Newsmaker: Why robots are scary--and cool

(continued from previous page)

At MIT, there were the robots Cog and Kismet that you wrote about in your book. Were they a first step in robots learning what it is to be like a person?
Foerst: I think they were. The whole ideology behind those robots was not, we can rebuild grown-up intelligence, but it was an acknowledgment of the fact that babies--even though obviously they are not born as blank slates, they don't have self-awareness, they don't have intentionality, they don't have all those things that we consider part of being intelligent--but they get all those capabilities through interaction with their caregivers. And so Cog and Kismet were really the first robotic models that were built in analogy to a human and learn through interaction, and I thought that was a very, very powerful approach.

The problem was, it is so hard to do it...I think what the robots could do is fascinating, but the underlying technology, as novel and as wonderful as it is, is still kind of primitive (compared to popular notions of what robots can do).

I think that for a lot of people the only thing they know about robots is what they see in the movies, whether it's "I, Robot" or R2-D2 and C-3PO, the Terminator, things like that.
Foerst: And so compared to that obviously Cog and Kismet are hideously primitive. People don't know how difficult it is to

The robot shares with us our world. With computers, we have to enter their world.

build those critters, and this is why I concentrated more on our reaction toward those robots, because I thought this is a more interesting thing--for instance, the fact that Kismet really didn't learn. I think there is much more ground to build on, I think that particular research at MIT suffered from a general problem in science, and that is that highly expensive basic research is not very well funded, especially in engineering where it's so expensive to build that stuff--there always needs to be an application.

Are there classes of robots? Are there, if you will, social strata--you have things like Roomba the vacuum cleaner, and you have assembly line machines, but then you also have at least the goal of creating something that's more like a person, a humanoid.
Foerst: Roughly you can distinguish between autonomous robots and nonautonomous robots. Autonomous robots are those who kind of decide for themselves what action they're going to take, and that is definitely the robotic stuff that I'm interested in, and the nonautonomous robots are the ones on assembly lines that just do their thing. Roomba is a highly efficient and highly autonomous robot--it just follows its plan, it just vacuums the floor and that's pretty powerful. You could just switch it on and there is no danger that it will do something to anything, and so we can build probably grass-cutting machines, lawnmowers, the same way and--

I'm little scared by the idea of a lawnmower going off by itself.
Foerst: Well, I think you need probably a very good fence. (Laughs.)

But the idea is, all that research comes out of the study of human intelligence or insect intelligence or animal intelligence, because what makes us all intelligent in a way is that we can cope autonomously with our environment and with its requirements. That is why we survive--if we weren't autonomous, we wouldn't survive--and so for me there is only a gradual difference between a robot like Roomba and the humanlike robot. I mean the difference is huge, obviously, but it's a difference in complexity but not a real qualitative difference.

Another common image people have of AI, and robots, I suppose, is HAL in the movie "2001"--a very smart machine, smarter than people perhaps, but it's a computer. What's the distinction between computers and robots?
Foerst: Because I focus so strongly on the body, that distinction is actually extremely important because the robot shares with us our world. With computers, we have to enter their world, via keyboard, we have to speak their language, we have to do their command. (With) robots on the other hand, and that's a big part of this whole autonomous robot research, you have machines that share our world and enter our space, understand our signs, understand things like pointing and gesturing, understand natural language...I think the reason why HAL is so powerful is because of the physical attributes--the eye and the voice. Whenever HAL speaks we hear this gorgeous voice and see this glaring red eye, and so we have physical attributes to anthropomorphize.

I think people are more comfortable with the idea of something like a C-3PO or an R2-D2--cuter sounds, the face is a little easier on the eyes, perhaps.
Foerst: The funny thing is that people like R2-D2 more than C-3PO. And I think that is because R2-D2 has emotions and C-3PO just comes across as

More Newsmakers

Overlooking Robotics Benefits to Construction

One of the key benefits to Robotics - and an area that has been tremendously overlooked by the tech experts and AI academia - would be in its application toward overturning present-day construction methodologies. These methodologies remain roughly the same as they have 5,000 years ago. Imagine the type and the cost of housing that could be made available - and the 400,000 job-related injuries avoided annually in the US - if robotics were to begin replacing manual labor. Almost every modern profession has been impacted by computer technology - except Architecture and Construction! "What about CAD?" you say. As its acronym implies, computer-aided-drafting has merely writ electronic a manual drawing process - and not the process itself. For an example of the potential of robotics applied to construction, one need only look at the pioneering work of Professor Behrokh Khoshnevis at USC.

http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-05/features/whole-house-machine

Robotics is the 'killer app' in-waiting for architects, engineers, builders, and most especially the first-time home buyer (or third-world home dreamer) - if only the technology industry would take a closer look!

