真正的人工智能已经存在吗

Artificial Intelligence is probably the greatest technological achievement in history. It’s subjective, of course, but I’ve been obsessed with technology ever since I was a kid, and while I’m sure there are many technical advances I am unaware of, AI, or machine learning, surpasses them all. An exception could perhaps be made for the invention of language or perhaps the wheel, however I doubt few other things will have such a profound effect on the human species. AI has been a stable component of contemporary culture for multiple generations now. From time traveling machines hell-bent on destroying humanity to friendly and lovable robots adventuring through space, we’ve anthropomorphized machines in preparation for what we all know is coming.

人工智能可能是历史上最大的技术成就。 当然，这是主观的，但是从小我就一直迷恋技术，尽管我确定我不知道有很多技术进步(人工智能或机器学习)已经超越了所有技术。 语言的发明或轮子的发明可能是一个例外，但是我怀疑没有其他事物会对人类产生如此深远的影响。 如今，人工智能已经成为当代文化的稳定组成部分。 从毁灭人类的时空旅行机器到在太空探索的友善而可爱的机器人，我们已经对人性化的机器进行了准备，以准备我们所知道的一切。

Only, what if it’s already here? What if ‘true’ artificial intelligence has already been created? To help explain, I need to go over how AI works. Don’t worry. There’s not any math involved.

只有，如果已经在这里呢？ 如果已经创建了“真正的”人工智能怎么办？ 为了帮助解释，我需要仔细研究一下AI的工作原理。 不用担心没有涉及任何数学。

Machine Learning is an extremely large and broad field, and as this technology grows and becomes useful for other fields, it only increases in depth and complexity. Obviously the average person does not have the time to learn how it all works, no matter how important it might be to do so. Luckily, the principles it works on are quite simple. The first thing we need to know about is something called a perceptron.

机器学习是一个非常广阔的领域，随着这项技术的发展并在其他领域变得有用，它的深度和复杂性只会增加。 显然，普通人没有时间去学习它是如何工作的，无论这样做有多么重要。 幸运的是，它所依据的原理非常简单。 我们需要了解的第一件事是感知器。

感知器 (Perceptrons)

The best way to conceptualize a perceptron is that it is essentially the same as a neuron in the human brain. If you’re not really sure what a neuron is, don’t worry, I got you covered.

概念化感知器的最佳方法是，它与人脑中的神经元基本相同。 如果您不太确定神经元是什么，请不用担心，我可以帮助您。

Simple Neuron

简单神经元

Neurons are the cells that make up our nervous system. (I said no math, I didn’t say anything about biology) Luckily, they’re pretty simple as far as these things go. That red portion on the left hand side is the nucleus. It receives electrical impulses from those branch looking things. The nucleus does some calculation, and decides what signal to send out to the right, which is fed into multiple other neurons. This was the blueprint for something called a perceptron.

神经元是组成我们神经系统的细胞。 (我没有说数学，也没有说生物学。)幸运的是，就这些事情而言，它们非常简单。 左侧的红色部分是核。 它从那些看起来分叉的事物接收电脉冲。 原子核进行一些计算，并确定将哪些信号发送到右侧，然后输入到其他多个神经元中。 这就是所谓的感知器的蓝图。

Simple Perceptron

简单感知器

I know, I know, this one is definitely close to math, but we don’t need to know any of it, though. Promise. All that stuff on the left is the input signals going into the ‘nucleus’, which does something, then sends output down to other perceptrons. The ‘Machine’ in Machine Learning is a large network of these ‘programmed objects’. Configurations vary, but that’s the gist of it. They take in input signal from something, be it text, numerical data, or whatever, and this extremely complicated network of digital neurons then passes signals back and forth in some manner until the total model outputs its prediction.

我知道，我知道这绝对接近数学，但是我们不需要知道任何一个。 诺言。 左边所有的东西是进入“核”的输入信号，该信号执行某项操作，然后将输出发送到其他感知器。 机器学习中的“机器”是这些“编程对象”的大型网络。 配置各不相同，但这就是要旨。 他们从某种东西(无论是文本，数字数据还是其他东西)中获取输入信号，然后这个极其复杂的数字神经元网络以某种方式来回传递信号，直到整​​个模型输出其预测。

If you’re not completely following, don’t worry. The important take away is this: A network of nodes takes in information, does some calculation, and sends out information to others who decide what to do with it. Sound familiar? It should.

