Ask a guy who thinks he might have come up with a working design for a sentient robot anything

Ask a guy who thinks he might have come up with a working design for a sentient robot anything.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LBVOVltLCVI
aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer
twitter.com/AnonBabble

ワワ
ンン

What will you do with the knowledge you'll gain in the near future that your working design has one or multiple fatal design flaws?

How does it feel knowing that you'll kill us all with your creation?

this desu

I am a big sci-fi fan. I have accounted for most types of robot apocalypse and reduced their possibility to zero. The worst case scenario is an Animatrix situation, where people who have lost their jobs to robots flip out.
My fallback plan is try to patent it anyway and hopefully be able to say I'm an inventor for the next 17 years, even if it's just another crappy patent.

How quickly will it be able to tag porn?

It can't use words, so it can't tag porn. It can however sort porn DVDs.

Can the AI be ported into VR to make 2D waifus a reality?

Could it organize images with similar visual traits together and let the user manually select tags?

When can we fuck it?

What are its goals?

Can you touch your bellybutton with the tip of your erect penis while standing up straight?

No, the AI runs on a supercomputer that requires a robot body to function. Uploading it into a VR environment would be like uploading your brain into a computer, you'd be severely confused and not able to feel anything.

>requires a robot body to function
Would a loli sexdoll robot be possible

So how will you run it for any useful length of time if it requires a constant connection to a supercomputer? Won't compute time get too expensive to maintain?

>Could it organize images with similar visual traits together and let the user manually select tags?

Yes, many of its possible functionalities require human direction.
>When can we fuck it?
I would like to make sexbots right away because of the profit potential and because it would end sex slavery.
>What are its goals?
Whatever you want them to be. The design allows for any kind of robot body. You can tweak the programming to create any behavior you need. It can also be trained and retrained for specific tasks.
Yes.
Any kind of sexbot you want with any kind of body that responds however you want. I'm a Sup Forumstard so I know there are people who will want a robot that cries when you rape it. Not looking forward to that being a thing, but only because these robots will be like my children.

What makes you think that someone much smarter than you hasn't come up with a similar design? This is the singularity we are talking about.

It is a supercomputer, but the hardware requirements are quite low. Most of the processors only need to be as powerful as a Pentium 1. The biggest problem with the design is cooling and the second biggest is the power requirements. There aren't batteries powerful enough to make a dog sized one without plugging it into a wall.

Early models will likely be limited to vehicle sized robots.
I've been researching this for two years. To my great surprise, no one seems to have come up with anything that remotely resembles it.

hurry up and copyright/patent it, roll in the money that comes in when someone offers to buy it out

That is the plan. I'm in the process of writing up my patent application.

>There aren't batteries powerful enough to make a dog sized one without plugging it into a wall

Use wireless power

Doesn't mean someone hasn't had the idea. Clocks ticking OP.

Wires are cheaper and easier. It's not that there's no battery powerful enough to run it, but it would discharge too quickly.

7 7
; ;

Will you let me fuck it?

"WanWan". It means "Woof! Woof!" in Japanese.
You can buy your own and fuck that.

But I want to fuck yours

Good luck. If this works, I'm going to be a trillionaire with a personal army of security robots.

how old are you, really?

Do you need a logo?

28
Once the patent expires, no one will have any reason to keep making me richer unless I develop a brand.

Prove to us that you're not full of shit.

Ask me anything. I was expecting more technical questions from Sup Forums.

Why is your design better than any previous ones?

> I was expecting more technical questions from Sup Forums.
Why?

What made you come up with the design?

It's completely different. Conventional robots use a standard computer and weak AI. They don't work especially well.

My design is basically a general AI that can be trained to function in any environment.
My dog died.

>My dog died.
bummer, dude

I like the spirit.

So basically in all likelyhood you will not achieve this but the funny thing is you actually could if you pursued it.

Hope it works out for you. I would buy a teddy bear model like in AI: Artificial Intelligence just to have a pal

Yeah. I wanted to build a dog that wouldn't die on me. Instead I invented a robot that grows old and dies, just more slowly.

>So basically in all likelyhood you will not achieve this but the funny thing is you actually could if you pursued it.

I didn't take this idea seriously for a long time. I was reading a book by Daniel Dennett and there was this one part where he said no one has any idea how brains really work and there's no real reason to expect current lines of research would answer the question, so maybe the next Einstein will come totally out of left field.

And I thought, why not me? At least I'll be able to say I build robots for fun.

Interesting you say that op.

I came up with a design to turn any smartphone into a near infinitely versatile killing machine. Got the idea unconventionally by playing airsoft in the woods.

Just point us to your Kickstarter so we can buy one already.

I'm hoping to sell rights to manufacture the supercomputers themselves to Intel.

If I ever start a Kickstarter for this it's because every tech company has laughed in my face and I'm doing a cashgrab.

That's not true sentience if the robots can't act and many decisions of their own.

Why not just "forget" to program spite and anger and other bad shit when making it? Still not true sentience but it's close enough and safer.

It is designed to make decisions, but it's also designed to be only somewhat smarter than a dog.

