexes for social situations. It will provide a shorthand for androids responding to humans emotionally without having to process every single detail. And equally important, it will provide a shorthand for human social interaction with androids.

That makes sense. Sending a female-appearing android who act 'womanly' into something like a hostage situation might well prove to be a great idea because it might be calming and help defuse the situation more rapidly.

Androids that seemed like us might be more acceptable than ones who looked obviously machine-like, and would very likely be easy to deal with.

That was a great artical at least now ill never forget my keys to the house anymore hehehe.

quote:

Originally posted by Danial Has anyone thought about the fact that human nature is untrusting and fearful of what is different from us. This can be seen throughout all of recorded history. Anything that is different. Anything that we do not understand is treated with fear, hatred, and violence. As we become more understanding of one different group, a new one always emerges to take it's "unwanted" place. Machines that are self aware would just become one of these groups. More then likely the outcome would not be a good one considering that we create machines for the sole fact to do things better then we can.

I would hope that by the time we get to the point of making intelligent androids, we have moved beyond this.

Although human nature doesn't change much, we know an awful about it but for some reason we don't use it.

For example, we know that the absolute best way to raise unprejudiced children is to let them get to know a wide variety of people.

As a case in point, my best friend is gay. He's a wonderful person. My kids have known him since they were practically babies.

When they started tossing the word "gay" around as some do here in the forum, I reminded them of my friend. They hadn't made the connection between the word they were using and how my friend might feel about it, and I was pleased when the word pretty much disappeared from their vocabularies.

We have a lot of evidence now that people are born gay, it is NOT a choice or a "lifestyle". Knowing this, using the word "gay" as an insult is just as bad as tossing around the "N" word, and I look forward to the day when people start figuring that out.

It is my hope that we collectively start using some of the knowledge that we have accumulated instead of trying to deny it exists.

If we don't, you're right, androids will become the new "it" group.

also keep this in mind

In many religions we are taught that humans are a flawed creation. Something that is flawed can not create something that is perfect. Creating androids in our image would be creating another flawed species.

the cycle never ends

quote:

Originally posted by Danial also keep this in mind In many religions we are taught that humans are a flawed creation. Something that is flawed can not create something that is perfect. Creating androids in our image would be creating another flawed species. the cycle never ends

Don't think that religion doesn't change, though. For example, it used to be that an adulteror was stoned to death. We don't do that any more, fortunately for many of our public figures.

I don't think perfect really enters into it, though. I tend to go with Truesdale in saying that in time, we'll be them and they will be us.

EDIT: Speaking of R. Truesdale, check your pm's, would you?

quote:

Originally posted by Danial also keep this in mind In many religions we are taught that humans are a flawed creation. Something that is flawed can not create something that is perfect. Creating androids in our image would be creating another flawed species. the cycle never ends

And yet many of those same religions, at least the monotheistic ones, teach that our creator IS perfect. If imperfection can only make imperfection, then it follows that Perfection (God) can only make perfection. So humanity must be both imperfect and perfect, and this is a logical contradiction.
Willy-Nilly, imperfect humans insist on trying to improve themselves and the world around them. Perfection is impossible to reach. But progress toward that goal is what I believe God wants us to try. This applies to the making of androids, or anything else.

The interesting thing about about that is, how can a perfect god create an imperfect species after his own image? This perhaps is a better topic for another thread though...

Perfection is impossible to attain. I was just merely pointing out that when we create something like a computer or android we are doing it to reach a state that we cannot attain. Yet since it was created by an imperfect being like us, our creation cannot achieve it either.

quote:

Originally posted by Danial The interesting thing about about that is, how can a perfect god create an imperfect species after his own image? This perhaps is a better topic for another thread though... Perfection is impossible to attain. I was just merely pointing out that when we create something like a computer or android we are doing it to reach a state that we cannot attain. Yet since it was created by an imperfect being like us, our creation cannot achieve it either.

Perfection is impossible, but progress is not. There is lots of room for improvement. So androids could be designed to be much better than imperfect humans in any dimension you care to name.

Your question about the God/creation logic paradox has a simple answer. Logical paradoxes are a problem for humanity's mind, not God's mind. God is simply beyond all human logic, as hard as that may be for us to understand.

The truth of that statement depends on what you believe god is. It is a very subjective thing. I know personally what I believe. Wheather my belief is correct is another matter.

As for the androids. It will happen eventually. Human clones will happen eventually also. Humans have a nack for doing things just because it is possible to do. Wheather that is correct isn't really the problem. The problem comes in how we react to it.

I personally believe humanity has the ability to create a utopian society. Sadly history teaches us that this is highly improbable. The evolution of science far surpasses the evolution of society.

So what happens when you create a species that is superior to you, yet treat them as inferior?

quote:

Originally posted by Danial The truth of that statement depends on what you believe god is. It is a very subjective thing. I know personally what I believe. Wheather my belief is correct is another matter. As for the androids. It will happen eventually. Human clones will happen eventually also. Humans have a nack for doing things just because it is possible to do. Wheather that is correct isn't really the problem. The problem comes in how we react to it. I personally believe humanity has the ability to create a utopian society. Sadly history teaches us that this is highly improbable. The evolution of science far surpasses the evolution of society. So what happens when you create a species that is superior to you, yet treat them as inferior?

Again, I don't know that they would necessarily be superior, only different. As we start making the modifications suggested earlier in this thread, we may find that origin (android or human) becomes less and less important and we are indistinguishable from one another without an actual brain scan.