Engineering Zombies (Part 1)

This is a difficult subject to engage in, not being fully familiar with it. But I think it is a subject that many would have though over in the past, if I was to design a robot how would I go about it approach.

As the A1 robot design gives no details as to how it engages in story telling other than the size of the computer, and as I assume the article is about that particular standard?

I would like to make just a few remarks along the lines, how would I go about it? There is the problem of recognition and evaluation, one assumes Boolean logic is the computer approach, something I do not fully agree with, but rather emotive self concern, how do you give a computer emotions? How do you priorities recognition? Recognition is a complex subject, something I do not think of it as a one dimensional subject, nor do I think it is Boolean, but one of priority?

Just a short note to get the ball rolling.

Regards JD.

Good to hear from you, JD. Thanks for getting the conversation started. AI researchers cannot "program" emotions. That's part of the reason why synthetic characters are zombies - they can't feel anything. Hypothetically, you could have a conversation in which a human says "I'm happy today" and the AI says "I'm happy, too". But the AI doesn't feel happiness. It's just been programmed to respond in that way when a "I'm happy today" statement is made.

A subsequent part of this interview will discuss some of the implications for "emotionless" AI, especially with regard to weaponizing synthetic characters.

In MHO I disagree that emotions cannot be programmed. I think at least the basic building blocks and structures can be formulated. What is the history regarding efforts to accomplish this, or has it been dismissed outright?

Regards JD.

Sounds like we could have a good debate about this, JD! Certainly, emotions can be "formulated" in that sense that drugs can alter the levels of neurochemicals such as serotonin. But is the administering of medications really "programming"? I'd say not.

I don't know the history of trying to program AI with emotions, but am hoping that others who may know more will join us in this discussion.

Others with more knowledge will need to expand, but when I refer to building blocks and formulation, what I have in mind is the following.

First there is the sensory input, that requires recognition, this has two associated blocks, what I call the auxiliary, and grading, the auxiliary is the associated muscular movement, and grading is simply sensory like and dislike.

Secondly formulation, this I think of as the primitive emotion of survival, collective behaviour to provide the necessities of survival, food. The thought of success evoking elation and laughter, failure evoking fear and screams, these two actions conveying a primitive message to a group.

So putting this together how does it work? First a sensory input is graded and formulated, then depending on the result stored accordingly, this is similar to C++, objects. They are contained in there separate groups, so a input associated with that group only evokes responses from that group. And these groups are tied together though the auxiliary.

Thirdly, auxiliary formulation. This is the non emotive part of the brain that structures responses? This is a friendly block, that can access all other blocks, restructure and test concepts, the stored results are the thoughts that are communicated to others, the result passing to a formulated group? This area has the responsibility to respond or not respond. Something possibly related to experience and its own history. Pain and pleasure?

Just a few thoughts, Regards JD.

So, October, 2008 has come and gone--any feedback on what happened?