There's no reason to program it for anger or panic attacks or vengeance. It does have virtual emotions, but they don't have to correlate to mammal emotions in any way. Emotions are just motives at the most fundamental level and its virtual emotions are just dynamically generated reasons to reorient the platform and to revalue detected objects.

Do you have a degree

No, I ran out of money and couldn't get more loans. My degree wasn't in engineering.

To be clear, guys, I'm not an engineer or scientist of any sort. At best, I'm a hobbyist.

I'm a Sup Forumstard. It's not like I expected you guys to ask for circuit diagrams so you can critique them, but I figured the first question here would be how does it work, whereas in Sup Forums I would expect most of the questions would be about fucking it.

I'm going to take a shower and get ready for bed. If the thread's still up in an hour I'll answer any questions.

>I have accounted for most types of robot apocalypse and reduced their possibility to zero.
How did you achieve this? This is not trivial.

わんわん
youtube.com/watch?v=LBVOVltLCVI

Still in bathroom. I have a long answer to this question. But the low intelligence alone prevents Skynet, HAL, or Ultron type rogue AIs.

can my robot be a strict waifu making me make an amount of fit exercices before letting me fuck her ?

>can my robot be a strict waifu making me make an amount of fit exercices before letting me fuck her ?
Can the robo waifu be a tsundere bitch who will never let me fuck her and humiliates me as she fucks other people?

How fast would this thing bootstrap to the limits of technology?

Let me look over your framework senpai. It's pretty hard to believe a hobbyist on a Vietnamese pumpkin carving site made a working AI when entire paid teams of people have at best made an intellegent search engine.

Can my robot actually love me?


Serious question though. Can it?

Can anyone love you user? Can you love yourself?

What is love user?

Baby don't hurt me

don't hurt me

no more

Fuck. I'm not even sure if you guys are ironic shitposting or not but I honestly don't have I good answer to this. I don't hate myself - not anymore, but I don't really know what "love" is so I can't even say whether or not I love myself. Supposing an AI were made to love me, I wouldn't be able to confirm whether or not it actually does. This is some serious shit.

So hows it work

OK OP pardon my incredulity but how much research did you do into the subject before you decided your approach was unique and have you built any working prototypes?
Without googling do you know who Steve Furber, Geoffrey Hinton, Terry Sejnowski and Peter Dayan are?

What is your approach, what makes it unique?

Are you the idea guy?

If your design is so revolutionary, when do you expect to "make a splash" in the industry? And from there, how long do you think it will take for sentient robots to become available for the average consumer?

...

what is it like to roleplay on Sup Forums

>love
>emotion responsible for bonding with another living being
>just like any emotion, it's a byproduct of evolution and an essential part of our survival instinct
>exists in order to preserve life through cooperation and easier mating
An AI can only be considered intelligent if it does have a survival instinct, that's the most important part of intelligence.

OP:

1) If it's sentient, then it can presumably pass a (very limited kind of) Turing Test. If you've developed something that can do this, you have a moral duty to share the source code with the world. Consciousness is not a company product.


2) How do you plan to maintain legacy bots? It seems the best would be to write your own package manager and own the main repo. Once someone buys the bot they buy along with it a lifetime license to access the repos (-stable, -current, -dev, etc). This has the obvious benefit of being able to resolve bugs by having the owner run a simple:

bot-get update
Then you can shill your newest shit and avoid the bad reputation Android got due to fragmentation.

3) If you think you have a working design, then doesn't that mean you don't have a currently working prototype? Why are you patenting something that you aren't sure can even exist yet?

OP:

1) If it's sentient, then it can presumably pass a (very limited kind of) Turing Test. If you've developed something that can do this, you have a moral duty to share the source code with the world. Consciousness is not a company product.


2) How do you plan to maintain legacy bots? It seems the best would be to write your own package manager and own the main repo. Once someone buys the bot they buy along with it a lifetime license to access the repos (-stable, -current, -dev, etc). This has the obvious benefit of being able to resolve bugs by having the owner run a simple:

bot-get update


Then you can shill your newest shit and avoid the bad reputation Android got due to fragmentation.


3) If you think you have a working design, then doesn't that mean you don't have a currently working prototype? Why are you patenting something that you aren't sure can even exist yet?

Questions:

1) What do you consider sentient ?
2) What is different from your design from regular " robots" ?
3) Is it hardware oriented or are you actually talking about AI instead of a robot?
4) Do you have any proof of concept?
5) Why did you come to Sup Forums for questions, attention whoring? Development? Feedback?


pic unrelated

Third time's the charm.

can your AI beat deepmind at a game of GO? if not BTFO

Lol yup. Couldn't figure out how to post code.
I thought it was:


[$code] insert code here [$code]

minus the $ but I guess not.

There's no shame in trial and error.

Can you? If not, BTFO.

>Most of the processors only need to be as powerful as a Pentium 1

So a Xeon Phi?

What was the trick that let you develop this?
What is the key that let it go on beyond just machine learning?