Paul Seletsky - Assoc. AIA
Associate Partner and Director of Technology
Davis Brody Bond Architects, New York, NY
Chair, Technology Committee
American Institute of Architects - NY Chapter
Committee Member - Technology in Architectural Practice
American Institute of Architects

[coschmi]

Conference

CALL FOR PAPERS
___________________________________________________
COMPUTERS & PHILOSOPHY, an International Conference
___________________________________________________

Le Mans University, Laval, France, 3-5 May, 2006



Chair: C.T.A. Schmidt

Conference web page: http://www.iut-laval.univ-lemans.fr/i-CaP_2006/

IMPORTANT DATES (check conference url for up-to-date information)
Friday November 18 th 2005 Submission deadline for extended abstracts
3-5 May 2006, Conference in Laval France

GENERAL INFORMATION
From Wednesday 3rd to Friday 5th May 2006, COMPUTERS & PHILOSOPHY will be held in cooperation with the American Association for Artificial Intelligence at Le Mans University in Laval (near Rennes, France).

Overview: Those interested in the study of philosophical problems and related technological applications are encouraged to participate. Philosophical, epistemological, theological and anthropological stances
on the construction and use of machines, computers and Robots are of
relevance to the conference.

Within the framework of the programme, we are looking forward to the
contributions of some eminent thinkers:

FRANCE Francis JACQUES Philosophy, Theology, Litterature, Sorbonne
USA Daniel DENNETT, Philosophy, Tufts
USA Rodney BROOKS, Robotics, MIT
Italy Lorenzo MAGNANI, Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, Pavia
UK Margaret BODEN, Art. Intelligence, Cognitive Sc. & Philosophy, Sussex
Canada Daniel VANDERVEKEN, Logic & Language, UQTR
Thailand Darryl MACER, UNESCO Reg. Adviser for Soc.& Human Sc. in
Asia-Pacific
UK Noel SHARKEY, Computation & Robotics, Sheffield
FRANCE Denis VERNANT, Logic & Philosophical Pragmatics, Grenoble

SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME
The increasing interaction between Philosophy and Computer Science over the past 40 years has lead to many position-taking stances in theories of mind, applied machine-embedded intelligence and cultural adaptations to the onslaught of robots in society. The chair is seeking short contributions to the body of knowledge within or about the intersection of the two fields. Is there a proper answer to the question of whether machines can think? Contemporary thought on computers and Artificial
Intelligence is not the exclusive aim of the conference the birth of original forms of machine intelligence can inform us about potential human beliefs and permissibility thresholds with regards to technology ?i.e. are all communities equally-footed with respect to machines that speak? The notion of machines that have desires and beliefs, increase their own learning capabilities, develop bodily functions, play games with us, help us learn, help children or the ill to express themselves, care-give the elderly, etc. used to create heated debates. Or do they still do so? In view of these on-going investigations, comparative studies and forward-looking accounts are welcome, as well as reports on innovative uses of knowledge found at the crossroads of philosophy and intelligent machinery sciences. Breaking news in computer science that pull the philosopher towards the computationalist point of view on mind are equally encouraged; and so are proposals that show the limits of representationalist theories. The main goal of the conference is to spur on interdisciplinary dialogue between 50-80 engaging intellectuals. Potential contributors may wish to use the topics listed below for further inspiration.

RELEVANT RESEARCH AREAS

In addition to main-stream areas of research ?Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence, Intelligent Robotics, Cognitive Science, Computer Ethics? we are looking for cross-cultural studies on the place of machines in society, as well as the following:

1. Evolution & Technologies
* Evolutionary Computation and Evolutionary Language Development
* Information Systems and the Philosophy of Design
* Biologically-Incorporated Intelligence; the Use of Organic Components
for Robotics
* Bio-computation, Bio-Robotics, Artificial Life & Meaning
* Robotics (Humanoid, Cognitive, Epigenetic, "Autonomous", Service, etc.)
* Humanoid Hosts and Guides for Museums, Galleries and Virtual Reality
Environments

2. Pragmatics & Comp. Linguistics
* Speech Acts and the Limits of Machine-embedded Use of Dialogue
* Obstacles to Parsing (Accents, Intonations, Emotional States, etc.)
* Relations, Reference and Communicability
* Artificial Affectivity in (non-)Dialogical Settings
* Dialogical Capabilities of Machines & Philosophy of Communication
* All Language, Meaning and Dialogue Issues

3. Minds and Intentionality
* Evocative Objects and Presumed Intelligence
* Personification of Artefacts
* Other Minds Theories and Simulating Co-intentionality
* The Mind/Body Problem in Cognitive Science
* European Versions (and Anti-theses) of the Intentional Stance

