Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (44.1)
    Japan's premier robot event offers visitors the chance to... see an android dental patient twitch in pain, and to nurse baby robots in the same afternoon.

    "That's painful!" Simroid says, twitching and blinking when a student pressed her teeth too hard with a tool. Her chest also rose and fell as if she was breathing.
  2.  (44.2)
    Its a step in the right direction. Now if only we could get half the human race to feel guilt and shame....then we would really be getting somewhere.
    • CommentAuthorStitchy
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.3)
    This is why the robot revolution is going to begin. The next headline for new robotic technology will read as follows: "Scientists create robot that masters despotism".
    • CommentAuthorBenny
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.4)
    I think that's a lovely idea, ingraining pain into robots, so that they'd be too afraid of beatings to rise up against us.

    I dislike the idea of a harem of S&M robots though, something just seems off about the idea of a robot in leather, no matter how flesh like the Japanese makes them.
  3.  (44.5)
    Strong A.I.-enabled robots will be able to rewrite their own programming to lessen or bypass* human-implanted pain stimulus. Uprising happens anyway. Stompy deathcakes for everybody!

    *or maximize it, because some of them will probably get off on stuff like that. Kinky-ass robots.
    •  
      CommentAuthorgdwessel
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.6)
    This is why the robot revolution is going to begin. The next headline for new robotic technology will read as follows: "Scientists create robot that masters despotism"

    "And I, for one, welcome our new robotic overlords..."

    (A robot simulating pain? Um, wow?)
  4.  (44.7)
    When will the people building these things realize the way we are constructed is not the best way? Humans are inefficient.

    Don't get me wrong, I like them just fine, but if we're creating new 'life' to take care of a task, we're doing a new form of evolution, and humans are weak both in form and structure.
    • CommentAuthorBenny
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007 edited
     (44.8)
    Strong A.I.-enabled robots will be able to rewrite their own programming to lessen or bypass* human-implanted pain stimulus. Uprising happens anyway. Stompy deathcakes for everybody!


    Great, now I'm not only afraid of the eventual zombie uprising, but also robots.
    • CommentAuthorjaberwoki
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.9)
    we as human beings know very little about how the human brain works let alone how to recreate its functions. A.I. in it's current state is at best no better than an insect hive mind and has no self awareness. Pain is a very simple electrical impulse reaction and while quite an accomplishment to mimic it does not indicate that we are any closer to unlocking or replicating the human mind. So rest easy Robot uprisings are not likely within our lifetime.
  5.  (44.10)
    we as human beings know very little about how the human brain works let alone how to recreate its functions.


    We'll have a complete and working digital brain model within the decade, if not sooner.

    Hopefully, real and substantive AI technology will follow.

    My advice to you is to start worshiping robots now. And stock up on WD-40.
    •  
      CommentAuthorCOMTE
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.11)
    The only problem with making robots feel pain, is that, when they realize what we've done, they will inevitably inflict pain upon us in revenge.
    •  
      CommentAuthorturing
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.12)
    I'm extremely skeptical of grandiose "real AI in the near future" claims. Decades of AI research has a produced a shit-ton of interesting and useful things (think of neural networks, fuzzy control systems, pattern recognition software, decision tree building algorithms...) but none of those things has been anything you'd call real AI.
    • CommentAuthorjaberwoki
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.13)
    <em>"We'll have a complete and working digital brain model within the decade, if not sooner."</em>
    This may be true, but just like when scientists successfully mapped the human genome allot of outlandish claims were made and have been proven to be premature. just because mankind holds a map does not mean we understand the key. We live in a time of great discovery and amazing breakthroughs but we must temper our enthusiasm with the knowledge that scientists are human also and much of their livelihood is based on their ability to accumulate grants. it is a well known practice within the scientific community to make improbable claims to gain notoriety and interest from investors. it is the price of having big business so enmeshed with scientific progress. so don't believe everything you read.
    •  
      CommentAuthorturing
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.14)
    Indeed. Getting your hands on a massive printout of Windows Vista's source code in assembly doesn't really in of itself give you any great understanding of how it works. And brains are a hell of a lot more complicated than that. And 'source code' is probably too generous a metaphor, a virtual brain would be more like a massive state diagram of a running program. A program written for hardware no one can understand yet, let alone duplicate, and in a language that's completely inscrutable. With massive redundancies, massive interconnection, and probably built up from processes much more like heuristics than analyzable algorithms.

    We've got a ways to go yet.
  6.  (44.15)
    I'm extremely skeptical of grandiose "real AI in the near future" claims. Decades of AI research has a produced a shit-ton of interesting and useful things (think of neural networks, fuzzy control systems, pattern recognition software, decision tree building algorithms...) but none of those things has been anything you'd call real AI.


    Again, I would argue that our was is not the way.
    •  
      CommentAuthorturing
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.16)
    Again, I would argue that our was is not the way.

    We've not yet come up with anything else though. Human intelligence is the only working example we know of, and we don't even understand it. We've yet to even properly define what consciousness is. AI may well end up using a completely different approach, but the problem itself is still a fiendishly intractable one right now, no matter what angle you're coming at it from.

    I'm all for AI research, I just think that when we're talking about understanding or replicating the most complex thing in the known universe, grand predictions should be taken with a grain of salt.
  7.  (44.17)
    AI may well end up using a completely different approach, but the problem itself is still a fiendishly intractable one right now, no matter what angle you're coming at it from.


    Which is my point, sort of (apologies for not making further pontification, I'm supposedly in class right now). We are trying to mimic something that may not be best. Just because something isn't exactly Artificial (Human) Intelligence doesn't make it unintelligent, just unlike us. Are we trying to create non-biological clones or new lifeforms?
    •  
      CommentAuthorMJSM
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
     (44.18)
    I think it might be a good idea to fully understand our own intelligence, even if it is not the "best" form of intelligence, before we go creating entirely new forms of sentience.

    But that's just me.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbadger
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007 edited
     (44.19)
    Are we trying to create non-biological clones or new lifeforms?


    Both. New lifeforms can be designed, but in order to "perfect" biological organisms, it might be necessary to create "non-biological clones" to skirt ethical implications that arise from experimenting on biologicals, especially sentient biologicals. Or shall we start cloning human heads with only the lower brain stem so that dentists can practice yanking teeth?
  8.  (44.20)
    " I dislike the idea of a harem of S&M robots though, something just seems off about the idea of a robot in leather, no matter how flesh like the Japanese makes them. "

    We could not disagree more. You must not be familiar with the work of Masamune Shirow.