Comments for AI Panic! http://aipanic.com This site is dedicated to research and unveil the perils, imminence and probabilities of a hostile takeover of the world through artificial intelligence. I will stay on the lookout for you and post articles, research papers and break-throughs of everything that could affect this danger. Sat, 05 Jul 2008 01:46:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 Comment on Ray Kurzweil at the Games Developer Conference ‘08: Lecture On Accelerating Returns by Jacelyn http://aipanic.com/ray-kurzweil-at-the-games-developer-conference-08-lecture-on-accelerating-returns/#comment-167 Jacelyn Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:27:56 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ray-kurzweil-at-the-games-developer-conference-08-lecture-on-accelerating-returns/#comment-167 I read Fantastic Voyage, The Age of Spiritual Machines and The Singularity is Near, and they changed my life. I even found some of his lectures on Itunes and I find myself impatiently awaiting his next book. Recently read another incredible book that I can't recommend highly enough, especially to all of you who also love Ray Kurzweil's work. The book is ""My Stroke of Insight"" by Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor. I had heard Dr Taylor's talk on the TED dot com site and I have to say, it changed my world. It's spreading virally all over the internet and the book is now a NYTimes Bestseller, so I'm not the only one, but it is the most amazing talk, and the most impactful book I've read in years. (Dr T also was named to Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People and Oprah had her on her Soul Series last month and I hear they're making a movie about her story so you may already have heard of her) If you haven't heard Dr Taylor's TEDTalk, that's an absolute must. The book is more and deeper and better, but start with the video (it's 18 minutes). Basically, her story is that she was a 37 yr old Harvard brain scientist who had a massive stroke in the left hemisphere of her brain. Because of her knowledge of how the brain works, and thanks to her amazingly loving and kind mother, she eventually fully recovered (and that part of the book detailing how she did it is inspirational). There's a lot of learning and magic in the book, but the reason I so highly recommend My Stroke of Insight to this discussion, is because we have powerfully intelligent left brains that are rational, logical, sequential and grounded in detail and time, and then we have our kinesthetic right brains, where we experience intuition and peace and euphoria. Now that Kurzweil has got us taking all those vitamins and living our best ""Fantastic Voyage"" , the absolute necessity is that we read My Stroke of Insight and learn from Dr Taylor how to achieve balance between our right and left brains. Enjoy! I read Fantastic Voyage, The Age of Spiritual Machines and The Singularity is Near, and they changed my life. I even found some of his lectures on Itunes and I find myself impatiently awaiting his next book.

Recently read another incredible book that I can’t recommend highly enough, especially to all of you who also love Ray Kurzweil’s work. The book is “”My Stroke of Insight”" by Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor. I had heard Dr Taylor’s talk on the TED dot com site and I have to say, it changed my world. It’s spreading virally all over the internet and the book is now a NYTimes Bestseller, so I’m not the only one, but it is the most amazing talk, and the most impactful book I’ve read in years. (Dr T also was named to Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People and Oprah had her on her Soul Series last month and I hear they’re making a movie about her story so you may already have heard of her)
If you haven’t heard Dr Taylor’s TEDTalk, that’s an absolute must. The book is more and deeper and better, but start with the video (it’s 18 minutes). Basically, her story is that she was a 37 yr old Harvard brain scientist who had a massive stroke in the left hemisphere of her brain. Because of her knowledge of how the brain works, and thanks to her amazingly loving and kind mother, she eventually fully recovered (and that part of the book detailing how she did it is inspirational).

There’s a lot of learning and magic in the book, but the reason I so highly recommend My Stroke of Insight to this discussion, is because we have powerfully intelligent left brains that are rational, logical, sequential and grounded in detail and time, and then we have our kinesthetic right brains, where we experience intuition and peace and euphoria. Now that Kurzweil has got us taking all those vitamins and living our best “”Fantastic Voyage”" , the absolute necessity is that we read My Stroke of Insight and learn from Dr Taylor how to achieve balance between our right and left brains. Enjoy!

]]> Comment on U.S. Army Demonstrates Armed Robot, Tries To Dispel Concerns By Hiding Trigger by Scott http://aipanic.com/us-army-demonstrates-armed-robot-tries-to-dispel-concerns-by-hiding-trigger/#comment-160 Scott Tue, 03 Jun 2008 06:26:37 +0000 http://aipanic.com/us-army-demonstrates-armed-robot-tries-to-dispel-concerns-by-hiding-trigger/#comment-160 Soldiers? As long as these machines produce less collateral damage than bombs expect them to be mass produced and on the battlefield replacing people in combat sooner than anyone is projecting. The truly scary thing to me is that the main reason Americans (and I say this as one) withdraw from combat isn't noncombatant deaths of the indigenous people- it’s an inability to stomach any loses on our side- without American troops dying wars will not end. Soldiers? As long as these machines produce less collateral damage than bombs expect them to be mass produced and on the battlefield replacing people in combat sooner than anyone is projecting. The truly scary thing to me is that the main reason Americans (and I say this as one) withdraw from combat isn’t noncombatant deaths of the indigenous people- it’s an inability to stomach any loses on our side- without American troops dying wars will not end.

