Artificial Intelligence Post Number 20

We would like to know when we may expect thinking computers that are smarter than we are.

First, we need sufficient affordable computer power. In an article by Tim Urban, he says that Kurzweil suggests that we think about the state of computers by looking at how many cps you can buy for $1,000. Moore’s Law is a historically-reliable rule that the world’s maximum computing power doubles approximately every two years. Looking at how this relates to Kurzweil’s cps/$1,000 metric, we’re currently at about 10 trillion cps/$1,000. This puts us on pace to get to an affordable computer by 2025 that rivals the power of the brain.

But this assumes that we need the power of the brain to do Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI).  If we can get an economical computer to think more efficiently than the way evolution created by trial-and-error, then indeed the 2025 date is a worst case scenario.  Even if an AI computer exceeds our thinking ability in only narrow fields, it will be disruptive.  I have already mentioned how ASI will devastate the stock market if it learns to predict stock changes that we mere humans cannot predict. And what will happen if a rogue country gets an ASI ability as to how to beat us in wars?  Or if an ASI computer decides that it would be more secure with less humans screwing around with nuclear weapons and global warming?

We are looking at a possible scenario of ASI, at least in a few narrow fields, sooner than 2025!  Maybe in as little as 5 years!

 

Advertisements

11 Responses to “Artificial Intelligence Post Number 20”

  1. Bob K Says:

    Another chip that I think may be a step toward artificial intelligence.

    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/216792688_NeuFlow_A_Runtime-Reconfigurable_Dataflow_Processor_for_Vision

  2. Bob K Says:

    On-line article in Scientific American could be a significant advancement for computer technology

    Graphene Finally Gets an Electronic On/Off Switch

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=graphene+finally+gets+and+electonic+on%2Foff+switch

  3. Bob Kaufman Says:

    Deepdive.stanford.edu

    Imagine the good and bad that could result when computer chips are 100 times or 1000 times faster and this type of software reprograms itself over and over again to get the results we seek. New chip technology might make that day a lot sooner than Moore’s law would now predict.

  4. Bob Kaufman Says:

    Bob Dylan conversation with Watson. Big promo for and by IBM but interesting

    http://Ibm.co/1Q1YJ40

  5. Bob Kaufman Says:

    If IBM could migrate Watson to a mainframe more like the TrueNorth chip, what might that mean for the development of AI?

    • wbrussee Says:

      15 years ago, I, a programmer, and another engineer developed a program to play the stock market. We had real-time stock prices sent to my home, and we used various statistical tests on price and volume to determine whether any stock was acting in such a positive manner that we should buy it. The program also determined, based on past history, when we should sell. To do this processing we bought what was pretty much a state-of-the-art home computer with dual processors. It cost about $5,000. Now, for the same price you can buy a computer with over 100 times the power/speed. This is consistent with what Moore’s law predicted.

      Many people think that it will take some super-magic software program to “think,” but if we just went back and reprogrammed our original stock-pick program on a newer more powerful computer 100 times as powerful, we could do something like tell the computer to “read” the front page of the most recent copy of the Wall Street Journal and have it search for any repeated word. It would then test that word for any indication that there is associated data that has a similar trend as the movement of the S&P 500. For any word/trend identified it would then determine if the trend was predictive such that we could use it as some trigger of future market movements. If it found such a word, the computer would be programmed to look for similar words and check those also as to predictive ability. For any combination of words found, it would test to see if combined they become a more accurate predictor.

      With the Wall Street Journal front page changing daily, over the course of a year the accumulated market predictor could become very powerful, and what it developed could look little like the initial direction the computer was initially programmed.

      Is this thinking?

      • Bob Kaufman Says:

        I am laid up with a leg injury that will heal but can not get to my computer. However, I get a weekly email from Peter Diamandis that this week points to IBM research finding a way to replace silicon with carbon nanotubes to greatly increase computing speeds. I am sure you can find many references on- line. This is just another incremental step towards AI enhancements and improved capability.

      • Bob Kaufman Says:

        You bet it is thinking.

  6. wbrussee Says:

    Bob Kaufman says, “…IBM research finding a way to replace silicon with carbon nanotubes to greatly increase computing speeds.”

    Interestingly, battery research is doing almost the opposite. Replacing the current carbon anode with silicon in a Li-ion battery can greatly increase the charging speed and capacity. The problem is that the expansion of the silicon causes the anode to physically fail after a relatively few charging cycles. By using a process that combines the silicon with the carbon nanotubes they are able to get a robust anode that is capable of a large number of charges and holds a much larger charge than the current anode and can survive 6,000 charge cycles while maintaining 85% of its initial capacity.

    Incidentally, what did you think of my book “Artificial Intelligence Newborn – It is 2025 and I am Here!” I have thick skin, so don’t hold back. Some of my books sell very well (over 80,000 copies), some don’t.

    • Bob Kaufman Says:

      When I first picked up the book and read a few chapters it did not grab me, so I put it down and went back to it later. I remember not liking the name Longly Steamfore. I know that is silly and picky but it’s also true. When I went back to the book I found it easy to read and imaginative. I especially liked the ambiguity of the ending. In this novel who is the hero and who is the antagonist? Who do we connect with emotionally ? It was fun for me to read because I am interested in the subject and know the author.

      • wbrussee Says:

        Thanks for the review. It is always enjoyable to hear another person’s take on your work!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: