Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   next step in evolution...or is that Intelligent Design
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 1 of 14 (370981)
12-19-2006 6:15 PM


The next time you beat your keyboard in frustration, think of a day where it may be able to sue you for assault. Within 50 years we might even find ourselves standing next to the next generation of vacuum cleaners in the voting booth.
Far from being extracts from the extreme end of science fiction, the idea that we may one day give sentient machines the kind of rights traditionally reserved for humans is raised in a British government-commissioned report which claims to be an extensive look into the future.
Visions of the status of robots around 2056 have emerged from one of 270 forward-looking papers sponsored by Sir David King, the UK government’s chief scientist. The paper covering robots’ rights was written by a UK partnership of Outsights, the management consultancy, and Ipsos Mori, the opinion research organisation.
“If we make conscious robots they would want to have rights and they probably should,” said Henrik Christensen, director of the Centre of Robotics and Intelligent Machines at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
UK report says robots will have rights | Financial Times
I have long thought the creation of consciousness is possible, especially if we develop quantum computers. The question is whether AI is an example of "evolution" or Intelligent Design, or both. Imo, if we create consciousness, it will be strong evidence for ID, demonstrating a testable and workable ID mechanism.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by kuresu, posted 12-19-2006 6:34 PM randman has replied
 Message 3 by jar, posted 12-19-2006 6:53 PM randman has not replied
 Message 4 by Straggler, posted 12-19-2006 7:57 PM randman has not replied
 Message 9 by Taz, posted 01-02-2007 9:02 PM randman has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 8 of 14 (373777)
01-02-2007 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by kuresu
12-19-2006 6:34 PM


is this serious on your part?
of course it would be design--because we know that we designed it.
however, it still doesn't help ID, in the sense that the dude who is supposed to have designed us can't be found.
So can you point out the name, type and fossil of the first organism, please? Be consistent in your logic.
Nor is he very intelligent for that matter, if we are all actually designed. you would think that a backbone meant for walking on all fours (like a dog) would be redesigned to handle the stresses of bipedal motion. I guess he thought we should all suffer back problems.
Thanks for illustrating one of the primary fallacies of the evo mindset. You guys just cannot help confusing science with religion, and so use theological arguments to address scientific issues. But hey, here is your theo answer. First, you assume know the purpose of why something would have been created. Secondly, you ignore the theological reasons for imperfection, such as the Fall.
As to the rest of your post, "conscious" and conscience are not the same words or things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by kuresu, posted 12-19-2006 6:34 PM kuresu has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 10 of 14 (374015)
01-03-2007 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Taz
01-02-2007 9:02 PM


define evolution and be consistent
OK TD, what you need to do is define the word "evolution" and only use the definition you give.....never use another definition of the word.....ever.
OK?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Taz, posted 01-02-2007 9:02 PM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Admin, posted 01-03-2007 1:32 PM randman has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 12 of 14 (374050)
01-03-2007 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Admin
01-03-2007 1:32 PM


Re: define evolution and be consistent
I suppose so since I take it you don't want it here in this forum.
Btw, for any lurkers, AI doesn't falsify Intelligent Design but rather is evidence for ID. It amazes me that anyone could argue otherwise.
Edited by randman, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Admin, posted 01-03-2007 1:32 PM Admin has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024