HAL9000

The December Drinks were announced on this thread: EDF Drinks - November and December "Friday 4th December - I have booked the downstairs bar in Boho Bar for us. They will hopefully lay on some nibbles and there is usually a DJ in there on a Friday. So get your party gear on and come along for a few pre-Christmas cocktails (or beers of course)." There's also the EDF Curry Club (Wednesday 25 November 2009: Tandoori Nights).

The only place one can guarantee a good mingle around here is at the EDF drinks.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On another note, I'm an adherent of Turing: at the > point that something becomes indistinguishable > from a human, it is to all intents and purposes > human. I think the Turing Test is too simplistic in its approach. It addresses only conversational indistinguishablility. The construct (computer, robot, machine, program - whatever) could be more or less than human-like yet able to configure itself to communicate with humans on their own level, for example. Does imitation, however good, make a human or merely a human-like construct?

It is generally accepted by modern roboticists and specialists in robotics that Asimov's Laws of Robotics are useless in practice.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But evolution is not just chance though. Life by > its nature wants to develop, change and adapt. The > ability to evolve is an evolutionary trait in > itself. The mechanism that drives evolution is random genetic mutation - chance. The chemistry of life happens to be mutable. The universe happens to be mutagenic. Whether that is just a coincidence or evidence of intelligent design I leave to you. > That?s not to say that it is driven by some > external influence it is just what it does by > definition. The 'external influence' is a dynamic environment, within which only the fittest survive.

Just turn his monitor upside down then - simples!

BB100 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > there are more amazing things like termites > so I do wonder how you can begin to think > it all just happened by chance. Chance is supported by Evolutionary Theory, which provides a reasonably good explanation for speciation, although it does not explain how life arose "out of nothing" thus allowing religion a little wriggle room.

Well I'll be.. I've just flipped mine upside down (and back again). Didn't know that! Pity the fool who lets me near their computer before I forget this shortcut :)

The initial SA80 earned a bad reputation for unreliability - the newer A2 version is said to be an improvement. Compare: SA80 vs AK-47

Robotics and AI have been major military research areas for at least half a century. It is said that classified military technology can be as much as thirty years ahead of what is in the public domain. Who else is interested in killer robots? I think it is reasonable to suspect that the scientists at Monterey Bay were discussing classified military technology because there is very little in the public domain today that would warrant such concern.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Devils advocate: > This suggests as long as its brain is > happy it does not feel the pain? I don't think we can make that assumption. The fish's nerves would continue to transmit pain impulses to the brain until the heat of cooking killed them. The fish would feel like it was being cooked alive. > and has it been gutted? does that mean it has > no central nervous system? No. Gutting does not remove or disable the central nervous system; it merely removes the internal organs. > is it the central nervous system that > communicates pain? Yes. Nerves connect the brain with all parts of the body via the spinal column, which runs along the backbone. In fish, the most sensitive nerves are concentrated in the skin along a feature called the lateral line that runs down each side of the body. The lateral lines would come directly into contact with the hot pan during cooking.

I agree with that research: configuration is probably more important than complexity in the emergence of consciousness ? in both biological and inorganic substrates.

True enough - but I would say that it's a fair assumption when it comes to human-to-human comparisons. We can't make that assumption in respect to other animal species and I see no reason why it should apply to an emergent AI or, for that matter, an extraterrestrial alien species, in my view.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's not true. We can communicate with plenty of > animals very well, most notably dogs. Sorry, it's just me being lazy. What I mean is that we have no idea what it is like to be a dog or to think like a dog and no way of communicating meaningfully with a dog within its own plane of consciousness. We don't even know whether any other animals have some level of consciousness. We communicate with dogs and other animals only from within our own plane of consciousness. I hope this makes more sense.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > if you look carefully it looks like it has been > gutted, if so how do the gills still twitch? It's head was kept cool while it was being cooked so its head and brain remained alive - gruesome.

Personally, I doubt that a human authored program will ever emulate the human mind. Not because it can't be done but because it will become cheaper and easier to grow synthetic bio-brains in jars first. However, I do see a potential risk in pursuing non-biological AI. It is far more likely that some purely logical intellect emerges that thinks and behaves more like the creature in Alien than a compliant R2D2. There is no reason whatsoever for an emergent AI to have any human attributes. Another question that interests me it whether the 'intelligence' of an AI entity would be limited to that of a human? I doubt it. It could be so different in type and power that we may not be able to communicate with it. After all, so far we have failed to communicate with any of the thousands of species that have co-evolved with us on this planet. As for robotic sex slaves, again, I think it will soon be easier and cheaper to clone promiscuous, bimbo-brained celebrity look-alikes to fulfil such a role.

Islamic, Judaic and Noahide Laws forbid the consumption of any 'portion' cut from a live animal (Genesis 9:4). The situation is not so clear cut in the case of Christianity, although the issue is raised in an apocryphal gospel in relation to cannibalism, where one would expect to find the relevant text in the New Testament, the prohibition applies instead to the consumption of animals killed by strangulation.

It must have been a slow news day at the Telegraph. This argument has been raging within academic and science fiction circles for several decades now. The cyborg/robot issue is a bit of a red herring. Artificial, self-aware intelligence is most likely to manifest itself as software running on either an inert or synthetic biological substrate. Such a program may be written entirely by human programmers or (more likely in my view) emerge from something like an artificial neural network. However, if and when it does happen - it will be the equivalent of an encounter with alien intelligence and all that that entails, including the issue of rights and other social protocols - it goes without saying.

Ha! That'll teach me to read the whole thread before posting! *Doffs hat to Ted's clever paradox-posing skills*

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > here is an example of Amnesty working against the UK > government: Point taken. I applaud their stance in this case whatever their motive... > Patrick Finucane, an outspoken human rights > lawyer, was shot dead in his home in Belfast, > Northern Ireland, on 12 February 1989 by Loyalist > paramilitaries. ... although it comes as no surprise that an organisation staffed by Human Rights lawyers has taken up the case of a murdered Human Rights lawyer. > In the aftermath of his killing, > prima facie evidence of criminal conduct by police > and military intelligence agents, acting in > collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries in his > murder, emerged. In addition, allegations have > emerged of a subsequent cover-up by different > government agencies and authorities. The irony is that we at Innocent, along with many others action groups, have been fighting exactly this sort of high-level corruption for years while Amnesty turned a blind eye - until it bit them in the arse!

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But as regards Amnesty International Note: There's Britain and then there is the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland. As far as I am aware they do not campaign on behalf of individuals in conflict with the British criminal justice system whereas they have organised hundreds of campaigns on behalf of foreign individuals under similar circumstances. My colleagues and I have written - it must be several dozen letters by now - to AI about various Human Rights violations of prisoners convicted within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales. AI has always declined any support or involvement.

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > self-interested altruism That looks like an oxymoron to me. Have I missed something?

matthew123 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Steal an apple and be hanged or resist the > temptation - what would you choose? Theft of food motivated by hunger is not punishable under Sharia Law.

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'd say > anyone who did what they did then laughed when > interrogated is almost certainly barking.needs to > be remved from society, but executed? The issue here is legal insanity rather than mental abnormality. Mental illness (or, for example, involuntary intoxication, psychosis caused by prescribed medications, etc - so-called exogenous causes) can only provide a defence when someone is unable to form a criminal intent or is unaware of the nature and quality of their actions through delusion, hallucination, irrational thinking (i.e. paranoia), clouding of judgement, etc. From what I've read about the case, my impression is that the laughter was intended or interpreted as a lack of remorse for the three-year-old victim?s suffering, but there's not enough information in the public domain to form a firm opinion. In any event, Islam (in common with exorcising Christianity) tends to view mental illness as possession by Jinns [aka Ginns] (i.e. entities similar to Christian evil/unclean spirits). On the other hand, Saudi's medical facilities are amongst the finest in the world: administered and staffed mostly by US doctors under contract - so there's no lack of expertise if the judicial system needs it. I don't know whether modern forensic psychiatry plays any part in the Saudi criminal justice system, though. BTW, my comment about Amnesty International above is motivated by their hypocrisy: they are quick to highlight Human Rights violations elsewhere in the world (invariably citing mental illness in death penalty cases) but they don't give a monkey's about the failings of the British criminal justice system.

A cafe is likely to have various items of electrical (and maybe gas) equipment switched on overnight - fridges, freezers, chilled display counters, water heaters, whatever - so, therefore, an electrical fire seems (to me) to be the first cause to be eliminated before malicious third parties are invoked.