Could technology be life one day?
My mind was sparked by an interview I've just seen. Some people believe technology (e.g., artificial intelligence) could develop to the point where a machine can make one feels that it behaves like a human. Then there is a remote possibility that the definition of 'life' should change. I would like to know your opinion or perspectives.
3 Answers
Anonymous
Here's an interesting example from history. In the 1960s, early AI pioneers at MIT produce a program called ELIZA, which was designed to be something like a computer therapists.
What happened was that even though everyone working on it knew that it was a program, and not alive (as in: definitely and unambigously not alive and not conscious by any stretch of the imagination, it was very basic compared to today's programs), some students and the secretary would still talk to it for hours because it made them feel better, interacting with the program at an emotional level.
Here's a famous transcript: http://www.filfre.net/2011/06/el...
ELIZA is often taken as an indication that as humans, we're more than willing to interact with artificial entities as if it were 'alive' even though we know that it is not. The barrier to what is needed for humans to interact with AI as if it were alive is probably lower than it is for an AI to objectively considered "alive". After all, we anthropomorphise stuffed animals, and we routinely become emotionally attached to fictional characters. It's not difficult to imagine a situation where we communicate at an emotional level with AI, even if we know that they aren't alive or they aren't advanced enough to fulfil what we consider to be "alive".
What happened was that even though everyone working on it knew that it was a program, and not alive (as in: definitely and unambigously not alive and not conscious by any stretch of the imagination, it was very basic compared to today's programs), some students and the secretary would still talk to it for hours because it made them feel better, interacting with the program at an emotional level.
Here's a famous transcript: http://www.filfre.net/2011/06/el...
ELIZA is often taken as an indication that as humans, we're more than willing to interact with artificial entities as if it were 'alive' even though we know that it is not. The barrier to what is needed for humans to interact with AI as if it were alive is probably lower than it is for an AI to objectively considered "alive". After all, we anthropomorphise stuffed animals, and we routinely become emotionally attached to fictional characters. It's not difficult to imagine a situation where we communicate at an emotional level with AI, even if we know that they aren't alive or they aren't advanced enough to fulfil what we consider to be "alive".
