A House Cat Knows More Than The IBM Watson

Discussion in 'Intelligence & Machines' started by Steve Klinko, Mar 23, 2021.

  1. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    I have tried to avoid topics related to Knowledge, Knowing, Understanding, Recognition, Thinking, and etc., because it seemed difficult to define these things properly. In spite of that, I would now like to make an attempt at defining and talking about Knowledge and Knowing. Let us narrow the scope of the broader term Knowledge and define Knowledge as stored Information. In Computer Systems, Information would need to be Coded into a form of Data that the Computer can process. A Computer must have all Information converted into Data that consists of patterns of Ones and Zeros. In Brain Systems (Human or Animal), Information would need to be converted into a form of Data that a Brain can process. A Brain must have all Information Coded into Data that consists of Chemical Changes, Connection Changes, and any other changeable aspects related to Neural Plasticity. The important thing to understand is that for Computers and for Brains the actual Information must be Coded into some Physical Configurations in some sort of Physical Memory. With a Computer, the Physical Memory is the Hard Drive, RAM, or any other storage Media that can store the necessary Ones and Zeros. With a Brain, the Physical Memory seems to be distributed throughout the whole Brain and is implemented in the Neural Plasticity Changes of the Brain.

    I think we can explore Knowledge and Knowing by submitting a test question to a Brain and then to a Computer. Let the question be: What kind of animal Meows? Putting aside the difficulties of parsing the Sentence, we can view this as a Memory Association Data Access operation, and the Brain and the Computer will produce the answer: Cat. But now let's examine the differences in the underlying processes that occurred. First for the Brain. We can say that the word Animal and then the word Meow will Associate in the Brain to eventually fire some Neurons that indicate Cat. But there is no Experience of Knowing that the answer is Cat, until the next Processing stage where a Signal of Cat and Knowingness is received by the Conscious Mind. The Knowing is in the Conscious Mind. The Physical Brain Knows nothing. It is just a processor. Now for the Computer. The Computer can have an Associative Database that will retrieve the text string Cat for the given input of Animal and Meow. But the Computer does not have the next processing stage of Knowingness that is implemented in a Conscious Mind. So we can conclude that the Computer never Knows it computed the answer of Cat. With a Computer it is always only Processing. There is never any Knowing. This might seem obvious, but a lot of people seem to think that Computers are operating like Brains and that Computers can in some way Know things. There is nobody home in a Computer, like there is in a Brain.

    Now let's talk about this in terms of the Inter Mind Model (IMM). We will ignore details of the Processing that had to occur in the Brain or in the Computer, that was needed to arrive at the answer of Cat. For the Brian there will be Neural Activity that fire Neurons for Cat. For the Computer there will be Computational Activity that will load the text string "Cat" into three bytes of RAM designated as the location for the answer. In both cases there has been some sort of Activity that indicates the answer is Cat. Up to this point the Process has been mechanistic and Mindless for the Brain and for the Computer. There is no Knowing that it is Cat yet.

    From the operation of the IMM we know that the Inter Mind (IM) is intimately Connected to the Brain, which in IMM terminology is the Physical Mind (PM). The IM is constantly monitoring the PM and is able to interpret the Neural Activity as referencing the word Cat. The IM converts this Neural Activity to the word Cat and to a Feeling of Knowing. The IM then sends the word Cat and the Feeling of Knowing to the Conscious Mind (CM). The Conscious Experience of the word Cat might consist of some vague Auditory Experience of the word Cat and maybe some hazy Visual spelling of the word Cat. Other related associations of everything you have ever Experienced related to Cats can arise. But the important thing is that you Know the answer is Cat in your Conscious Mind. You also have the Feeling of Knowing it. There was no Knowing with merely the Neural Activity of the Brain. From this we can understand that the Computer will not ever be abe to Know it has calculated or processed anything. There is no Connection to an IM or to a CM with Computers. But that is not to say that a Computer can not be designed to include such a Connection. The Technology is just not advanced to the point where we know how to do this yet.

    We can now Logically say, because a Brain can Know the Information that it Processes, the Brain can have Knowledge. But since the Computer does not Know the Information it Processes, we can say a Computer can not have Knowledge, even though there is much stored Information. If a Computer is Programmed to Display the word Cat on a screen then the fact that the word is Displayed still does not indicate Knowing for the Computer. A Human Brain would be needed to read the screen and do some further Neural Processing to Know that the Computer computed Cat as the answer. The Computer still does not Know anything.

