In other words, I would want to say that if we stand with humility before the uncertainties of the future, we must be too open to the possibility that humanity will feel that ‘machine intelligences’ will one day do important work we will never be able to do.
Spy clocks cameras for home full#
And this when there is the understanding that we ourselves do not really understand the full complexity of how human beings think and feel and act. It seems to any case that the kind of simplistic thinking of ‘the loading brains into computers people’ is complemented here by arguments which really do not show the way AI will not be able to engage in any mental activity we can find some formula for duplicating. Nor would I be certain that ‘stories involving causation’ another suggested human exclusive ability cannot in one way or another be taught to AI. After all it was Einstein who said ‘common sense is that layer of prejudice deposited in the mind before the age of eighteen years’ and anyone involved in work of creation and discovery knows ‘common sense’ is not enough to do the job. But it seems to me this argument or series of arguments could be made a stronger way. The ideas that AI is not about to replace us, that it cannot do and will not be able to do many things that humans can, that it lacks ‘common sense’ and needs stable realities to operate and cannot deal with the uncertainties of reality, certainly appeal to many of us not looking forward to our much-predicted moving into second-fiddle status.