i think the only difference between humans and robots who pathedically and unconvincingly attempt to simulate humans is the number of memories that each refers to when coming up with a thought.
a real human lives for at least 15 years, recording countless descriptions of how things work, and how things should be reacted to before you are able to have a real meaningful conversation with him. a computer has to have all these countless thousands/millions of specific examples of memories manually typed in by some dude who just doesnt have that much time on his hands.
the only way to make a robot that can effectively answer a question as impressively and accurately as i can is to simulate my life and all the experiences that have flashed into my brain. without them, i would be nothing but a super-efficient card catalog with no cards.
either we create a machine that interprets sensory data the same way humans do, and we let this thing run around for 15 years learning, or give him some kind of strict regimen so that he can learn it all in 5, or what i would do is, as im raising a real human child, observe all of the things that that child learns, interpret the exact context of all of his little discoveries, and input them somehow over a 15 year period and eventually the end product should be a lot like my son.
im curious as to how a computer would reference such a database. humans are able to make some pretty abstract connections. like i can imagine the universe and its mission for all humans to do selfless good is equivalent to a persons arm, and the act of lifting a weight up and down directly relates to how strong the thing is.
the way i imagine this is that i have created a category in my brain: things that naturally help themselves do work better by repeatedly doing that work. it seems that for all such abstract comparisons, there must be a category that links the things i will compare.
its like there is a list of qualities that dedscribes every single term i have ever installed. the list is huge, it includes every possible way the term can be described. i learned all of these characteristics by my experience of them, and so recording them in a computer as my child learns them ought to do the same thing.
but how efficiently can a computer possibly cross reference everything in this way. it seems to me like i already have a term defined that describes the arm and the universe and other things, and the list of things that fit this category is just as easy to compile as the list of things that describe an individual object such as my arm. there doesnt seem to be any ‘searching’ through my brain for things that fit the category, its like the category was already formed as i discovered that certain things fit into it, and the category itself, ‘things that improve with practice’ is just as much of a basic term as ‘my arm’ is.
but how many categories are there? is this just how memories are? is there a way to teach humans that incorporates this idea? would knowing this allow me to further harness my brain or allow me to better help my son harness his?
cause my next big idea, and probably the way this thread should end up going someday is how do you most efficiently input experiences into your childs brain. it will soon be my mission to stop screwing with people who dont believe in the omnisoul, and start figuring out how to raise another future man, but im not used to correcting the work of thousands of years of human civilization unless i know a little bit about it.