
Xero010 wrote:On another note, has anyone considered installing a VI system into their mech that tells the pilot about approaching enemies as well as damage and helps with navigation, like Cortana from Halo
Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:A VI like Mila is an interface, not a true intelligence. It's a grammar parser and producer, not a heuristic, abstract, and emotional agent.
Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:Xero, in general, with real-life AI systems, getting stimulus-response is the easy part. Cockroaches know how to run away and we have robots as smart as they are. Hutch, I built one out of $10 of Radio Shack parts. The hard part is abstracting meanings from things, generating symbols that gel with other symbols and a limbic environment into a coherent sense of self, other, objects, and ground. Like, what's this?
or this?
Part of what's interesting about the study of artificial intelligence to me is that we make these proposals, like, "It's something that can have a conversation with you." And then we discover that, even though something can have a conversation with you, it still doesn't feel like a person; and furthermore, such a test turns out to give false negatives; humans fail the Turing Test all the time, even when properly administered. We used to say, "It's something that can use tools." But it turns out lots of animals use tools, and some of them are clearly not intelligent, though elephants and all apes do it at least some. It's a very subtle thing, intelligence. "Will to live" is clearly not an element of it, though. Mantises, as Chuang Tzu said, will bravely face a cart wheel. No
lack of "will" there. Walking through a field of tall grass results in a shower of grasshoppers flying away. Likewise, no lack of will to live.
So, if you could make a robot that could feel suffering and avoid it, feel satisfaction and seek it, would you have an intelligence? Not if it can't tell the difference between a window and a painting of what lies beyond it. Not if it can't tell that you've changed
your mind about something. Not if it can't paraphrase a series of tangentially related events into a coherent story.
A VI like Mila is an interface, not a true intelligence. It's a grammar parser and producer, not a heuristic, abstract, and emotional agent.
ferrelferret wrote: self awareness, which is still a mystery to current science
Soren wrote:This is a setting with highly portable laser weaponry. I invite you to consider what laser point-defense would do to aircraft. (Hint: Phalanx, thirty years ago, could track and bring down artillery shells in flight during testing, and practical anti-artillery systems are coming into use now. Aircraft, even supersonic aircraft, are a lot slower.)
Ryujin wrote:Speaking of which, I'd like to point out that the US and Germany have been independently developing, and making good progress with, ground-transportable laser point-defense systems for use on the battlefield (a version of Phalanx with a laser replacing the Gatling, for one). Rheinmetall, for example, was shooting down UAV's with a 10 kw laser mounted on an AFV turret late last year, somewhere in Switzerland. They're confident enough to claim that a 100 kw version will be available within the next 5 years.
Soren wrote:This is a setting with highly portable laser weaponry. I invite you to consider what laser point-defense would do to aircraft. (Hint: Phalanx, thirty years ago, could track and bring down artillery shells in flight during testing, and practical anti-artillery systems are coming into use now. Aircraft, even supersonic aircraft, are a lot slower.)
I'm sure the explosions would be very pretty, though.
Various cost/benefit balances exist, of course - it's a developing galaxy, after all - and in some places, I'm sure aerial drone weaponry makes sense - because the defenses aren't present, because you can afford a thousand drones for two or three hits, or because you don't care very much about killing bystanders by accident. Pick your favorite.
gusindor wrote:Here's a thought; drones as 1-shot rockets. How much intelligence does it take to crash into something?
Soren wrote:This is a setting with highly portable laser weaponry. I invite you to consider what laser point-defense would do to aircraft. (Hint: Phalanx, thirty years ago, could track and bring down artillery shells in flight during testing, and practical anti-artillery systems are coming into use now. Aircraft, even supersonic aircraft, are a lot slower.)
Return to Mobile Frame Background
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests