Rated: 80% (1 votes)
Loading ...A.I. Vs. Stem Cells.
Big_Adam
Something I’ve noticed about the world.
A.I. = meh.
Stem Cells = bad.
Okay, thats not too clear. Stem cells (for those who have no idea what they are) are basicaly blank cells that can go on to make any cell in the body making it semi-viable to grow organs and various other body parts for people. The problem is stem cells only come from very young life forms that haven’t grown into anything yet. Also know as human embryo. So you have to end a life that isn’t really anything yet to get stem cells or stem cells can be taken from abortions.
A.I. (artificial intelligence) is the thing that makes that last boss in your game really freekin hard to kill.
Right, thats the two defined.
In recent months (and for long really) there’s been alot of controversy about the stem cell research as it means you have to end a life to save another. Alot of people don’t see this as a fair trade or just plan wrong (new life = potential, old life = spent) as well as the idea that you could clone people which for some reason is bad. So you have a using new life to continue old it’s a living thing sort of argument.
Now, A.I. (stay with me here) is advancing slowly but surely on and on. No one seems to give a flying feck about it though. This confuses me as at some point we’re going to create a new little thing that can talk, think and ponder it’s own existence. Yet no one seems to make a big fuss about it.
If ending a life to continue another if bad how is out and out creating a new creature good? Hell, it’s barely going to be new as we will make it like us so it’s going to be like a robo person. So cloning is bad but creating a new life out of bits from Maplin is okay? How in the great wobbly wide world figured that one out. Yeah, we’re a long way off a robot that can talk to you and think on it’s own but we’ve barely scratched the surface of what stem cells may be capable of yet people have been making a big stink about it for a while now. We’ve been getting smarter and smarter A.I. for a while, yes they only do one task (like stalk your arse in Far Cry 2) but damn they do it well.
We (humanity) need to get over our little morels a bit and let the world of science progress a bit. I mean really we do. For the sake of our own kind we do. Yes, stem cells is a bit grizzly at the moment but what wasn’t when they started. Medicine started out as a right hack and slash job, now you can have entire surgery with only a scar the size of a penny left to show for it.
Hmm…do I seem to have gone rambling off a bit.
My orginal point (no, really there was one) is that it’s odd that a living thing with no real form yet is to be respected and not fecked around with due to humanity or something regardless of if it could save lives and regrow organs. Where as A.I. where we could create a new life with a mind, no one gives a crap about.
It’s just weird.
“If ending a life to continue another if bad how is out and out creating a new creature good?”
if should be is
“How in the great wobbly wide world figured that one out.”
Who in the great wobbly wide world figured that one out? possibly??
“We (humanity) need to get over our little morels a bit and let the world of science progress a bit.”
That would be morals. Unless you are being supremely clever and are referring to the morel species, which can be described as a phallus with an egg-shaped head.
Don’t know if the quotes will work…
nope damb
Yo Chris, sorted your post a little.
My grasp of english and grammar isn’t good at the best of time (I blame my old schooling). That on top of I tend to ramble.
Anywho, I mean the morels of humanity in general. We have weird idea about ourselves. Or at least thats what I think.
Thanks adam 
Read through your other blogs. Keep up the good work.
the point of AI is that it LOOKS like it is intelligent, like behaviour states etc. if you hurt it it’s upset, if u attack it it attacks you back, but it’s just making you THINK it’s a living thing, not actually to create one, even if you managed to totally create a robot that ACTED like it was a human being, you’d easily believe i could be a human being but it’s just a well done bit of programming… it’s just a confusion in your brain that just connects the AI with a real living thing; that’s the whole point.
The point is, a real human being is a real human being, AI just acts like one.
then you get to the philosophical questions like “how can i know i’m not a computer program”, and it all becomes silly.
“the point of AI is that it LOOKS like it is intelligent”
Then why call it artificial intelligence? We already have robots that are intelligent enough to move if their food/electricity is moved. If I took your food away you’d go somewhere else to get it. I don’t call that acting intelligent I call that being intelligent. You’ve found a problem, you wonder off to fix it. There are robots that do the same.
Anway, I’m not talking about “acting” intelligent I talking being intelligent. I mean something that will see a situation then go and solve it to achieve a goal. Not just do what someone else did via mimicry.
There is still a difference there though.
AI is not capable of thought as a human is, AI is only able to follow instructions in a systematic process designed by the creator.
Long and short of it is in the name.
“Artificial” intellegence.
“Intelligence is a property of mind that encompasses many related mental abilities, such as the capacities to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend ideas and language, and learn. ”
“Artificial refers to something which is not natural. ”
~Wiki
I think our ideas of AI are grossly different good air Alec.
Anway, my idea of AI in my post is about artificial intelligence that can think and reason. So “advance” AI.
Forgive me for not seeing you point, but if a sentiant being can think and reason for itself, it is no longer artificial intelligence.
Artificial intellegince, as i said is a representation of intelligence. Using algorithms/logarithms/mechanisms to determine what would appear as commonscense knowledge or reasoning.
The AI you’re talking about, i believe, is in fact, not artificial at all. What I believe you are trying to say is the intellegnce of a sentient being created in a lab/workshop/other place. Artificial intellegince in itself is simply a name given to the subject who “appears” to posses intelligence.
I digress, Back to your original point:
If, somehow, another lifeform was “created” which did posses its own intelligence, i’d like to think, in a moral way, that they would have human rights.