Maybe there's not a way to argue it through philosophical or mathematical avenues, but that doesn't really matter to me. Machines do not think on the same terms as humans do and are not comparable "beings" (if you can call them that.) Humans are the creators of the machine, so therefore, machines can try to be "better," more innovative, smarter, but behind every program there is a maker, a human maker. It's as simple as that. I mean, computers can mock human thought because their abilities derive from human thought, but they lack emotion, which is a large impetus for why humans do or think the way they do. It's not only emotion they lack, but an array of human traits. I don't think the argument should be: Who is "better:" man or machine? We are inherently different things, with different skills, but it should be common knowledge that we, us human beings, control what the machine does. Therefore, there should be no human insecurity that the human race will lose against some computer-driven world takeover. Ridiculous.
Here is a news article showing how voice technology just can't seem to get it right: Read Me a Story, Mr. Roboto
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment