Can AI eventually become 'self-aware'?

Discussion in 'Science' started by Patricio Da Silva, Dec 25, 2020.

  1. Monash

    Monash Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2019
    Messages:
    4,517
    Likes Received:
    3,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you limit the term 'machine' to non-biological engineering then IMO based on everything I've learned and read to date the answer is no.

    At best all you can do is build an 'emulator' i.e. a computer capable of emulating normal human responses under specific conditions in certain circumstances and perhaps being able to engage with humans meaningful communication about those conditions/circumstances. Turing's test still rules!

    You might over time tack on more and more learning subroutines covering a wider variety of problems and situations of greater depth and complexity but even with audio and photo sensors added on so that the device can interact in real time with people it's still just an emulator. It does not possess a conscious, sentient mind. We still haven't cracked the nature of consciousness in the human brain let alone learned how to instill it in other forms of 'mind'.

    We've also failed dismally to date (as far as I'm aware) at attempts to emulate humor, emotion and other basic human 'drives' at a machine level, drives that all animals seem to have. That situation seems unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.

    All of which is separate and distinct from problem solving - where computers can beat the pants of us.
     
  2. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Interesting cite.

    I think there is a long ways between what that journalist wants to consider consciousness and what I think consciousness entails.

    I'd never consider any machine we have today to be self aware or conscious even in a tiny way. Personal computing devices, chess machines, go machines, car manufacturing machines, etc. - these are all amazing for what they are made for, but they don't know who they are, what problem they solve, etc. And, nothing they have is applicable to problems such as planning their own futures, forming a strategy of personal improvement, identifying risks, etc.
     
  3. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Interesting contribution.

    I agree totaly when it comes to where we are today

    I'm not so sure that's the limit, though.

    When humans set out to build a machine that could beat all human players at go, the root was focused on learning, including the ability to create and implement strategy. Then, through a gigantic mountain of experience the machine gradually learned how to win the game.

    I think that's kind of a crude model of what babies do - born with a fixed set of programming and peripherals (memory, body parts, senses, etc. that don't even work), then doing what they are absolutely crazy good at - learning.

    Of course, there are biological reasons for the size, shape, senses, capabilities, etc. for newborns. Any attempt in the far future to create consciousness will surely look very different, as those elements aren't required for consciousnes - even in humans.
     
  4. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,645
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not so sure that self awareness has anything to do with any singular function of any brain much less the human brain.
    Is self awareness a singularly human trait or do we consider it a human trait because we display it to one another in ways we comprehend. Is "self awareness" just the human method of claiming superiority and therefore dominion over all other animals?

    A definition of "Self Awareness" applicable equally from any perspective need be developed and, really, until that definition is created then no one is right, or wrong and we just end up banging heads over what really become articles of faith.
     
  5. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,645
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I dunno.

    I think "self awareness" is more than finding the doodle and giving it a twirl. Similar methods are used to teach dogs and I know we've all heard the phrase "monkey see monkey do." Generally such behavior in a dog would indicate it will be easier to train. So, is it the capacity to learn that demonstrates "self awareness?" I think that's partially right but not nearly the whole picture.

    In other words, to be considered "self aware" an entity must be capable of learning independently of being taught and incorporating new knowledge into its behaviors.

    I really think that most would agree that the capacity to learn is one requirement of being "self aware."
     
  6. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here's an interesting article that mighy be termed a search for human consciousness.
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-consciousness/

    I agree that there is a LOT more to do just to know what is being proposed when someone talks about creating consciousness like a human has.

    I've been trying to stay limited to two aspects. One is identifying what it is NOT. It's NOT your iPad, for example. It's NOT a machine that can play "go". It's NOT one of the chat bots that can pass the Turing test today.

    The other is that it isn't an impossible problem. It's certainly WAY out of what we can do today, though. I see it as not impossible because our brains are not infinite. So, whatever we finally decide consciousness is, I'm sure we will agree that our human bodies have that, and our bodies aren't infinite. In other words, it's been done.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  7. Asherah

    Asherah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreed. Traditional AI entails performing functions (like chess playing) that are typically performed by (truly) intelligent beings. But it does not entail duplicating the process by which intelligent beings do it.

    OK, but it's not far from it. Take a dog mind, and add the ability to use language. The dog could then produce propositions about the external world and about itself. This is self-awareness.

    Not true. Artificial Neural Networks are able to perform mental-like functions in a manner that is believed to be very similar to the way our brains work.

    As to whether or not self-awareness is physically possible, it's unclear - but it's currently a topic of philosophy of mind, not science (there's just too much we don't know about the way brains work). Philosophers who are "physicalists" believe the mind is entirely a function of activities in the central nervous system. If they are right, then it should be possible to one day create an artificial entity with a mind, and self-awareness.

    Are physicalists right? It's controversial. Most mental processes can be described in a way that is consistent with physical processes -an algorithm (more or less). Beliefs, sensory input, intentional behavior, even free will - easy stuff. But there is also the "hard problem" - feelings and qualia. For example, pain. It's functional role is easy (pain induces us to avoid certain things, and to seek relief of pain), but the conscious experience of pain has not been accounted for.

    So...it seems to me this is the crucial issue: can we envisage an entity having feelings, like pain, pleasure, happiness, etc. I don't know that it's impossible, but the problem has not been solved yet.

    At the other end of this is: if the mind is not entirely the product of physical processes, then what IS it? There are more reasons to take dualism off the table, then reasons to take physicalism off.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2021
    WillReadmore likes this.
  8. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree that the capacity for learning is part of self awareness.

    If we take a vehicle that can drive itself across town without any human interaction then it would need to be able to learn about the constantly changing elements in the environment that it is traversing and be sufficiently aware of it's own dimensions and abilities so as to avoid collisions with other road users of all types.

    Granted that level of self awareness might be on a par with a bug at the present time but go back 4 decades and look at the hardware, software and connectivity that existed then and compare it to what we have today. The difference is many orders of magnitude so given that the example vehicle above has primitive self awareness and learning abilities what will it become in the next 40 years?

    Only nerds and geeks were capable of interacting with computers back then while today anyone can do it.

    In essence what we are witnessing is the evolution of machines towards some level of sentience. It is theoretically possible that machines could evolve their own unique form of intelligence and self awareness that matches their abilities. That potential exists and we are along for the ride to see where this goes.
     
  9. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,262
    Likes Received:
    16,936
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That only makes sense if you reject the notion that life has a spiritual basis.

    IF you do accept it, then my statement is true.

    As I've already stated a while back, given my recognition that my belief and understanding of consciousness having a spiritual basis, I've posted this thread in the wrong forum. Religion & Philosophy is where it should have been posted.
     
  10. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Using my example of creating AI soldiers who can kill, and assuming AI can learn and modify on their own, essentially an evolution of unknown limits,
    if AI does not posses 'some form' of consciousness or self-awareness, at least the 'behavior', then AI would not care about basic 'human values'. At this point if the goals of the AI don't mesh with the best interests of humans, Ai will be problematic.

    Humans are creating AI, and we think AI is subordinate to humans, but if AI can evolve without limits, be in control of it's goals, at some point in this evolution my AI soldier will not care if it's 'killing' a rock or a human. If this can happen, this is when humans become subordinate to AI...
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think the problem comes if you believe that the entire physical human body is insufficient to live as a conscious being - a human.

    Because of biology, mankind is surely strongly connected to the rest of the tree of life. And, other segments of hte tree of life have consciousness to various degrees that are significant. Dogs have some, but they tend not to be able to recognize themselves in a mirror, for example. Porpoises are way better than that.

    Lots of kinds of animals experience pain. Many have emotions. Many have fear. Octopi and various others can form significant strategy. Some can in fact recognize themselves in a mirror - that is, they know they are an entity and can recognize that. Baby humans can't do that - it is something learned. And, if it is learned, then what does that mean for the suggestion that it is supplied by the proposed magic ingredient?

    So, what IS the argument in favor of humans having brains incapable of consciousness?

    Is it that all animals have this magic piece of god-stuff controling their thoughts and actions, but some pieces of that are worse than others - with humans having better ones?

    Is it that what we have as our physical bodies ARE capable of pain, emotions, etc. - just like can be found implemented in the bodies of other animals?

    What is the evidence for our brains being found to be incapable of the root functions that make us individual humans?
     
  12. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's a horror example for sure!

    Hal, the computer in 2001, didn't need consciousness to decide that humans are the disease threatening the system Hall was built to protect.

    So our systems (stock/commodities markets, power grids, etc.) will be vulnerable long before anybody creates artificial consciousness.
     
  13. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,262
    Likes Received:
    16,936
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I believe that there is a spiritual basis to all living things. As for consciousness, the higher the organism, the greater the quantity. Where it actually begins, no one knows.
     
  14. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If there is any more elusive a definition than for consciousness, self awareness, or life, it would be one for ‘spiritual’.
     
  15. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Backing up to the discussion of Sophia, if I suggested Sophia has demonstrated self awareness, what is the response to that suggestion?
     
  16. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreed!

    Just ask the mods to move and they will do so for you.
     
  17. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I suggest that consciousness is to be found in all animals which can dream.
     
  18. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    31,262
    Likes Received:
    16,936
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree. In fact, dreaming is the real proof that humans are more than machines. Machines cannot 'dream'.
     
  19. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I've been told they dream of electric sheep.
     
  20. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What do you think dreaming is and what do you think is going on in your wetware when you dream?
     
  21. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Meat computers need down time for maintenance, but there are verious good reasons for not totally turning off brains during that period.

    That hits me as more of a result of a particular maintenance strategy and I don't see how that is required for consciousness.

    Also, dogs and other animals (which also have finite brain resources, need a maintenance cycle, and have some level of consciousness) dream, too. So, you need to be better about dividing the world of "dog soul" from the world of "people soul" if you want to bring your religious beliefs into this.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  22. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Machines take backups during down time which is not all that different to what is happening when we are sleeping.
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  23. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is interesting

    It's one of the themes of Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" which is showing on television right now. It also has to do with Dark Matter

    ("Young Adult" stories have moved on from Nancy Drew, it seems)
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2021
    Cosmo likes this.
  24. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We need to proceed carefully...
     
  25. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,645
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not just "human" consciousness. I believe it was a Niven short story.

    They're on a planet somewhere and they're sure it has no "sentient" life.

    The "hero" of the story wanders off into the desert for no good reason. He sits on one of the many boulders spread scattered everywhere on the planet. He sits and watches. After a bit a rat-kangaroo type critter comes hopping up and stops in front of a nearby boulder right in front of him. A hole opens in the boulder, the kangarat hops in and the hole closes. The guy returns to his quarters and sleeps. This cycle repeats for several days and the guy realizes, he's not dreaming.

    The "boulders" aren't just sentient. They're intelligent enough to know that inferior beings (people) would be threatened by their telepathic ability so they hide. In plain site.

    We, as humans, possess a capability to develop sentience. While we may not be sentient at birth we have the capability to develop sentience. When we can quantify how to identify that capability then we can know whether an entity has the ability to become/be sentient. We should not be so arrogant as to assume "human" is the top of that particular evolutionary model.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.

Share This Page