如果您没有完全关注，请不要担心。 重要的收获是：节点网络接收信息，进行一些计算，然后将信息发送给其他人，这些人决定如何处理它。 听起来有点熟？ 这应该。

If you’re reminded of the perceptron, you would be correct. Functionally, at scale, a neural network is very similar to a large perceptron. There are, of course, variations and this is not absolutely 100% true, but it’s true enough for our purposes here. Conceptually, they take in information, makes some calculation, and sends information out to something or someone that is going to use it. It’s perceptrons all the way down, and all the way up.

如果您想起了感知器，那将是正确的。 从功能上说，神经网络与大型感知器非常相似。 当然，有一些变化，这并不是绝对100％正确的，但对于我们这里的目的而言，确实足够正确。 从概念上讲，他们接收信息，进行一些计算，然后将信息发送给要使用该信息的某人或某人。 感知器一直向下，一直向上。

但是它如何工作？ (But how does it work?)

Staying with our high level approach, training a model to do something is pretty straight forward. You have your neural network and some data you want to make predictions with, say, predicting whether an image is a 3 or a bee. You feed the data into the machine, and it spits out a prediction. A REALLY bad prediction. This makes sense if all we did was slap some perceptrons together and feed it a bunch of images. How would it know what a bee is from a 3? It has nothing to compare it to. To get our model to understand the differences, we have to train it.

与我们的高级方法保持一致，训练模型来做某事非常简单。 您拥有自己的神经网络和一些数据，这些数据可以用来进行预测，例如，预测图像是3还是蜂。 您将数据输入到机器中，然后发出一个预测。 一个非常糟糕的预测。 如果我们所做的只是将一些感知器拍打在一起并提供一堆图像，这是有道理的。 它怎么会知道3只蜜蜂是什么？ 它没有什么可比拟的。 为了使我们的模型了解差异，我们必须对其进行训练。

Doing so is fairly simple. We want to have a bunch of images of 3’s and bees, and labels for each picture so the machine can grade itself. It then takes in an image, makes a prediction, and checks to see if it got it right. Of course initially it will get most of them wrong. Afterwards, a process called back propagation, or something similar, will occur. Back propagation is where the machine will adjust different parameters, making new connections between different perceptrons, getting rid of others, and then tries again.

这样做非常简单。 我们希望有一堆3位和蜜蜂的图像，以及每张图片的标签，以便机器可以对自己进行评分。 然后，它获取图像，进行预测，然后检查图像是否正确。 当然，起初它将使大多数错误。 此后，将发生称为反向传播或类似现象的过程。 反向传播是机器将调整不同参数，在不同感知器之间建立新连接，摆脱其他感知器然后重试的地方。

As you might imagine, this can get very technical in practice, but in general, it’s simply feeding an image into the machine and it predicting whether it’s a bee or a 3, then checking the answer. If it’s right, hooray! On to the next image. If it’s wrong, it will tweak some settings here and there and try again, until eventually, the machine is able to tell the difference between 3’s and bees pretty well. Again, this is not technically accurate, but conceptually it’s good enough.

您可能会想像，这在实践中会变得非常技术化，但是总的来说，它只是将图像输入到机器中，并预测是蜜蜂还是3只蜜蜂，然后检查答案。 如果是的话，万岁！ 转到下一张图像。 如果错误，它将在此处和此处进行一些设置调整，然后重试，直到最终机器能够很好地分辨出3和蜜蜂之间的差异。 同样，这在技术上并不准确，但从概念上讲已经足够了。

Luckily for us, it’s not very good at much else. It’s highly specialized and trained to do this one thing, and one thing only. That’s where we come in.

