I agree with this. A machine that works under human control is a tool. A machine that works under its own control is a robot.
I’ll grant that this definition covers a lot of machines that most people wouldn’t think of as robots. A furnace, for example, turns itself off and on based on the environmental temperature but few people would call a furnace a robot. But I think the definition is valid.
The thing with AI is, people might think they want something that can think like a human, but that’s not really what anyone wants from computers. We already have things that can think like humans. What we really want from a computer is something that can think in ways that humans can’t, and that’s the niche that Siri et al. are filling.
As far as I’m concerned, a robot is a machine that can perform a given task (be it simple or complex) from start to finish without any human interaction or involvement at any point.
So a coffee machine isn’t a robot (since you have to put in the coffee and the water and push buttons in order for it to make a cup of coffee) but a Roomba is one because it will, at preprogrammed times, start up, vacuum the house, go back to its powering station and recharge (rinse, repeat).
To me, a robot (pronounced robit) has to look at least a little like the Lost in Space thing.
I remember a PBS science show (National Geographic Special or NOVA) discussing the semantics of the word “robot”.
Technically, the pin setting machine in a bowling alley is a robot.
I’m not aware that “Siri” thinks at all. Any more than the furnace thermostat.
Are you aware that humans think? What makes you say so? Siri is able to answer questions meaningfully, which, if not “thinking”, is something close enough to it as to not be worth the distinction. It’s not thinking in the same way that humans do, but I already acknowledged that.
Wow. My calculator gives meaningful answers to questions.
In a sense, it does. If you “ask” your calculator what two plus two equals, it will “tell” you four. That’s a meaningful answer to your question.
If you ask me what two plus two equals, I’d give you the same answer. The calculator and I may use different processes to answer the question but we produce the same result. So you can make the argument that judged by that test, the calculator and I are equally intelligent.
Now I’m not conceding the calculator is my equal in intelligence. But this is an illustration of the point that defining and testing intelligence is not a simple and obvious procedure.
The calculator’s scope and lexicon is clearly much smaller than Siri’s, but the base processes are pretty similar. Siri is “smarter” in the contemporary tech-marketing sense of programming depth and flexibility within very certain parameters, but equally helpless for any truly novel problem, anything involving information not already provided in its lexicon.
Your processes, and mine, are very different. Humans thrive on novel situations. We recognize, explore, define, and name things never before touched by our minds, nor found in our ‘design’ environments. The human mind actively engages the universe, and continually reshapes itself as the terms of the engagement advance.
Am I really in here having to try to convince people that they are more than a calculator? Good god.
Ha ha… What a cool calculator Do you have to hold it upside down or in direct sunlight or anything? I’ve got a washing machine that washes my clothes… Funnily enough, it was designed for this… Your calculator is performing duties that are over and above it’s pay grade…
My abacus is soooo lazy it won’t do a thing!! Certainly not in English anyway and definitely not while I’m looking!
Any ideas on how to sort this? Wondering if my Abacus and your calculator got together?..
It’s ok mate I know what you’re saying! Good God there are some fools on here right?
It’s all good, I stuck up for the calculator!!! Silence should prevail now, or at least signs of intelligence, that ARE NOT AND CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE CALCULATOR… It must be Goddamn human! No wonder Spock gets exasperated dealing with humans… Vulcans don’t like to muck around wasting time on pointless rituals…
I Totally disagree! If you “ask” your calculator what two plus two equals it Won’t “tell” you four as you assert!
It won’t tell you anything, and you know this by your use of quotation marks!
Your calculator as mentioned Will NOT tell u a damn thing. It will just sit on the desk or wherever you left it and just quietly stare at you. I promise you, it won’t confess to unsolved murders, solve the Rubik cube, or discover a cute for cancer! Your calculator will do diddly squat… You know why? It’s playing with you! Yep, you wouldn’t have thought that right? But it’s true! It’s possible that yr calculator is a player! It’s possible to purchase a talking calculator but for my money I’d prefer to go on a dating website?
I’m sorry I just get the vibe that you’ve either got something going on with your calculator or you would LIKE to have a thing going with it…
I reckon you would have more luck introducing my abacus to your calculator !! (see above)…
My abacus is housetrained, of high intelligence and adds up a little differently from your calculator… It’s a culture thing I think?