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by Eric Tetz http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-159 Eric Tetz Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:14:05 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-159 "his behavior when he’s not in line of sight isn’t credible." He doesn't *have* behavior before he's spawned. You're conflating the NPC spawning algorithm with the NPC AI, when they are totally separate. Yes, both contribute to the illusion of reality for the gamer, but so do graphics and sound, and you wouldn't confuse *them* with the AI, right? "I largely agree with the point that game AI’s don’t really deserve the 'AI' designation." Why not? "I don’t think that the future of AI is located in videogames :)" Oh ye of little faith. ;) I don't know if videogames are the future of AI, but AI is certainly the future of videogames. Thus far, the most significant advancement in game technology has been visual. But as we get closer and closer to the holy grail of photorealism, the hard problems are ALL related to behavior; how things move and how they respond to our attempts to interact with them. We've made great gains recently by incorporating physics into games, so that objects move more realistically, but game characters are still incredibly limited in what they can do. No matter how realistic you can get them to *look*, the illusion is spoiled as soon as you try to interact with them; everything they can ever say must be anticipated in advance and recorded in a studio (game audio is still where graphics were in the 80s; almost entirely sampled, the auditory equivalent of bitmapped sprites). Creating game characters that can be interacted with realistically will be the final and hardest challenge games face, and it's ultimately an AI challenge, an entertainment version of the Turing Test. “his behavior when he’s not in line of sight isn’t credible.”

He doesn’t *have* behavior before he’s spawned. You’re conflating the NPC spawning algorithm with the NPC AI, when they are totally separate. Yes, both contribute to the illusion of reality for the gamer, but so do graphics and sound, and you wouldn’t confuse *them* with the AI, right?

“I largely agree with the point that game AI’s don’t really deserve the ‘AI’ designation.”

Why not?

“I don’t think that the future of AI is located in videogames :)”

Oh ye of little faith. ;)

I don’t know if videogames are the future of AI, but AI is certainly the future of videogames. Thus far, the most significant advancement in game technology has been visual. But as we get closer and closer to the holy grail of photorealism, the hard problems are ALL related to behavior; how things move and how they respond to our attempts to interact with them. We’ve made great gains recently by incorporating physics into games, so that objects move more realistically, but game characters are still incredibly limited in what they can do. No matter how realistic you can get them to *look*, the illusion is spoiled as soon as you try to interact with them; everything they can ever say must be anticipated in advance and recorded in a studio (game audio is still where graphics were in the 80s; almost entirely sampled, the auditory equivalent of bitmapped sprites).

Creating game characters that can be interacted with realistically will be the final and hardest challenge games face, and it’s ultimately an AI challenge, an entertainment version of the Turing Test.

]]> Comment on The Humans Are Dead by Shane Legg http://aipanic.com/the-humans-are-dead/#comment-158 Shane Legg Mon, 02 Jun 2008 18:51:26 +0000 http://aipanic.com/the-humans-are-dead/#comment-158 I think this version is quite a bit better: http://youtube.com/watch?v=WGoi1MSGu64 I think this version is quite a bit better:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=WGoi1MSGu64

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by Horus Aha http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-157 Horus Aha Wed, 28 May 2008 23:35:32 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-157 Hi Again, I largely agree with the point that game AI's don't really deserve the "AI' designation. However, I still think there could be a good market for AI's in certain types of games, just because they could be quite entertaining as NPCs or have other roles (say monitoring players). At any rate, a really fun scenario of a game AI running amok (along with lots of other software) is in this book: <a href='http://www.thedaemon.com/' rel="nofollow">Daemon</a> It really is a "must read" since it talks lots about the havoc that can be unleashed with even "dumb" (non AGI) software designed to manipulate people. Great, thought-provoking fiction. Hi Again,

I largely agree with the point that game AI’s don’t really deserve the “AI’ designation. However, I still think there could be a good market for AI’s in certain types of games, just because they could be quite entertaining as NPCs or have other roles (say monitoring players).

At any rate, a really fun scenario of a game AI running amok (along with lots of other software) is in this book:

Daemon

It really is a “must read” since it talks lots about the havoc that can be unleashed with even “dumb” (non AGI) software designed to manipulate people. Great, thought-provoking fiction.