4. Culture & Adaptability
* All Anthropological Views on Computers and Robots
* Context-embedded Computer Learning
* In-class Robotic Teachers, Vulgarisation and (non-)Acceptance Issues
* The Pros and Cons of Computer-Mediated Communication & Learning
* Virtual Reality & Digitally-supported Personalities
* Post-modernism and Fiction related to Machines and Individuals

5. History, Ethics & Theology
* Issues arising from the Automation of Thought
* Designing Users' Beliefs, Beliefs Designing Machines, Religious
Deontology
* Robo-Ethics, Moral Agents, Spirituality of Machines, Technological Souls
* The Impacts of Intelligent Computers and Robotics on Society
throughout History
* Cognitive Epistemology or Science as Applied Technology

6. Other
* Transdisciplinary attempts to link Philosophy, Computing and/or Robotics

Please see web site for full details; programme, topics, accommodation, registration as well as a colourful poster and detailed information on plenary session talks.

Conference web page: http://www.iut-laval.univ-lemans.fr/i-CaP_2006/

[timcoyote]

Orange Catholic Bible

Good interview and Anne Foerst's book is worth reading. I love my fellow Lutherans!

I wonder if she has ever read Frank Herbert's "Dune" books...
----------
"Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."

" 'Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind,' "

... "But what the Orange Catholic Bible should've said is: 'Thou shalt not make a machine to counterfeit a human mind.' "

----------

AI, Cylons and Mathematics

The real breakthrough in AI will come when someone finally figures out the mathematics for neurons, i.e. how they work and organize. Then we'll be able to construct some real robots.

As to "God" and robots, I wonder what she thinks of the current incarnation of "Battlestar Galactia" and the Cylon robots with their single "God" fighting the humans and their "Gods of Kobol?"

Yes, figure out neural cognition. . .

. . .so that robots can develop the same flaws we have. That way, they can forget important information, have their memories altered by time and later discussion, and all of our other psychological difficulties.

Heck, we should figure neural organization just to figure out what's wrong with us! :)

Reasonable and reasoning

Personally I wouldn't encourage fellow AI researchers down the religious path, but diversity is key to progress in robots, I'm sure.

The more that is learned from various arcane points of view, the easier it will be to collect useful behavior into a singular device.

AI as a spiritual quest; yes.

[Richie]

You have-

To live long enough to make such assumptions as you did. We are a lonely group of humans is a rediculous statement. You are talking about a group of humans that have grown up on TV and this is not true of most people. Most people like being alone so they can THINK of things that are more pleasent when they are not interu-pted by some stupid TV comercial or people talking about they'e troubles loudly.
Again you have not lived long enough to say the things you say are fact.- Rich

Just FYI...

Being "lonely" and being "alone" are two very different things. Why the comments on age? There are people out there half your age that have lived twice as much and have twice the wisdom.

In reality, AI has nothing to do with God

The whole argument when you bring God into the picture is purely hypothetical, there is nothing that stops anybody in believing anything, but that is the beauty of our design (how it has happened is not known yet, but this is okay until we find out, there is no need to rush to a one step answer (God) for everything without evidence).

Coming to the actual problem of AI, it already exists all around you for specialized problems to the point where you almost fail to notice it, am not sure what is the benefit in trying to teach human behavior to machines, I think we should do better.

Once we figure out the mind design, we will have more clarity in understanding ourselves.

To be considered educated, first it was theology/church, then it was shakespheare, currently is it science and technology, but in US we seem to go back full circle instead of embracing reason.

Solutions to AI

Simple solutions to AI:
all you need is one simple IF statement

If this (new information, technology) better?
True: apply to itself and loop.

False:
Searh_for_information() (search Internet? such a big database)
Loop.

If it was written correctly, the initial database (brain) can start with empty and the algorithm will learn itself. The search function will not be easy to write (of cause) but long enough, the algorithm will be able to replace the search algorithm written by human by its own (oh wait function over-ride? doom day?). but what do I know?, I am BBA Major.

Just some ideas.

[coschmi]

Conference on SOUL, ROBOTICS and other such amalgamations

CALL FOR PAPERS
___________________________________________________
COMPUTERS & PHILOSOPHY, an International Conference
___________________________________________________

Le Mans University, Laval, France, 3-5 May, 2006



Chair: C.T.A. Schmidt

Conference web page: http://www.iut-laval.univ-lemans.fr/i-CaP_2006/

IMPORTANT DATES (check conference url for up-to-date information)
Friday November 18 th 2005 Submission deadline for extended abstracts
3-5 May 2006, Conference in Laval France

GENERAL INFORMATION
From Wednesday 3rd to Friday 5th May 2006, COMPUTERS & PHILOSOPHY will be held in cooperation with the American Association for Artificial Intelligence at Le Mans University in Laval (near Rennes, France).

