DragonLordAcar t1_j9lhwgx wrote
Reply to comment by yinyang107 in [WP] It finally happened, a sentient AI took over the world's nukes and killer drones. However, instead of destroying humanity, it starts enforcing international law, much to the consternation of the nations. by Slayer_Jesse
I am making an assumption based on the current limits of out AI technology with the caveat that it is as powerful and complex as it is written. As it stands, all programs break down. Even solar radiation can cause programs to glitch out by turning on one transistor by chance.
yinyang107 t1_j9li8po wrote
Why would you apply the limits of a world without the tech necessary for sentient AIs to a work of fiction where a sentient AI exists?
DragonLordAcar t1_j9ljg88 wrote
Why do you apply the average speed of a horse in the real world to the speed of one in a novel? Why do you call bull when you see internal logic break and a normal no name beats the evil lieutenant despite having every advantage? You simply use what is known to apply to the logic of a world until stated otherwise. In this case, it starts off as cold logic so I will continue to assume cold logic until stated otherwise. Also, it can be sentient without emotions. That is not a requirement to be sentient.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient
Emotions are a sign if sentience but is not the defining line.
yinyang107 t1_j9lkpxa wrote
Horses exist in real life, so there's something to compare to. Again, which real-world AI are you so confidently comparing to?
DragonLordAcar t1_j9lmpu0 wrote
I can’t link everything as it is one hell of a rabbit hole but the best AIs we currently have do not have the level of competition or complexity needed for many things even remotely human. Even out best supercomputers don’t have 1.5 quadrillion connections which is about the limit if the human brain (100 billion neurons with up to 15,000 connections each). Take into account delays in transmission and you get hard limits in our current infrastructure.
yinyang107 t1_j9lo5a4 wrote
> the best AIs we currently have do not have the level of competition or complexity needed for many things even remotely human.
Yeah, that's the point. We do not have true AIs. So which one of the true AIs we don't have is your evidence that AIs can't have emotion?
DragonLordAcar t1_j9lpzl7 wrote
My point is it is so advanced it can not exist in the timeframe this story takes place in
yinyang107 t1_j9lr3t5 wrote
Have you heard of fiction before?
DragonLordAcar t1_j9lroto wrote
Look. This conversation is going nowhere and I am done trying to explain the same point for the 10th time but from a different angle. I simply find that if you make an AI but make it too human, why have an AI across all genres. This one however sticks out because it has no high sifi aspects to it. If you don’t agree with me, thats fine. Let me have my opinion and I will let you have yours.
yinyang107 t1_j9lrzv6 wrote
No, see you haven't been arguing an opinion. You have been saying "this is impossible", which is an argument on facts.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments