Makes you wonder about the whole aftificial intelligence thing too
This is the kind of the thing that researchers tend to figure will emerge naturally from the behaviour of artificial intelligences.
A system smart enough to be called intelligent would certainly have to be able to construct hypotheticals and consider them fairly thoroughly, in order to give an opinion of a hypothetical situation almost as readily as a real one.
But the process of considering hypotheticals is bound to involve some things going on in the AI that are the same or similar to what would happen if the event actually happened.
I'd guess that this happens in humans, and is a large part of what causes confusion as to the difference (especially with "dreams", where we're often temporarily deluded into thinking the event *is* real). But if that's going to happen in AIs too, then they have the potential to be just as uncertain on the topic of what is real.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re:
Date: 2004-02-12 05:43 pm (UTC)Makes you wonder about the whole aftificial intelligence thing too
This is the kind of the thing that researchers tend to figure will emerge naturally from the behaviour of artificial intelligences.
A system smart enough to be called intelligent would certainly have to be able to construct hypotheticals and consider them fairly thoroughly, in order to give an opinion of a hypothetical situation almost as readily as a real one.
But the process of considering hypotheticals is bound to involve some things going on in the AI that are the same or similar to what would happen if the event actually happened.
I'd guess that this happens in humans, and is a large part of what causes confusion as to the difference (especially with "dreams", where we're often temporarily deluded into thinking the event *is* real). But if that's going to happen in AIs too, then they have the potential to be just as uncertain on the topic of what is real.