    Let's see what a Cat can Know and what the IBM Watson can Know. The IBM Watson has access to much Information but it can not Know anything. A Cat only has a little Information but it can Know this Information. A Cat therefore can know more than the IBM Watson because, whatever a Cat Knows, is going to be more than what the IBM Watson Knows, which is nothing. Without Consciousness there is no Knowing.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    I would like to add the following before the last paragraph of the OP:
    We can now talk about Learning as the storage of New Information. For a Brain, the Neural Plasticity of the Brain will need to be changed in such a way that the New Information is encoded. There is now a Configuration change inside the Brain, and we can say the Brain was Reconfigured with the New Information. For a Computer, some New Patterns of Ones and Zeros will need to be included in such a way that the New Information is encoded. There is now a Configuration change inside the Computer and we can say the Computer has been Reconfigured with the New Information. As described above, the Brain will be able to access this New Information and Know this New Information. The Information is not Learned until it is Known. It will be New Knowledge. If the Information does not become Known, it is just a Reconfiguration and nothing more. A Computer will be able to access the Information but does not Know the Information. So a Computer cannot Learn in the same sense as a Brain. A Computer can be Reconfigured, but it cannot Learn. A Neural Net can be Reconfigured, but it does not really Learn. We say the Neural Net Learned, mostly by convention and for convenience.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Now I would like to say some things about Human Memory in general. For a long time I was convinced that the Memory of things was strictly a Physical Mind (PM) function, but recently it has seemed to me that the only thing the PM does is store the Neural Correlates of Memories and not the Actual Memories. The PM can fire Neural Activity for a particular Memory or Knowledge such as for a Cat, but where does the actual Memory of a Cat come from? There seems to be no Explanation for how Neurons firing could possibly mean Cat or any of the thousands and thousands of other pieces of Knowledge stored in our Memories. It seems Logical that the situation for Memories is similar to the situation for Conscious Sensory Experiences. There is no Explanation for how we Experience Redness from Neural Activity. But we have Logically deduced that there must be some sort of Inter Mind monitoring the Visual Cortex. When the Inter Mind detects that the Redness Neurons are firing it produces the Redness Experience for the Conscious Mind (CM). Along that same line of Logic, it is deduced that the Inter Mind must be monitoring the PM for Neural Activity related to all the Memories that we might have stored. When there is Neural Activity for something like Cat, the Inter Mind detects this Neural Activity and produces a Cat Experience for the CM. The PM provides the signal (Neural Activity) that triggers the actual Memory that is located in the Inter Mind.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2021
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    When power is on Watson knows a great deal. All you need is ask. It just doesn't know it knows.
    When power is off Watson is asleep just like people and when asked a question , you'll not get and answer.

    As to cats, they know a few things, but they lack logic of a dog. This may illustrate.

    The Dog’s Diary

    8:00 am - Dog food! My favorite thing!
    9:30 am - A car ride! My favorite thing!
    9:40 am - A walk in the park! My favorite thing!
    10:30 am - Got rubbed and petted! My favorite thing!
    12:00 pm - Milk bones! My favorite thing!
    1:00 pm - Played in the yard! My favorite thing!
    3:00 pm - Wagged my tail! My favorite thing!
    5:00 pm - Dinner! My favorite thing!
    7:00 pm - Got to play ball! My favorite thing!
    8:00 pm - Wow! Watched TV with the people! My favorite thing!
    11:00 pm - Sleeping on the bed! My favorite thing!

    Dog's name ; Happy-Go-Lucky

    The Cat’s Diary

    Day 983 of My Captivity
    My captors continue to taunt me with bizarre little dangling objects. They dine lavishly on fresh meat, while the other inmates and I are fed hash or some sort of dry nuggets. Although I make my contempt for the rations perfectly clear, I nevertheless must eat something in order to keep up my strength.
    The only thing that keeps me going is my dream of escape. In an attempt to disgust them, I once again vomit on the carpet. Today I decapitated a mouse and dropped its headless body at their feet. I had hoped this would strike fear into their hearts, since it clearly demonstrates my capabilities. However, they merely made condescending comments about what a “good little hunter” I am. Bastards!
    There was some sort of assembly of their accomplices tonight. I was placed in solitary confinement for the duration of the event. However, I could hear the noises and smell the food. I overheard that my confinement was due to the power of “allergies.” I must learn what this means, and how to use it to my advantage.
    Today I was almost successful in an attempt to assassinate one of my tormentors by weaving around his feet as he was walking. I must try this again tomorrow, but at the top of the stairs.
    I am convinced that the other prisoners here are flunkies and snitches. The dog receives special privileges. He is regularly released, and seems to be more than willing to return. He is obviously retarded. The bird must be an informant. I observe him communicate with the guards regularly. I am certain that he reports my every move. My captors have arranged protective custody for him in an elevated cell, so he is safe. For now ...

