unforum

[Tarrsk]

[Phaedra]

[SpghEddy]

This thread looks like it could become a very interesting, albeit [Off Topic], discussion of human vs. machine minds. However, I fear that if people get too hostile and emotional about other people's comments, it's surely going to get locked before too long.

For what it's worth, I believe that we have not yet scientifically discovered anything about the brain which would make it impossible to build a pretty accurate simulation using a different medium (electronics, for instance). Would this be practical? Probably not. But it's definitely possible, in the theoretical sense. Which definitely raises the philosophical question of whether that construct should be considered alive/concious/human/possessing a soul. (I read somewhere that ancient Jews have been considering this idea since the original Golem stories became popular)

Note, however, that we do not fully understand how the brain works. This means that someday when we fully understand the brain, A) it will be simulatable, or B) something will turn up that we can't simulate (like the presence of a soul, or some wierd quantum effect beyond our control, or something like that). Since this is a matter of opinion, not scientific fact, we will probably disagree about what the future will hold. But I'm routing for A, especially because it brings up so many philosophically challenging problems, not to mention the coolness factor of having "real" AIs.

Concerning some issues people have been talking about:

Is the human mind binary? If I understand correctly, you are conjecturing about whether the mind has a "state" which can be represented by a discrete (binary) system, such as a computer, or equivalent system? Keep in mind, that a computer can only manipulate discrete values. At the lowest level values can be 0 or 1, but there are inbetween values that cannot be represented, which means a computer could only ever approximate the continuous elements of the mind's state. But that might just be enough for our purposes, who knows? (Also, a computer can only perform operations at discrete intervals, which means if two elements of the brain are simultaneously influencing each other, you've got a feedback loop which can only be approximated using discrete methods)

Speaking of computers & turing machines, and whether the brain is a Turing Machine... well, actually, the brain can do anything a turing machine can do, which I can prove given some reasonable assumptions. Note that this just means that the brain has at least the same computing power as a turing machin. It doesn't mean that the brain is designed the same way, nor that it is equivalent to a program that can be run on a Turing Machine. You can think of a Turing Machine as occupying a lower rank of computability compared with the theoretical power of the mind.

[BeeNetter]

Yes, I understood that I was responding to two different posts - BoxInABox and Phaedra. Sorry if I did not make that clear.

It's interesting how emotional we all get when discussing this. I am of the belief that the human brain is not simulatable, and that we do have a "soul" or "free will" that machines do not. Of course, that is a totally untestable proposition.

I am still not sure what "binary" means in the context we are using it. Is this equivalent to "is a Turing machine"? It sounds like we are talking out of completely different lexicons - BoxInABox from the street hypnotist's, Phaedra from the psychologist's, and myself from the biologist/neurologist's point of view.

Anyways, that's all off-topic ranting. For all we care, the entire universe we live in may be a very sophisticated simulation run by higher beings on a gaming console. Back to the point. In the Halo universe, AIs are clearly unique. The AI is non-duplicatable, and cannot be created without destroying a human brain. Whether this is for purely technical reasons, or whether it is because of a human "soul" being present within the AI, is debatable.

How about Sleeping Princess vs. Durga. If the hypothesis that Melissa, Durga, and SP are different facets of the same AI is correct, then it is possible that they were damaged by the very event of "splitting" an AI into three pieces.

[daboking]

Perhaps we do stray a bit from topic, but it is very interesting conversation nonetheless. May I suggest that those who wish to continue this man vs machine topic go over to phaedra's corner of the world:
http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6862
(if you do not want this to go there, phaedra, I apologize and will edit my post. )

[Phaedra]

[Phaedra]

Post the Fourth

[Ragashingo]

Just one small note, AI's are duplicatable, see Cortana and the covenant (Forerunner?) AI duplication software in First Strike. The duplication caused imperfections in the duplicated AI but I remember it saying when Cortana duplicated her language routines she repaired the errors the software caused.

[GabrielBlade]

And AI's themselves can make somewhat smaller, slightly less capable "cousins" of themselves, to control various sub-systems and such - such as the one Cortana made of herself for the PoA to set down on Halo - and then reabsorbed when she returned later on..

[Nightmare Tony]

Beeneter, one fantastic post (latecomer in this thread of fun . Had a spec thing going after listening quite a bit to Durga_Remembers.wav. Why would we think that Druga and Melissa are one and the same? I am of the mind that they are not, but are built up the same way. Jersey just gave us the answer in there how to unlock. To know the true name, which the tales told. SP being Perdita. The trick is to follow Jersey's example in the wave and overload on the information, suddenly switch back to the direct questions. This was also clued in a super early one with Jersey about him trying to catch his reflection in a mirror, and Durga counseling him that he needs to move faster to catch it. In effect, he did the same thing, moving subjects too fast for Durga to switch back, so in effect, he caught her reflection quite fully.

Can we do the same at an axon call?