RE: Robot car closes on driver track times

[renrut]

The parallels between this and Chess are quite staggering, for years people said computers couldn't do it and then along came Deep Blue and suddenly it was just about how much memory and processing power you could throw at it, hence why its only a matter of time and money.

Afterall humans are just very very advanced computers capable of huge parallel processing tasks, on the fly accurate approximations to real world conditions and hugely adaptive to different tasks. The difference is if you were to start re-wiring humans to do a particular job better there might be complaints...

[V8RX7]

405dogvan said:

Back in 2008, DARPA had a robot which did this - they're now producing this thing for military applications, it can follow troops and navigate terrain carrying heavy loads

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

Right now they're making this - and soon, it will come looking for you - and you're screwed...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed...

I freely admit I don't follow this stuff but is this REALLY the best available ?

That's shockingly st.

(Yes I said the same about ZX81 etc and look where that lead so I have no doubt in time they will be very capable)

[Mr Whippy]

ant leigh said:

Mr Whippy said:

I think we will see computers being better at everything eventually, even better at us from technical thinking through to creative processes. We will literally be inferior brains in bags of mostly water that have given birth to an intelligence that will out-last us.
What that means for us is beyond my knowledge... I just keep thinking back to "The second renaissance" video from The Animatrix...

Dave

Maybe not. The human brain, despite having a smaller theoretical processing capability, is still capable of producing superior results to computers in any area where the answer is not based on solving mathematical formula's created and pre-programmed into the computer by humans.

Perhaps the future lies in 'connecting' increased artificial memory storage and simple additional processing to the vastly superior organic computers we all have.

The results are probably just a function of genetic programming, and the 'feeding' of our neural network as we grow old.

With conventional computers/computing, I agree there is no way they will ever be able to do anything except what we clumsily ask them to do via programming languages and explicit responses to inputs.

But at some point we will have the processing power and memory capacity to just let computers do their own thing and breed promising iterations of AI.


If quantum computing really takes off in the next 10yrs, then I bet we'll see lots of pretty mind-boggling amazing stuff coming from computers by 2050... whether we then apply it to the world around us is another thing.


But until a computer can basically go off, find out how to do something, and come back and do it, then they are not really intelligent or worth bothering with for tasks that humans should be able to do already... like driving.

We are too easily giving in to letting computers do tasks we can still easily do, and for what benefit? So we can be fatter and lazier?
Driving is a fun past time and something you can take pleasure in being good at. What next, robots to clean your home

Dave