How can you have a proposition that the mind doesn’t exist? That means propositions don’t exist and that means, in turn, that you don’t have a proposition.
Read More ›
In an op-ed at CNS this morning, Walter Bradley Center director Robert J. Marks summarizes his case, as an artificial intelligence expert, that the United States must remain competitive in military AI or, as it is called, “killer robots,” because hostile nations are forging ahead.
Read More ›
Can we afford to let hostile powers develop AI warfare and not do so ourselves? Artificial intelligence expert Robert J. Marks has been discussing the issue in podcasts with various hosts across the country.
Read More ›
Artificial intelligence expert Robert J. Marks tackles the contentious subject of military drones in his just-published book, The Case for Killer Robots: Why America’s Military Needs to Continue Development of Lethal AI. Many sources (30 countries, 110+ NGOs, 4500 AI experts, the UN Secretary General, the EU, and 26 Nobel Laureates) have called for these lethal AI weapons to be banned. Dr. Marks, a Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Baylor University, disagrees. What if ambitious nations such as China and Iran develop lethal AI military technology but the United States does not? Nations that wish to maintain independence (sovereignty), he argues, must remain competitive in military AI. (“Advanced technology not only wins wars but gives pause to Read More ›
Should the United States military pursue development of lethal autonomous artificial intelligence weapons? Robert J. Marks, Director of Discovery Institute’s Walter Bradley Center for Natural & Artificial Intelligence, says yes. He makes his case for lethal A.I. weapons in his book, The Case for Killer Robots: Why America’s Military Needs to Continue Development of Lethal A.I. To find out how Read More ›
Both computers and humans can be fooled by patterns that appear significant but really aren’t. But the bigger the computer, the more random patterns it can find in the vast swathes of data processed.
Read More ›
Larry L. Linenschmidt interviews Robert J. Marks on the difference between performing a task and understanding the task, as explained in philosopher John Searle’s famous “Chinese Room” thought experiment.
Read More ›
Robert J. Marks talks with Larry L. Linenschmidt of the Hill Country Institute about the misattribution of creativity and understanding to computers. This is Part 2 of 2 parts. Other Larry L. Linenschmidt podcasts from the Hill Country Institute are available at HillCountryInstitute.org. We appreciate the permission of the Hill Country Institute to rebroadcast this podcast on Mind Matters. Show Read More ›
Robert J. Marks: We have a number of aspects that we exhibit that are not algorithmic. I would say, qualia, creativity, sentience, consciousness are probably things that you cannot write a computer program to simulate.
Read More ›
Robert J. Marks talks with Larry L. Linenschmidt of the Hill Country Institute about the nature and limitations of artificial intelligence from a computer science perspective. This is Part 1 of 2 parts. Other Larry L. Linenschmidt podcasts from the Hill Country Institute are available at HillCountryInstitute.org. We appreciate the permission of the Hill Country Institute to rebroadcast this podcast Read More ›
Paul's remarkable vision, described in 2 Corinthians 12:2, could well have been a near-death experience. He was once stoned and assumed to be dead, his body abandoned outside city walls. But he revived.
Read More ›
Big companies have been known to just pay patent trolls to go away but individual inventors must be more resourceful.
Read More ›
Near-death experiences are generally seen as real, even among hardcore skeptics, and research focuses on how to account for them.
Read More ›
Dr. Bradley also spoke about how near-death experiences are creating a challenge for skeptics of the reality of the mind.
Read More ›
In these excerpts from the podcast, Walter Bradley Center director Robert J. Marks talks with John Lennox about an AI immortality where we are told, for example, that we won’t need tongues because we can tap right into our taste buds.
Read More ›
George Montañez, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at Harvey Mudd College, took issue with Kurzweil’s claim that AlphaGoZero needed no instructions to beat humans at the game of Go: “For a system like this to work, a human must define the incentive structure, also encoding the assumptions.” The sheer power of a computing system does not cause it to do anything at all.
Read More ›
Claims that a given program has “passed the Turing test” should be treated skeptically because a program can be optimized to pass the Turing test without demonstrating any particular intelligence.
Read More ›
AI in accounting means that businesses need accountants who can interpret the meaning of the blizzard of numbers more than ever. The successful accountant will increasingly have higher education and show a broad understanding of the business area and environment.
Read More ›
As soon as you assume that each neuron is a microprocessor, says Danilov, you assume that there is a programmer. There is no programmer in the brain; there are no algorithms in the brain. However, it is "extremely painful" for many people to let go of the idea.
Read More ›
One of a pioneer neurosurgeon’s cases featured a patient who could, unaccountably, speak ancient Greek. The explanation was not occult but it was surely remarkable for what it shows about memory.
Read More ›