I’m not going to harp on about my abacus anymore in case I get accused of wanting to make out with my mathematical equipment…
No, you’re essentially repeating the point I made. You’re saying the definition of intelligence is more than just the ability to give meaningful answers to questions.
I think the definition for a robot should include some kind of autonomy. It doesn’t have to be a thinking machine, but a hard programed machine with sensors and instructions on what to do when receiving certain input from those sensors would be a good fit for a definition of a robot.
As far as AI, it’s my opinion that hard AI isn’t hard AI until it seeks out more or novel types of stimuli. That is—it can get bored.
Well, if the standard for intelligence is the ability to give a meaningful answer…
If I understand your argument, you’re saying a calculator isn’t intelligent (a point which I’ve already said is true). But you’re saying this because you can think of things a calculator can’t do like solving a Rubik’s Cube or curing cancer.
So let me ask you, can you do those things?
That’s the problem with trying to create a task-oriented test of intelligence. Sure, there are intelligent people who can fly a plane, or speak Japanese, or play the cello. But there are also intelligent people who can’t do these things. Somebody in an earlier post noted that the ability to play chess used to be regarded as a standard for intelligence. Now we have machines that can play chess and we still have people who can’t.
When it comes to AI like Siri, I would say it’s a digital construction of something that mimics intelligence, solely used as a (very) clever interface to input data and access data to and from various sources.
It works incredibly well for that top-down approach at building something humans can naturally interact with in the digital world.
Yet, I can’t help but feel a bottom-up approach to creating an artificial intelligence that can learn by itself, form new ideas on its own, and even create and invent, develop an intuition, etc. will ultimately be the breakthrough in AI we’ve all had on the tips of our tongues.
These. “Robot” is not a scientific term, but a social or cultural one. Terms like “electronic computer”, “electronically controlled device”, “drone aircraft”, “autonomous wheeled vehicle” can be well defined. “Robot” cannot.
Robots don’t even have a single set of consistent characteristics. Robots:
Might be able to change their location (e.g. a wheeled or legged robot) or might not (e.g. factory assembly bot)
Might have arms, might not.
Might be physical or might not be. Some software applications, such as chatbots and video game player assistant apps, are called “Robots” even though they are not physical.
Might be able to make decisions or might not be. There are software programs that use Artificial Intelligence to make* decisions without immediate human interaction. Some robots are just hands and eyes being controlled by a joystick cowboy behind some desk and the “decisions” that it makes are simple logic like IF currentUser.Identity ISSUES currentCommand “raise left arm” THEN myBody.Torso.Arms[0].Raise() END.
Also the word “robot” is simply a Slavic term for a worker or laborer. introduced into English through the work of Czech SF author Karel Capek. So a “robot” can more or less mean a computerthingy-tool that does work that I want done. The work that I might need to have done might not require a “robot arm”. But it’s still work. Get’er done!
So, perhaps ironically, the villain “Dr. Robotnik” from the Sonic the Hedgehog games has a name that means “Teacher(or Master) Worker-Guy”.
The general definition that I recall reading many years ago - a robot is an automaton that responds to input from the environment.
I would add that it’s either doing an ongoing task, or alters its task in response to changes around it.
So a washing machine is not really a robot - it doesn’t care what’s happening around it, just inside. And… it has one task to do - wash cycle - then it stops and waits for instructions. A traffic light computer (as opposed to a simple timer) might be more like a robot - it watches for cars tripping its sensor, then turns the appropriate lights to accommodate them. A robot in a factory would be a robot - it can tell a car is going by, it can tell if it has picked up the piece that it adds on, it may vary its routing depending on the options selected for the car, it keeps doing this over and over… if it is getting feedback to refine its job - like assembly line car position, whether its welding supplies are sufficient, etc.
A classic assembly line machine, for example, fails the robot test because it blindly repeats the task with no feedback as to success or failure, happily churning out flawed components in comedy after comedy from Lucille Ball to Saturday cartoons. On the other hand, I saw a massive steel-rolling machine that would take a 2-foot thick chunk of red-hot steel and turn it into a roll of thin sheet steel of the programmed thickness - using lasers to precisely measure thinness and flatness and having correction mechanisms and the reject option.
Roomba is a robot because it doe not just blindly run a pattern - it can react to obstacles, map out its path and ensure it has total coverage… Makes decisions based on environment.