Overview: Those interested in the study of philosophical problems and related technological applications are encouraged to participate. Philosophical, epistemological, theological and anthropological stances
on the construction and use of machines, computers and Robots are of
relevance to the conference.

Within the framework of the programme, we are looking forward to the
contributions of some eminent thinkers:

FRANCE Francis JACQUES Philosophy, Theology, Litterature, Sorbonne
USA Daniel DENNETT, Philosophy, Tufts
USA Rodney BROOKS, Robotics, MIT
Italy Lorenzo MAGNANI, Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, Pavia
UK Margaret BODEN, Art. Intelligence, Cognitive Sc. & Philosophy, Sussex
Canada Daniel VANDERVEKEN, Logic & Language, UQTR
Thailand Darryl MACER, UNESCO Reg. Adviser for Soc.& Human Sc. in
Asia-Pacific
UK Noel SHARKEY, Computation & Robotics, Sheffield
FRANCE Denis VERNANT, Logic & Philosophical Pragmatics, Grenoble

SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME
The increasing interaction between Philosophy and Computer Science over the past 40 years has lead to many position-taking stances in theories of mind, applied machine-embedded intelligence and cultural adaptations to the onslaught of robots in society. The chair is seeking short contributions to the body of knowledge within or about the intersection of the two fields. Is there a proper answer to the question of whether machines can think? Contemporary thought on computers and Artificial
Intelligence is not the exclusive aim of the conference the birth of original forms of machine intelligence can inform us about potential human beliefs and permissibility thresholds with regards to technology ?i.e. are all communities equally-footed with respect to machines that speak? The notion of machines that have desires and beliefs, increase their own learning capabilities, develop bodily functions, play games with us, help us learn, help children or the ill to express themselves, care-give the elderly, etc. used to create heated debates. Or do they still do so? In view of these on-going investigations, comparative studies and forward-looking accounts are welcome, as well as reports on innovative uses of knowledge found at the crossroads of philosophy and intelligent machinery sciences. Breaking news in computer science that pull the philosopher towards the computationalist point of view on mind are equally encouraged; and so are proposals that show the limits of representationalist theories. The main goal of the conference is to spur on interdisciplinary dialogue between 50-80 engaging intellectuals. Potential contributors may wish to use the topics listed below for further inspiration.

RELEVANT RESEARCH AREAS

In addition to main-stream areas of research ?Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence, Intelligent Robotics, Cognitive Science, Computer Ethics? we are looking for cross-cultural studies on the place of machines in society, as well as the following:

1. Evolution & Technologies
* Evolutionary Computation and Evolutionary Language Development
* Information Systems and the Philosophy of Design
* Biologically-Incorporated Intelligence; the Use of Organic Components
for Robotics
* Bio-computation, Bio-Robotics, Artificial Life & Meaning
* Robotics (Humanoid, Cognitive, Epigenetic, "Autonomous", Service, etc.)
* Humanoid Hosts and Guides for Museums, Galleries and Virtual Reality
Environments

2. Pragmatics & Comp. Linguistics
* Speech Acts and the Limits of Machine-embedded Use of Dialogue
* Obstacles to Parsing (Accents, Intonations, Emotional States, etc.)
* Relations, Reference and Communicability
* Artificial Affectivity in (non-)Dialogical Settings
* Dialogical Capabilities of Machines & Philosophy of Communication
* All Language, Meaning and Dialogue Issues

3. Minds and Intentionality
* Evocative Objects and Presumed Intelligence
* Personification of Artefacts
* Other Minds Theories and Simulating Co-intentionality
* The Mind/Body Problem in Cognitive Science
* European Versions (and Anti-theses) of the Intentional Stance

4. Culture & Adaptability
* All Anthropological Views on Computers and Robots
* Context-embedded Computer Learning
* In-class Robotic Teachers, Vulgarisation and (non-)Acceptance Issues
* The Pros and Cons of Computer-Mediated Communication & Learning
* Virtual Reality & Digitally-supported Personalities
* Post-modernism and Fiction related to Machines and Individuals

5. History, Ethics & Theology
* Issues arising from the Automation of Thought
* Designing Users' Beliefs, Beliefs Designing Machines, Religious
Deontology
* Robo-Ethics, Moral Agents, Spirituality of Machines, Technological Souls
* The Impacts of Intelligent Computers and Robotics on Society
throughout History
* Cognitive Epistemology or Science as Applied Technology

6. Other
* Transdisciplinary attempts to link Philosophy, Computing and/or Robotics

Please see web site for full details; programme, topics, accommodation, registration as well as a colourful poster and detailed information on plenary session talks.

Conference web page: http://www.iut-laval.univ-lemans.fr/i-CaP_2006/