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by dev http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-155 dev Sun, 18 May 2008 09:56:34 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-155 gta is best... simple... any other opinion is pointless gta is best… simple… any other opinion is pointless

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by Slimky http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-154 Slimky Thu, 15 May 2008 03:17:02 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-154 "Your police example doesn’t really describe what most gamers would consider AI, it’s more of an event trigger." I think that Robin was talking about the behaviour of the situation. What I mean is that the agent doesn't look smart/believable when the player doesn't see it. It isn't logical that the police car spawn in front of you or right at the street corner. Even if it uses good AI by purchasing you, his behavior when he's not in line of sight isn't credible. Btw, good site, but university first. I don't think that the future of AI is located in videogames :) “Your police example doesn’t really describe what most gamers would consider AI, it’s more of an event trigger.”
I think that Robin was talking about the behaviour of the situation. What I mean is that the agent doesn’t look smart/believable when the player doesn’t see it. It isn’t logical that the police car spawn in front of you or right at the street corner. Even if it uses good AI by purchasing you, his behavior when he’s not in line of sight isn’t credible.

Btw, good site, but university first. I don’t think that the future of AI is located in videogames :)

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by Slayve http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-153 Slayve Mon, 12 May 2008 17:31:16 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-153 I don't know much about AI theory or the technical aspects of its implementation, but I do know what gamers mean when they talk about AI. Your police example doesn't really describe what most gamers would consider AI, it's more of an event trigger. In games, AI usually refers to the actual behavior of NPCs. Your example of NPCs sometimes taking cover on the wrong side of their cars is a good example of what gamers would consider bad AI. Unfortunately, most games have terrible AI, to the extent that most can't even get pathing right, which to a layman seems like a fairly basic task, e.g., open doors before trying to walk through doorways, don't walk into walls, etc. Off the top of my head I can think of only three games with enemy combat AI that was in any way surprising or unpredictable: F.E.A.R, Far Cry, and Halo 3. The AI in those games is at least unpredictable enough that enemies don't follow the same path each time, they react in some rudimentary way to your actions. The catch-22 to game AI is that contemporary game design depends on AI being pretty dim-witted. Level design, weapon and vehicle balance, player abilities, and even core game mechanics would have to be significantly changed if considerably smarter AI suddenly became available to game designers. Not that this wouldn't be a welcome development in gaming, just to point out that much of game design is built around the assumption that NPC AI is not going to be very dynamic. It would be nice if the morons would at least stop walking into walls, though. Sheesh! I don’t know much about AI theory or the technical aspects of its implementation, but I do know what gamers mean when they talk about AI. Your police example doesn’t really describe what most gamers would consider AI, it’s more of an event trigger. In games, AI usually refers to the actual behavior of NPCs. Your example of NPCs sometimes taking cover on the wrong side of their cars is a good example of what gamers would consider bad AI. Unfortunately, most games have terrible AI, to the extent that most can’t even get pathing right, which to a layman seems like a fairly basic task, e.g., open doors before trying to walk through doorways, don’t walk into walls, etc. Off the top of my head I can think of only three games with enemy combat AI that was in any way surprising or unpredictable: F.E.A.R, Far Cry, and Halo 3. The AI in those games is at least unpredictable enough that enemies don’t follow the same path each time, they react in some rudimentary way to your actions. The catch-22 to game AI is that contemporary game design depends on AI being pretty dim-witted. Level design, weapon and vehicle balance, player abilities, and even core game mechanics would have to be significantly changed if considerably smarter AI suddenly became available to game designers. Not that this wouldn’t be a welcome development in gaming, just to point out that much of game design is built around the assumption that NPC AI is not going to be very dynamic. It would be nice if the morons would at least stop walking into walls, though. Sheesh!

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by MTV Multiplayer » R.T.F.A.* Monday: High-Def Help http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-152 MTV Multiplayer » R.T.F.A.* Monday: High-Def Help Mon, 12 May 2008 12:01:48 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-152 [...] “Nothing Spectacular”: AI Panic, a blog about artificial intelligence is unimpressed by the AI in “Grand Theft Auto IV.” [...] [...] “Nothing Spectacular”: AI Panic, a blog about artificial intelligence is unimpressed by the AI in “Grand Theft Auto IV.” [...]

]]> Comment on AI in GTA IV: Nothing Spectacular by Barnesm http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-150 Barnesm Sun, 11 May 2008 06:39:52 +0000 http://aipanic.com/ai-in-gta-iv-nothing-spectacular/#comment-150 Hey, the work comes first, hope it all goes well. I look forward (as always) to reading more of your postings when you have time. Hey, the work comes first, hope it all goes well.
I look forward (as always) to reading more of your postings when you have time.

]]>