I really like the perspectives individuals have about this concept. Especially the different types of people i speak to about this. The cavemen mentality being my favorite in the sense of doom and gloom, to the people who believe that there is a possible transcendence into a virtual life. I was hoping to have some level of input from the godot forum, and this has been absolute gold in my eyes. I wish i could reach more people with this thought and document the responses properly just as a time capsule of thought and perspective leading up to and during the assimilation to AI. I think it will happen much like the y2k threat (if you are old enough to have experienced that), and something that just opened our eyes to the need for better planning with computers. Meanwhile you have the crazies LITERALLY prepping and throwing out electronics preparing for the END. Something so basically human of us, but evolution favored the ones who prepped harder. The niche is then filled to exploit that preparation by a "smarter" creature (penguins and rocks for nests comes to mind), creating a new threat to prepare for. I get the "need" people have to fear new things, but certainly the terminator concept is extreme, but i hope the human perspective doesn't create a barrier to really accept the benefits AI WILL bring.
@kuligs2 i feel like the talking computer aspect is a different route, more on the level of visual scripting and may come with some of its shortcomings. the integration of tech into our brains is definitely the "next" big step, and yes, happening as we speak. i more so am asking if the computer will be able to write clean or even cleaner code than we can now, and in what time frame. doing so from the input we give it, what ever means that may be. i think the video generating is more so a method of learning how to "think" like we do, and a process to analyze what we are saying. Possibly a "waste" of time, but all our knowledge (arguably) is formed with a similar method thru our days, from the first one.
@Jesusemora I felt like a no was just a really closed minded thought, not to be offensive with that statement, but id argue anyone who can handle this level of thinking is very aware the shackles of no/not going to happen bring. BUT.... playing devils advocate, as the lack of allowing a response is more closed minded than saying no to something, i apologize for not allowing the vote. I will certainly add the tally for NO mentally. I guess my mentality is more that human error and the lack of shared knowledge limits us to human productivity. So of course humans will write the code incorrectly and need a lot of time to polish their craft. That is where a computer being able to "perfectly" understand the outcomes, would need to bridge the gaps of human interpretation. Once it can understand what we want to say, it could create the fastest path to doing so, kind of like the fist time python code runs (right?), except doing that however many of times with ABC variables for which method really is fastest/concise. Coding is difficult mainly because we are building on ideas from the past, and using them to solve modern problems. That makes our need to prior knowledge immeasurably important. If ai is used to understand the bug and then sort thru a vast directory of how problems were solved before, i feel at least 90% of necessary code could be done by a program and its learned habits. It would only be the really revolutionary ideas that would need some human input to bridge the understanding gap. As far as flying cars, we do have them, but the functionality really isn't there. I had a deep conversation at a wedding with a guest i had met there (jet salesman), and he made a great point that to create something you are safe being hit by another vehicle in, the whole being able to fly part becomes a big factor... just to heavy. i believe there is an english company thats sold them for some time now, but only to the island hopping superrich outside of the masses. The infamous "They" recently made a battery powered flying suit, like iron man kinda... that's more space age to me than a flying car.
@lukboy i think that the "like grammarly" statement is down the path i'm addressing. Using that same process to how code "should" be done, be that simple error assistance, could certainly be done with enough info properly indexed and "AI'' to analyze it. Kind of like The rust language, The blistering speed of C but with the lack of assigning/releasing memory done by machine (I could be totally speaking out my behind, but i think that's how that goes), just doing that same thing on a much higher level from basic thoughts and a Grammarly style approach to making basic thought, become machine level thought. Something to hold your hand as its broken down.
@xyz i don't necessarily mean simply in the game world but possibly that would be easier to do that apps/programs to solve human needs, being they may be something newer/not done before. Basic interpreting of ideas and compiling code that works properly, from simple "human" level inputs, and materializing the idea would do wonders for those people who CANNOT think in a linear level needed for programming. Imagine what could be done by a child's imagination if we could put that into form. The out of the box thinking isn't always applied to gaming i feel bc the process has limitations of what been before. Once you learn to think a certain way, it defines your creativity from that point on. Removing the need for high level thoughts to make simple ideas come to life. Now as far as this being done with the resources available, that is the limitation to me. Possibly the power needed for such a program is just not there for the average joe to access, but that same thought is what makes the google algorithm so awesome right? It does searching on a crazy high level with minimal resources per person accessing said info. Why cant there be a similar dictionary/key relationship with human input to machine understanding. Most likely step by step guiding you towards your directive, not just do "this" and "that" happens.
