Printable View
then end was. and it was directed by spielberg. but stanley kubric came up with the idea and wrote the beginning. you can really see the transition from kubric's work to speilberg as well. kubric's was much much better.Quote:
I thought AI was done by Speilberg?
Sorry, but I think that they took AI too far. They should have ended it about 15 minutes before they did, and as a result the movie sucked IMO.
i agree chsh.... the last 15 was speilbergs doing
Stanley Kubrick rulez...
True AI is defined to be self-conciousness.. well if we make a computer program think it's self-concious then as far as it's concerned it's Intelligent. Give something the ability to learn, and inputs that it can learn from, it will probably become intelligent rather quickly. There are bots made already that can carry on conversations on a specific topic, short ones but they do still carry one on. If you really think about it, when we put code into a program telling it to behave a certain way we limit it by telling it not to behave in another way. That's a dillema because then we have to come up with the code telling it how to learn when we don't even fully understand how that would happen. So we have limited our programs from being intelligent by thinking the way we do. Somehow, if we want a program to be truly intelligent then we'd have to find a way for it not to be limited to do only what we tell it to do.
Just a though, it'd be funny if someone made an intelligent program that happened to start experimenting with turning itself off for a day or two...
Hmmm... 71.43% voted for the arguments of the Yes-team, 28.57% for the arguments of the No-team. Taking in consideration that the Yes-team only consisted of four (participating)people - RcGreen, Preacherman481, Lord_Darkside-x, and Flibberdy - I'd say we have a clear victory here.
Congratulations!
I'm not going to close this thread, since we still have a good discussion going on here.
You know I find it ironic that my team is losing and yet I won. Yay me! ;)
It is interesting to see the play on words. I trully didn't think of exact phrasing. If you look at the wording of the question "Will machines SHOW emotions?" it is different than "Will machines HAVE emotions?"
Interesting debate. ;)
Any more coming up Negative?
Confusion was the keyword, true that MsMittens... ;)
The question indeed was 'Will machines SHOW emotions?', and it seems like everybody drew their own conclusions.
I just find it funny that most people don't have that big of a problem with defending a point of view they don't agree with ;)
Good job, everyone.
More's coming up, even more confusing ;)