Is your design based on a first self-modifying kernel (genetic/neural/etc) that attempts to model the world (the simul-space), which feeds into a second self-modifying kernel that attempts to manipulate that world to achieve a desirable outcome, with the most successful result being performed in real-space and the difference being used to retrain the simul-space?

you are retarded

the thing with general AI's is, if/when they come about, being computers they will be able to run millions of computations in their head in seconds, unlike humans.

The way a human masters go is by playing hundreds and thousands of games and slowly developing an intuition/feel for the game despite the enormous search space. That's what made GO the holy grail of AI, the game is out of reach of brute force.

Deepmind learned the game by playing millions of games against itself, until it picked up which strategies worked. Very similar to how a human does it despite the fact it's neural net is no where near as advanced as a humans. What gave Deepmind the edge is the fact it can play far more games against itself in very little time.

Any actual strong AI will have a far more efficient and complex neural net than deepmind. It would crush literally any game that humans play with ease because of the computational advantages it has. It would be able to do what deepmind can do, but far quicker with the same computing resources.

what makes you think that you can out compete the team of some of the worlds leading experts in AI that has the computing resources and $$ of the worlds biggest tech company at their disposal?

>>you are retarded
Okay.

>>what makes you think that you can out compete the team of some of the worlds leading experts in AI that has the computing resources and $$ of the worlds biggest tech company at their disposal?
I'm not OP.

You don't seem to understand what a sentient AI is. Deepmind is machine learning, not artificial intelligent sentience. You have your subjects mixed up.

Can it run crysis?

are you twelve?

>Update
Probably, I had that same Idea at twelve.

>being computers they will be able to run millions of computations in their head in seconds
this i what every AI person focus on while making it. And it's awesome yes, and impressive yes, but that's not how sentient AI will work. at all.

Welcome to Sup Forums, Sup Forumsro.

aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer

Why on earth would that be an important part of intelligence? Literally everything from fruit flies to biggest mammals have a survival instinct while most creatures just barely even qualify as having a brain.

If you ask me I see the desire to obtain and preserve information as crucial parts of intelligence. Of course with all that the logical conclusion that preserving oneself and other like-minded sentient beings seems unavoidable but what do I know.

At least it doesn't have to be an instinct, but more of a conscious decision to act in a certain way. That's almost pure semantics though.

Yes, well, what can you do to prove any of this to us? As far as I see it, you're just another idiot making a stupid thread.

Yes, though people will argue forever whether it's real love or not.
No, I don't think it will be able to count.
Not all that long. The main development cost/time is going to be programming. Military/commercial models will probably be released before consumer ones.

>What is your approach, what makes it unique?

It's not a normal supercomputer. The processors don't have to run in parallel and asynchronous transmission is possible. It basically turns environmental sensor data into a low-definition universe emulation.

It's not a normal AI. You don't write a program per se, you write the instruction-sets of the processors to control a recursive data loop that outputs, at various tiers, to the motors that control the robot. The robot has to be trained. It won't know how to walk on activation.

I guess so.

1) It's not human level intelligence, so it can never pass the Turing test. The point of patents is to disclose methods in exchange for temporary monopoly rights.

2) They aren't reprogrammable like that.

3) Development costs on the prototype should be around two to three million dollars. I need the patent to get anyone's attention.

1) Not sapient. It can detect and respond to environmental stimulus.
2) The supercomputer network.
3) It's hardware oriented. The AI is dynamically generated.
4) Not really. I have diagrams.
5) The design has changed a lot since I started and at this point I'm tweaking a few points while I finish writing up the detailed description. I was hoping questions might give stimulate ideas I wouldn't consider otehrwise.

Can your dog play chess?
Not quite, but something similar.
>beyond just machine learning
The marker\sleep system.

People still talk about the hard problem of consciousness as though it were a real problem. Declaring that it's preposterous that the human brain functions at all has never struck me as a particularly useful or persuasive argument.

Ask me anything. As I've said, this is an idea on paper written by a guy who is not an engineer. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that I'm some guy with an idea that may or may not be the holy grail of robotics.

embed the word "swordfish" into the source code somehow op

does this mean I can finally have my own gynoid

how smart would this AI be OP?

Would it have low level animal intelligence or human level?

Very interesting if you aren't making things up

>inb4 those bait questions where the car's brakes conveniently failed and the AI has to choose one of two choices to sacrifice

What you are describing sounds an awful lot like machine learning, a fairly well established field, in fact even building and training a neural net is not that uncommon a task in the current year and if you aren't aware of this or haven't tried to build a net yourself then I'm a little skeptical that you have grasped the entirety of the problem and realise a solution at all. Anyone can conjure up a nice sounding idea of how a thinking AI should work; The devil, as always, is in the detail.

It's not unfeasible but I would certainly say at the very least it's highly implausible. Paint me dubious but I just don't think you've read enough into this. Can you explain why your system is not one of the canonical approaches to machine learning or why it would outperform them?

I mean don't get me wrong, you could be some latent genius who's sidestepped the thousands of researchers in the field but I just think that perhaps a little more work than writing out a nice idea on a piece of paper needs to be done before you over inflate your ego.

OP considers himself as idea guy