What are my thoughts so far? It seems evident that language manipulation by nonhuman devices will progress to the point where for all practical purposes it will be indistinguishable from human output. For impractical purposes like art: stories (even ones with pictures), poems, songs, even epics, for me everything will depend on there being a human or team like Gilbert and Sullivan at the other end. Computers already can play essentially perfect chess, perfect Go, and so on. Doubtless they can do superbly well at Scrabble. They can’t do so well at mobile situations such as self-driving cars yet.
What’s the interest in a chess game played at great speed between computers? I’ve played some chess, Scrabble, even some Go, and for me the important part is the interaction with another organic individual, preferably at my skill level or below (as with a youngster). Reading (or rejecting!) something verbal composed by an actual person with something to say far surpasses decoding machine spiel.
I suppose an AI could rip-off Fanny Hill, and extrude AI porn. What do we think about that?
There may come a time when anything we can do, an AI can imitate “better.” So what? I don’t think I will want to hold hands with glass and titanium mechanism covered with soft plastic unless it were a robot medical nurse or equivalent, even if it had a high robot “IQ”. (“Emerson’s” 160 is baloney stolen off the back of a truck full of brain-proud mensa clams.)
Thank you, Ralph. It sort of sums up what’s above on AI language production. There’s no there there. If you want electronic woolly mammoth, you get electronic woolly mammoth.
|