|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
Baleur
Posts: 2343
Location: South Sweden
|
 Posted: Mon, 1st Aug 2005 01:47 Post subject: Baleur's Toughts #4; digital life? |
|
 |
Ooookay now, i know there are some ppl out there who find me odd, but shut uup and listen, try to be open to this, its a really interesting tought! Honest!! 
Seriously tough, if you are incapable of deeper toughts, dont bother to read on..
Watching all those anime sci-fi movies (Ghost In The Shell 1&2 etc) really got me thinking, not about souls, or souls in machines (which i think is rediculus).
But about what defines life..?
Ok look at what we define as life today..
Us (humans):
Because of everything, we have a working biological body, a brain even ourselves cant fully comprehend yet, and etc etc you all know why we define ourselves as life. 
Animals (reptiles or mammals, fish or whatever):
Because well, they are just like humans, but with the exception (depending on your own beliefs) of true complex emotions, complex intelligence, and so on.
But those flaws, arent really flaws, since they still thrive and are, alive.
Insects:
Altough most of us dont feel sadness or any emotion at all when we "kill" an insect, they are still considered Alive. Still considered Life.
Even tough, interestingly enugh, we now have computers that are capable of more advanced processing (not to mention the odd intelligence equation, where modern supercomputers are far superior to the intelligence equation of an insect) than an insect..
But i think we all can agree that insects are living beings, or living "stuff". Whatever.
Now, if we consider insects and a rat, as life. Why not a machine? 
Hell there may be some of you reading this that actually DO, but lets face it like 99.9% of everyone dont consider machines as life.
So what is life? Easy quick questions and answers to figure it out.
That you have a personality? No, since insects like ants, function as a whole, rather than individually. Yet, they are considered Life..
That you can think? No, since again insects can really think, there are always exceptions, but what i mean is realtime rational thinking, not reactional thinking.
When a fly is trapped behind a window, it cant figure out why or any solution, it simply flies torward the seemable exit, banging against the window, retreating to collect itself, then reapeats its pre-programmed behavior.
Point, it cant do realtime problem-solving. Only if it is part of its instincts, like attacking or retreating. 
That you have a carbon-based body? Probably not, since most agree that if/when we meet true aliens, which by the way probably will look like and be unlike anything human, we will still consider it a living being.
If there is an alien mainly composed of silicon, or perhaps even a crazy tought as a being of energy.
It still will be considered life by us if it can solve problems and function solely without some outside monitoring/maintenance..
So, if neither is the reason for what we call life, why dont we call machines life?
Because a computer isnt "free"? And because it can only "think" in pre-programmed ways, not freely?
Insects dont think freely, insects think in pre-programmed ways..
Hell, not even slaves think freely, at least they dont appear to think freely, neither do small animals, they dont appear to think very much..
Because machines are composed of other things than organic beings?
As the previous example stated, if we meet an alien race composed of unknown materials, we will still consider it life.. So why isnt silicon+metal+electonics considered life?
EXAMPLE!!!!
Human beings has a heart, pumping blood trough veins, that transports air, to our muscles and brain so they get the air they need to function.
Machines have a power supply, running electricity trough wires, that transports the electrons (1's and 0's), to its CPU (brain) and various components so they get the electricity/information (1's and 0's) they need to function.
Animals have a brain to use for problem-solving, maintaining itself (the body), defending itself and collecting fuel (food/water/oxygen) in order to survive, and ultimatly reproduces itself, that is the point of animals and life.
But all those points, can easily be fitted to machines as well, they use their "brains" for problem-solving (that means realtime interaction with the enviroment, changing depending on the current situation etc).
They could easily maintain themselves (future machines), collecting powersources, batteries or a nuclear engine or whatever, recharging..
And can easily be programmed to reproduce itself, collect materials and build a copy of itself.  
And another thing!!
If we consider bacteria, that only lives in rockcaves, that only "lives" by a chemical reaction enabling it to convert rock to energy, to replicate itself, and so on, as LIFE.........
You get my point.
Every single computer today is more advanced than that, that would be the equivalent of a program designed to convert one thing, to another thing until a set ammount, and then replicate.
But wait, there are AI dudes in games that does more than that, are they then to be considered alive?
Becaue they are doing exactly what other primitive forms of life do, trying desperatly to stay "alive", trying to eliminate threats, just generally trying its best to survive and in the case of RTS, replicate until it has exhaused all the availible fuel/resources/food..
Are we then taking LIFE when we kill d00ds in UT and enemy generals in C&C?? 
So then, if you can put everything that defines life so far, into a machine aspect of things, why isnt machines considered life? 
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 RAM: 4gb Kingmax DDR2 800mhz Video: Asus GeForce 250GTS 1gb Sound: Asus Xonar.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 1st Aug 2005 02:40 Post subject: |
|
|
Movement, reproduction, sensitivity to stimuli, growth, respiration, excretion, energy consumption.
The 7 factors that define biological life.
Obviously we're talking about artifical life here so the factors are a bit different, and there are computer programs which can mimic bacterial and viral life. But it's only an expression of our interpretation of these organisms. There is nothing inherent in our current computing systems that could be distinguished as life.
Personally I define true life by the presence of sentience, and there are most definitely no computer systems which exhibit that trait. Maybe in 20 or 30 years.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esel_Gesi
VIP Member
Posts: 3802
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Mon, 1st Aug 2005 04:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | Movement, reproduction, sensitivity to stimuli, growth, respiration, excretion, energy consumption.
The 7 factors that define biological life.
Obviously we're talking about artifical life here so the factors are a bit different, and there are computer programs which can mimic bacterial and viral life. But it's only an expression of our interpretation of these organisms. There is nothing inherent in our current computing systems that could be distinguished as life.
Personally I define true life by the presence of sentience, and there are most definitely no computer systems which exhibit that trait. Maybe in 20 or 30 years. |
In this regard would you consider plants as being alive? Most, if not all, plants do not move. Plus they really don't have a true level of awareness other than their response to stimuli.
I have to agree with you though. The computer programs only mimic our ideas of how these organisms act. By this line of thought we really will never be able to mimic true life because it will always be an interpretation of how we think it works.
Personally I don't think machines will advance enough in my lifetime to be able to call them 'alive' but, then again, I am a skeptic.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SycoShaman
VIP Master Jedi
Posts: 24468
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 1st Aug 2005 04:38 Post subject: |
|
|
| Esel_Gesi wrote: | | AnimalMother wrote: | Movement, reproduction, sensitivity to stimuli, growth, respiration, excretion, energy consumption.
The 7 factors that define biological life.
Obviously we're talking about artifical life here so the factors are a bit different, and there are computer programs which can mimic bacterial and viral life. But it's only an expression of our interpretation of these organisms. There is nothing inherent in our current computing systems that could be distinguished as life.
Personally I define true life by the presence of sentience, and there are most definitely no computer systems which exhibit that trait. Maybe in 20 or 30 years. |
In this regard would you consider plants as being alive? Most, if not all, plants do not move. Plus they really don't have a true level of awareness other than their response to stimuli.
I have to agree with you though. The computer programs only mimic our ideas of how these organisms act. By this line of thought we really will never be able to mimic true life because it will always be an interpretation of how we think it works.
Personally I don't think machines will advance enough in my lifetime to be able to call them 'alive' but, then again, I am a skeptic. |
I believe plants are alive, not in the sense me and u or a lion is, but alive none the less |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
