Hacker News Reader

Comment by rpm4321 | Hacker News Reader

I'm very skeptical of this recent emphasis on the theory that our complete sensory experience has to be simulated (or replicated via robotics) in order for a strong AI to learn.

All you need to do is read a bit about Helen Keller to know that language should be a sufficient window into our world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Keller

View on HN

I make the argument that 'some' of the sensory experience must be available and that interaction with the real world is crucial. To your point about Ms. Keller, I have used this example myself as to why robotics should focus more on the sensation of touch and it's why I commissioned the development of a low-cost etextile robotic skin from a brilliant designer/engineer at MIT. That project (rSkin) can be found here (http://www.instructables.com/id/rSkin-Open-Source-Robot-Skin...)

Where did you make the argument? I see you making the claim, but there's nothing arguing it, no evidence. There's just the vague thought experiment about extracting signal from noise.

To point it out another way: humans can't be intelligent because they are lacking in six senses that Martians have. It's that even richer experience that enables true intelligence; without these qualia and the vital marrow of the foundation of the core of the heart of really truly scotsmany work, humans can't be intellegent. Can you knock down this claim without knocking down yours as well?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com