The great ethical debate in the year 2100 will be about the
civil rights of sentient machines.
The great ethical debate in the year 2200 will be about the
civil rights of sentient humans.
OK, that’s supposed to be a joke. But let’s think a bit about the possibility
of sentient machines.
Life is immaterial and ephemeral. One moment after death, a being has all of
the same solids and fluids, all of the same atoms and molecules as at a moment
before death. But something mysterious
has departed. Life exists as a
collection of electrical impulses and chemical changes. The idea of a living, immaterial,
non-physical spirit is a powerful one, and most people throughout history
subscribe to the idea that all living creatures are endowed with such a spirit.
But no such spirit has ever been
reliably observed. On a scientific
basis, we must presume that life consists solely of the electrical and chemical
interactions that animate our muscles and minds.
Consciousness, too, must be a matter of electrical and chemical
physical properties. It should not be a
surprise. We can influence consciousness with as chemicals diverse as caffeine,
TCP, or LSD; and we can stimulate memories with electrical impulses to the
brain. Is there any reason, then, why
machines using complicated patterns of electrical connections could not become
as conscious and aware as humans?
Examples from
Science Fiction
Science fiction and science fiction authors have proved to
be remarkably prescient about future technology and social issues, and there are
innumerable examples of computer consciousness in science fiction. Considering the remarkable consensus of
science fiction authors about the possibility of computer consciousness, I am
inclined to believe that it is a real possibility. I
think it is time to consider in what form it may occur, and what implications
it will have for mankind.
Here are a few sentient machines from some of my favorite science
fiction stories.
Character Type Book or Show Author
Mycroft Mainframe The Moon is a Harsh Mistress Robert
Heinlein
Daneel Olivaw Android
The Caves of Steel Isaac Asimov
Colossus Mainframe The Forbin Project Michael Crichton
Data Android Star Trek, Next Generation Various
Samantha AI
Program Her Spike
Jonze
Marvin Robot Life, the Universe and
Everything Douglas Adams
Bender Robot Futurama Matt Groening
Jay Score Robot Jay Score Eric
Russell
Einstein AI
Program Beyond the Blue Event
Horizon Fredrick Pohl
Tardis Time-Ship Dr. Who Series Various
There are dozens of other examples in science fiction. What
makes these stories interesting is the range of thoughts and behaviors
exhibited by the sentient machines. And
in a way, the stories are explorations of what it means to be human and
sentient. In some of the stories,
machines threaten mankind; in some stories they save mankind. Sometimes they bond as friends with human
characters; sometimes they question their own lack of humanity. But as drawn by the authors, they are
unquestionably alive.
Image from the film "I, Robot", screenplay by J. Vintar and A. Goldsman,
after a collection of stories by Isaac Asimov.
Today, artificial intelligence is one of the fastest
developing fields of technology. Artificial
Intelligence is expected to understand our spoken speech, speak meaningfully in
response, act as clerks or servants, interpret our instructions from gestures,
render judgments and decisions in complex fields such as medicine, recognize
and appropriately classify images and scenes, drive our cars, work in our
factories. Ultimately, artificial
intelligence may design and improve its own replacements. At this time, there are no known limits to
what artificial intelligence can do.
But all of this is less than what we see in science
fiction. Few computer specialists would
believe that today’s artificial intelligence is anything living. AI programs execute instructions from
programmers, and in some cases, can adapt that programming based on input from
the external environment. But even then,
the program is simply performing as it was designed, without motivation or
will. It isn’t alive.
Sentience
What, then, would be the hallmarks of a sentient
machine? What qualities would it have
that differ from today’s artificial intelligence? Would we recognize a sentient machine if we
saw one?
Here is a list of the qualities that I think are necessary
to the definition of sentience.
Consciousness – Awareness of the surrounding environment.
Self-awareness – The ability to say “I am”, without being asked.
Personal Memory – The ability to remember former analyses
(thoughts) and actions.
Thought -- the ability to think in processes, make forecasts and
predictions based on processes, rather than pattern recognition.
Will – The deliberate decision to perform or not perform an action
according to self-determined reasons.
Empathy – The ability to recognize other beings as sentient.
Consciousness
Consciousness is hard to define. In the biological world, I think that
consciousness is a gradational quality, rather than a discrete property. No one would suggest that a virus is
conscious, and yet it has some property of life which is greater than that of a
piece of rock. But most would agree
that a worm is more conscious than a virus, and a dog is more conscious than a
clam. And perhaps a colony of bees is
more conscious than an individual bee.
Both computer programs and flatworms can respond to external
stimuli. Flatworms can be trained to
avoid stimuli associated with pain, and seek stimuli associate with food. Perhaps these actions demonstrate the
emotions of fear and pleasure. But it is
unclear if the responses of either flatworms or computers are aware and knowing responses, or simply the results of chemical and physical
programming.
Definitions of consciousness include awareness of exterior
and/or interior things. But the
definition and observation of awareness is difficult, even in humans who have
suffered brain damage. The
identification of consciousness, separate from the qualities of self-awareness
and free will, will be very difficult to recognize in computer
intelligence.
Personal Memory
Personal memory is a critical part of human personality. I define personal memory as the memory of
prior thoughts (analyses) and actions. Personal
memory is distinctly different than computer memory which is used to hold data
for processing. It is the memory of
performing previous processes, and the memory of those results. This kind of memory allows people to learn,
and to develop preferences which reflect personality. Without personal memory, a machine could never
develop self-awareness or will.
When we wake up in the morning, personal memory is what
allows us to know that we are the same person who went to bed the night
before. Or more directly, personal
memory informs us that we are the same person from moment to moment.
Machine learning algorithms must have some kind of personal
memory, recording and comparing previous analyses to new ones. The type of memory probably depends on the
type of machine learning algorithm. Some
kind of personal memory, perhaps developed from machine learning, will be a
necessity for a sentient machine.
Self-awareness
My son gave me the simplest definition of self-awareness: The
ability to say “I am”, without being asked. But perhaps this is a little too glib. Like consciousness, living creatures span the
range from clearly not self-aware, to fully aware.
A test performed with some creatures uses a mirror. A parakeet can be kept company by a mirror,
never realizing that the parakeet in the mirror is not a companion. A cat is initially mystified by a mirror, but
may eventually realize that the cat in the mirror is not another cat. A great ape will almost immediately realize
that the image in the mirror is itself.
It seems to me that for a digital entity, self-awareness
implies a recognition of external reality and the separation of the self from
that reality.
How could self-awareness be recognized? In biology, creatures have reward systems,
seeking food and sex. Rewarding oneself
is a demonstration of self-awareness.
Self-aware creatures also pass the mirror test, recognizing a patch of
paint visible only in the mirror. If a
computer could be observed treating itself differently than external reality,
it might demonstrate self-awareness.
Perhaps a self-diagnosis problem might show that the computer would
treat an internal problem differently than an external problem. But computers lack inborn desires, fears or
survival instinct. It might be difficult
to observe self-awareness in a computer, even when it exists.
Will
Will is the ability to perform independent actions. This will be easier to recognize than
consciousness or self-awareness. Actions
independent of programming would be evidence of some measure of sentience in a
computer. Nevertheless, machine-learning
algorithms allow computers to make independent judgments and perform
actions. Machines can play chess,
diagnose medical conditions, connect electronic traffic in efficient ways,
answer questions, and perform many functions similar to humans. But at what point does a computer exhibit
free will? How can we tell?
Computer AIs do unexpected things all the time. Chatbots are a good example, offering
spectacularly bad examples of conversations, based on some learning algorithm
applied to real human conversations.
Microsoft’s experimental chatbot “Tay” became notorious after only a few
hours of exposure to interaction with real humans. Of course, a number of users were
deliberately trolling Tay, and succeeding in turning the naïve chatbot into a
bigoted and sexually aggressive delinquent.
Within 16 hours, the chatbot’s personality was hopelessly corrupted, and
Microsoft took Tay offline, ending the experiment. In a second, accidental public release of the
chatbot, the bot became stuck in a repetitive and poignant loop, tweeting “You
are too fast, please take a rest” several times a second to 200,000
followers.
It is still unclear how we could recognize free will in a
machine, as opposed to an apparent malfunction.
(Once again, I recall episodes of Star Trek which explored that very
dilemma.) Perhaps behaviors that were
clearly in the best interest of the machine would be noticed, but how could we
expect such behaviors, when machines have not evolved to pursue their own best
interest? Once again, recognition of sentience
seems difficult or impossible.
Thought
It seems to me that thought is a property of sentience. I believe that the empirical learning
performed by AI programs is not thought.
(I have similar views about empiricism in science, e.g., http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2016/12/the-scientific-method-redefined.html.) Actual thought involves something more than
the correlation of previous patterns. Thought
requires the recognition of processes which change reality (even a digital
reality). When an AI program can
recognize causation, rather than correlation, I would acknowledge that the
machine is thinking. And thinking is one
component of sentience.
There might be a test which could reveal how a computer was
solving problems, whether by empirical correlation, or by understanding processes
(thought). Understanding processes
allows something that physicist David Deutsch calls “reach”. Processes can be extrapolated to situations
which are far beyond the range of input data.
For example, a computer might draw empirical data on how apples fall
from many trees, and describe how other apples fall from trees. But understanding the process of Newtonian
gravity allows the computer to describe the orbits of planets, far beyond the
bounds of what could be achieved by any empirical program.
Empathy
My wife suggested that empathy should be a component of
sentience, and I agree. A sentient
machine must have the qualities already discussed: Consciousness,
Self-awareness, Will, and Thought. But
just as self-awareness requires the recognition of external things (which are
“not-self”), full sentience requires the recognition of other sentient
beings.
Forms of Computer Sentience
As I would define sentience, it consists of several
components: Consciousness, Personal Memory, Self-awareness, Will, Thought and
Empathy. If sentience does emerge in
machines, I expect it will be gradual, and will not appear as the full-blown
sentient beings of science fiction.
Recognition of sentience may be very difficult, particularly in machines
which are already performing independent machine learning.
In the biological world, four billion years of evolution has
been necessary for the development of sentience. Computers lack that evolutionary
background. Computers have no innate
instinct for survival or self-interest.
Computers, even if they have the glimmerings of consciousness and
self-awareness, may not demonstrate self-oriented behavior that would reveal
their progress toward sentience. Some period of evolution, by design or by accident, will probably be necessary for computers to develop sentience.
I am not sure what form computer sentience might take when
it appears. It seems to me that
sentience could appear in many different guises, and may surprise us by the
form that it takes. It may be a single machine, running
specialized machine learning programs, and designed to develop sentience. It may be a network of computers, or it may
be the entire Internet. The latter would
echo an old story by Arthur C. Clarke, in which a global telephone system
developed sentience. Sentience may
develop out of computer viruses, which have considerable evolutionary pressure
placed upon them already. Sentience may
exist as software, jumping from device to device as new hosts. In most science fiction stories, sentience
develops in a single, unique machine, but it may not happen that way. My daughter suggested that each of many small
devices – cell phones, smart TVs, home security systems – may become sentient
at the same time. Alternatively, it is
worth remembering that the human brain (as well as the human body) is a colony
of smaller cells, each capable of performing some of the basic functions of
life independently. Cells in the brain
each perform some analytical function, but it is only the total network of the
brain that we consider sentient.
Evolution of Sentience and Computer Viruses
My son asked how computer viruses could develop sentience. I'm thinking about viruses which are sophisticated enough to evolve, which may require human initiative to get started.
As far as evolution, I'm thinking about a virus which is
deliberately programmed to introduce variants in subsequent generations, or
steal bits of code from other programs.
As in ordinary evolution, most of the variants will be irrelevant or
harmful. But given enough cycles, some
of the variants may improve the virus' ability to survive.
Fear of Computer Sentience
Inevitability of Computer Sentience
If I am correct that human sentience is strictly a matter of
physical chemistry and electricity, then I believe that machine sentience is
ultimately inevitable, provided that humanity survives long enough. When it happens, it will challenge our place
in the world, the meaning of our goals, and the meaning of humanity. It may be the most important thing that has
happened to mankind since the emergence of our own species as sentient beings.
No comments:
Post a Comment