I will do my best to put an idea into words, but im not saying i have some grand answer here, just wanted to poke others brains on what they thought. Most educated individuals at the time believe flight would never "take off" (forgive my pun) and that the ONLY way that would possibly work, were via dirigibles. Not that all dreams come to fruition, the majority don't, but this level of thought/banter is essential for the advents of tomorrow.
This is a concept for a planning/goal app that i had hoped to make at some point, very super rough iteration, but i think it gets the point across perfectly... its sort of an idea to take the habits of Tamagotchi and apply that to a goal oriented planning/tracking app.
- Create an app that will keep track of my day to day activities via user prompts for information or any available tracking data that:
A)creates a relevant avatar to represent each activity/data and make it look cartoony with comic style graphic effect
B)the avatar will become bigger/smaller, darker/lighter, grow/die depending on each process they represent, relevant to level of achievement to goals.
C)shows an "updated" background image of the avatar each time the phone opens/closed to the main screen with updated information that can load the menu whenever "action choosen by user" is done
D)menu is a customizable user GUI to create new avatars and assign goals/info, upgrade the avatars
"screen" environment, check specific data relevant to each activity
E)Make a character that represents the progress of all activities, and make him become happy/mad, clean/dirty, fat/skinny depending on what each avatars data tracks. Make the character in the same graphical effect of the avatars.
F)keep track of data in a log, that shows the actual progress, progress if all goals HAD been met, and progress if NO goals had been met and the ability to cancel or change log information for "errors" or unreported progress.
G)create ability for user to "sell" screen space via advertisements on billboards on the main phone screen instead of having to purchase app/premium for access to all features.
As far as getting the app into the stores and whatnot, i feel like that is a completely different issue, and on a business level of thought. The ability to run applications on different hardware is getting much easier to navigate, but that is a moving world, and i suppose to be effective in any aspect of business, its typically best to find others who specialize in services you don't have a good working knowledge of. I have little understanding of porting games into stores and making it run on different devices, but that is a great thing for the same hand holding AI to walk you thru. The steps looked pretty generic the very little i have looked into it, but require extensive knowledge on the processes. Again i may be sticking my foot in my mouth, but is it really that hard to do?
There are totally holes in this series of instruction and that is where the ai could "walk" thru the code it thinks you want. If what it thinks you want isn't lining up, you could simply add a parameter, to have "x" or not include "y". eventually you could get come to, if nothing else, a blue print for a working app that needs the human element applied to get what you want, but that i see only as a step in progression. The functions of managing data, and processing information is nothing new and certainly there ARE programs that do this already, so the same processes can be put in place WITHOUT the programmer needing the mathematical understanding of what to do and the learned knowledge of how OTHERS have gotten to the step you want to use to produce your thought.
Really i think the game world would be almost easier to do IF the code was allowed to be generated from the brain children of what came before you. Just plugging games into another, and using the same mechanics as a basis to build on. Is it "fair" and/or profitable are the real hindrances i see down that thought, besides the amount of computing that would be needed to understand what your asking of it. AI can read a book and describe it to you now, the google one that just release can understand up to 1 hour of a movie and explain it to you..... wtf right? that's amazing to me! why cant it get to a point to interpret code and what outcome we want and create a working concept?
People once believe they could work harder than machines, and we have the story of JOHN HENRY, who supposedly beat a digging machine, but that time has since passed. Deep Blue versus Garry Kasparov was a great example of man "Beating machine" at chess. The next year he got beat by IBM.... and i think everyone can agree that the computer will win from here on out. This is the next digging machine/chess challenge. the old > "NO WAY A COMPUTER CAN DO WHAT I, A MIGHTY MAN CAN DO" 🙂
OVERALL, I think that is a human aspect of every industry, to feel irreplaceable. One day i think everything we can fathom will be able to be done by machine, just maybe not in the basic/physical perspective we think currently. "How long until that happens?", is the only question in my mind personally.
