Does this program have consciousness? Or is there something special about a person that the program can't copy but can pretend to have? If you ask it if it has consciousness, and it replies in the affirmative, is that good enough to say it does? Can you determine consciousness from external viewing? (For those curious, there is no known way to do so)
And can you then pause or stop the program, ethically? After all, if it is a perfect copy, then it thinks it's the person it copied, and aren't you then pausing or stopping a human consciousness? Is it ok to pause it, since you can restart it and it will never know? Or is the temporal shift considered harm? What if you just pause it, but never restart it? Is it dead?
The future may be strange and full of devious questions...
Woundweavr - I saw somewhere that they's pretty much proven that the neurons in the brain do not make use of quantum mechanics. Of course they're not 100% sure, but I saw something about it in sci.nanotech.
On the second count I agree with him, it is possible to create intelligent, sentient machines. However (possibly because I am one generation up on him) I also believe that it is possible to create machines with true feelings and emotions. This is an interesting concept to toy with (hypothetically).
However, I disagree on the first concept. The human brain is many times more complicated than any computer that will be invented in the near future, so mapping the human brain topologically is more or less impossible, for a few years at least. But don't quote me on that.
The turing test shows us that this is not the only way. You would have the intelligent machine and a human being, both hooked up to some sort of I/O mechanism. You would then alternate asking the two subjects questions. If you could not tell which one was the man, and which was the machine, then you had an AI on your hands.
People have been able to get close to that definition of intelligence for a long time with simple programs. Anyone remember Eliza, the computer therapist? You would ask her questions, or say some things about yourself, and she would analyze keywords in you statement, do a little randomization, and throw a response back at you.
Apperently, back at MIT where this program originated, people began to actually talk to her about their problems, as if she was a real therapist. If a program like this was written with proper complexity (maybe add in some heuristics and a little data storage so she'll customize herself to your personality and emotional needs), would it really be any less effective than an actual therapist? Or is it really the empathic effect of sitting next to a caring fellow human that benefits us the most?
My point here, I guess, it that intelligence is in the eye of the beholder. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, does it matter if it's not really a duck? In addition to that, if we're going to be synthesizing a duck, why not take that as an opportunity to improve upon the basic model?
Maybe what the human race needs is a little bit of redesigning. A version 2.0, if you will. Is'nt that what evolution's all about? It doesnt look like we're going to change much physically anymore. The true human evolution is in machines. We're creating tools that can do things we could never hope to with our flesh. The meat is obsolete. Bring on the silicon.
A current theory has been gaining acceptance that states that human consciousness is derived from quantum mechanal interaction inside each neuron's microtubules within the brain. I am fond of this theory if only to deny the logical endpoint of thought as a derivitive of purely Newtonian physics.
The brain without quantum mechanics interfering would be a complex machine only able to react to stimuli, which was caused by something else and so on. This would suggest that everything is predetermined by one initial action at the universe's creation, or Fate or God.
However, if the quantum microtubules theory is true then there is free will. It would also make simulation of a human brain dificult if not impossible. A quantum computer would be required, and even then, the seeming randomness of quantum states may preclude any type of artificial "soul".
printable version chaos
Everything2 Help