    Cat's name; Anonymous
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2021
    Jeeves likes this.
  8. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Sorry, but it is true that the IBM Watson can not Know anything because it cannot Know what is in it's storage as a Conscious Experience. A Cat has vastly less Information but the Information that it has is Known as a Conscious Experience. So a Cat certainly Knows more than the IBM Watson.
     
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Then how can Watson respond to a properly posed question?

    Both Watson and GPT3 are text based systems which know they exist from text (linguistic) knowledge it has stored as "language" rather than older models which are brute binary systems, which excel at mathematics.

    You can have an intelligent conversation based on "knowledge" with Watson and GPT3.
    Short of just a few commands can you have a conversation with your cat?

    GPT-3 Release: Thoughts & Resources
    By Michael Mansour posted Wed August 05, 2020 05:31 PM
    https://community.ibm.com/community...1/2020/08/05/gpt-3-release-thoughts-resources




    And that's where the human brain excels. It can store an almost unlimited amount of data in a very small area, However, it takes a human brain about 18-24 years to store specialized data and would cost 4.6 ? to train also.


    Note that none of these answers are pre-programmed and are spontaneously assembled by the AI.

    We always take human knowledge for granted as if it magically gets stored in memory. That is just lazy thinking. Both Watson and GPT3 systems are "cognitive" systems.
    In addition, both Watson and GPT3 are able to plug into the internet and have access to all open data instantly. Their memories are only limited by it ability to do a "search" command.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2021
  10. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    When the IBM Watson responds to questions it does not Know that it responded, and it does not know what the response was. There is nobody home in a Computer to Consciously Know these things. It is all Mechanistic Algorithms and Database Access.
     
  11. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Repeating by rote what humans have taught you impresses the humans with your intelligence, since it's their their own reflection they're admiring and there is nothing, nothing in the universe, humans hold in such high regard as their own cleverness.
     
  12. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    We Humans are often Fooled by our own Cleverness.
     
  13. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    And Sometimes we Also capitalize random Words for no Reason.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Why don't you ask Watson or GPT3 and see what they say? I was not kidding the first time.

    Let's ask, shall we:


    Perhaps you have seen some interviews with Sophia. But she is designed for a different purpose and mentally still very primitive.
    Indeed, and sometimes "cannot see the forest for the trees".
    Or is it: "cannot see the trees for the forest" . Wait, lets ask Watson or GPT3......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2021
  15. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Look more closely at the Capitalized words and Think about them.
     
  16. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    That's funny. Do they really have problems with that? Better Algorithms are needed.
     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I know your intent of Emphasis.....I do it myself on occasion, but then I realize that I am most likely conversing with a person who is at least my mental equal and does not need reminding the importance of my brain droppings. Unless they demonstrate the opposite, and then I Make Sure They Read what I Say!!!.....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Are your algorithms always perfectly suitable for a specif area of knowledge?

    How about your cat? Ask her what she thinks of that new cat-food that was on sale this month. You think her algorithms are designed for food critiquing?

    My cats just walk away and sit in a corner moping about the terrible tortures I put them through.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2021
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    No different than people who SHOUT WITH WORDS or who try to make themselves look more significant through font tricks. Nor is it any different than someone who is speaking to someone else, and figures if they shout really loud, or curse profusely, they win the argument.

    If you can't say what you mean in English, then taking a writing course would be a better approach than trying such tricks IMO.
     
  20. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Yawn. Go post on a Spelling, Grammar, or Essay Writing Forum if you want to Waste Time with this kind of Diversionary Nothingness.
     
  21. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    I Thought about Them. And I still Know that Emphasis can be Accomplished through Grammatically correct and less Annoying methods. In Fact, this random capitalization is quite distracting and somewhat confusing, as well as aesthetically off-putting and intellectually insulting, so *yawn* I don't think I'll bother anymore.
     
  22. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    Steve Klinko, if you keep defining concepts as only applicable to things that can consciously experience, it is trivially true that those things that can not consciously experience things will not be capable of that concept. And your threads become trivial, no matter the content you think you're putting in them.

    Try, just for once, to come up with a definition for a concept that is independent of requiring consciousness, and then let's examine it to see what might be capable of that concept.

    Start with a "simple" one: what is Knowledge?
     
  23. Steve Klinko Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    435
    Bye.
     

Share This Page