对我们来说幸运的是，它在其他方面还不是很好。 它是高度专业化和受过训练的人员，只能做一件事。 那就是我们进来的地方。

人为因素 (The Human Component)

As amazing as this technology is, these machines remain dumb. And I mean REALLY dumb. Our machine from earlier might be able to tell a bee from a 3, but if you throw a picture of a cow into it, it’s going to struggle to determine if it’s a bee or a 3, because for the machine, there’s just not any other option.

尽管这项技术令人惊叹，但这些机器仍然很笨。 我的意思是真的很蠢。 我们以前的机器可能能够从3分辨出一只蜜蜂，但是如果您将一头牛的照片丢进去，它将很难确定它是一只蜜蜂还是3只蜜蜂，因为对于机器而言，根本没有其他选择。

Artificial Intelligence, for as much as it’s used, is really more of a marketing misnomer than a technical description. See, the problem is, we humans are pretty dumb too. (Not as dumb as our earlier machine, of course. That was obviously a cow!) It turns out, we don’t know what intelligence actually is. Oh we have lots of vague definitions, but the reality of it is, there’s an element to intelligence, specifically consciousness, that we just can’t define, let alone replicate in a digital space. Much smarter people than myself are working away at the problem, but it’s honestly a bit of a black hole, given our inability to even define what it is we want to make! Consciousness is one of those weird things where, you know what I’m talking about, but if you try, you’ll realize you don’t actually know how to define ‘what’ it is in any real sense.

尽管使用了人工智能，但实际上它实际上是一种营销误用，而不是技术描述。 瞧，问题是，我们人类也很愚蠢。 (当然，不如我们以前的机器那么笨。这显然是牛！)事实证明，我们不知道实际上是什么智能。 哦，我们有许多模糊的定义，但现实是，我们无法定义智慧的元素，尤其是意识，更不用说在数字空间中复制了。 比我自己聪明得多的人正在解决这个问题，但是老实说这是一个黑洞，因为我们甚至无法定义我们想要制造的东西！ 意识是那些奇怪的事情之一，您知道我在说什么，但是如果您尝试一下，您会意识到您实际上并不知道如何定义“真实”的含义。

团结大家 (Bringing Everyone Together)

So why does this matter? What is so important about this? Of course, everyone is aware of the recent upheavals in our society, and I think most people who utilize social media are aware that these upheavals are, at least in part, due to the proliferation of social media in the past decade. Indeed, many Social Media founders have started speaking out over the past several years about the dangers of social media, how they did not realize what they were building, or if they did realize it, they were not aware of the unintended consequences of such a technology being unleashed on society, but what is so dangerous about human beings able to freely connect and share information with each other?

那么为什么这很重要呢？ 这有什么重要的呢？ 当然，每个人都知道我们社会最近的动荡，我认为大多数使用社交媒体的人都知道，这些动荡至少部分是由于过去十年中社交媒体的激增所致。 确实，过去几年中，许多社交媒体创始人已经开始谈论社交媒体的危害，他们如何不意识到自己正在构建的东西，或者如果他们确实意识到了这一点，则他们并不了解这种社交媒体的意外后果。技术向社会释放，但是对于人类能够自由连接和共享信息的人来说，有什么危险呢？

I remember this one time I was on a business trip in Virginia. It was late, after a long day of work, and I was hanging out on the top of the hotel parking garage watching society do it’s thing before I headed in for the evening to get some sleep before another long day. There was this busy four-way intersection by the corner of the parking garage I was in, and I couldn’t help but notice that every car that drove up was lit up from the inside by phones. Even the cars with only a driver. Sometimes they were smarter than the average, and would not be using their phone as they pulled up to the light, but I could see the interior of their car light up as soon as they stopped at the light. I got to see many cars honk at those in front of them who weren’t paying enough attention to the light.

我记得有一次我在弗吉尼亚州出差。 经过一整天的工作，已经很晚了，我在旅馆停车场的顶层闲逛，看着社会做这件事，然后才去晚上睡觉，然后又漫长的一天。 我在停车场的拐角处有一个繁忙的四路交叉路口，我禁不住注意到，开车驶过的每辆车都被电话从里面照亮了。 甚至只有司机的汽车。 有时他们比普通人聪明，当他们举起灯来时不会使用手机，但我可以看到他们停在路灯下时车内照亮了。 我看到很多汽车在他们前面的喇叭鸣喇叭，这些喇叭没有足够注意灯光。

Now, many might focus on the dangers of driving while distracted, or doing any of the other things we humans have to do while distracted by the tiny computer in our hands. For sure, they would be right to point out these dangers, but I don’t think those are the real dangers we need to consider. Yes, it only takes a split second for a deadly accident to happen, and this needs to be remembered, and it’s a tragedy every single time. But what I saw when I stood on top of that parking garage looking down was not hundreds of distracted people, but hundreds of nodes, taking in information and sharing it with other nodes. After all, remember our conception of a perceptron is just a node that takes in information, makes some internal calculation, and then sends information on to other nodes that we are commonly connected to.

现在，许多人可能将注意力集中在开车时分散注意力的危险，或者在我们手中的微型计算机分散注意力时，做人类必须做的任何其他事情。 可以肯定的是，他们指出这些危险是正确的，但我认为这些不是我们需要考虑的真正危险。 是的，只需要一秒钟的时间就可以发生致命的事故，这需要记住，而且每次都是悲剧。 但是，当我站在那个停车场的顶部俯视时，所看到的不是数百名分散注意力的人，而是数百个节点，它们吸收信息并与其他节点共享信息。 毕竟，请记住我们对感知器的概念只是一个接收信息的节点，进行一些内部计算，然后将信息发送到我们通常连接的其他节点。

As I stood there people watching, I couldn’t help but visualize the lines of information being sent out from each person. Responding to an email chain? Tweeting to thousands of followers across the globe? Or Face timing with a loved one just a few miles away? I saw connections everywhere, with information being shared across geographic distances that would have been completely unimaginable just a few short generations ago. The parallels to a neural network were obvious, the scale was just off the charts.

当我站在那儿观看的时候，我不禁将每个人发出的信息可视化。 回复电子邮件链？ 向全球成千上万的关注者发布推文？ 还是与相爱的人在几英里之遥面对时机？ 我看到了无处不在的联系，信息是跨地理距离共享的，而这在短短几代之前是完全无法想象的。 与神经网络的相似之处是显而易见的，规模只是图表之外。

旋钮和转盘 (Knobs and Dials)

In 2012, Facebook manipulated the newsfeeds of about 700k users. What made this worse, was it was without their consent. They did this over a 1 week period, managing the facial expressions these users were exposed to in order to see if it were possible to effect users emotions. You can read the study here.

2012年，Facebook操纵了约70万用户的新闻源。 更糟糕的是，没有他们的同意。 他们在1周的时间内进行了此操作，管理这些用户暴露的面部表情，以查看是否有可能影响用户的情绪。 您可以在这里阅读研究。

“We show, via a massive (N = 689,003) experiment on Facebook, that emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness. We provide experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient), and in the complete absence of nonverbal cues.” — Facebook Study on Emotional Contagion

“我们通过在Facebook上进行的大规模( N = 689,003)实验表明，情绪状态可以通过情绪传染传染给其他人，从而使人们在没有意识的情况下经历相同的情绪。 我们提供了实验证据，表明情绪传染不会发生在人与人之间没有直接互动的情况下(暴露给朋友来表达情绪就足够了)，并且完全没有非语言暗示。” — Facebook关于情绪传染的研究

There are conspiracy theories abound about this topic, and I want to take a moment to differentiate myself from that. My purpose here is to try and outline what I believe to be the first ‘True’ AI that has come online. I make no assumptions as to the intent of those who built it, or their actions once they had it online. My aim here is to describe what I believe to be the similarities between social media and machine learning technologies, and what that means for society in general. Maybe what is happening is the natural result of the bandwidth between humans increasing so drastically in such a short period of time. It is entirely possible that, as ‘processing power’ increases due to the increased bandwidth, different modes of reality manifest out of the increase in information.

关于这个话题有很多阴谋论，我想花点时间使自己与众不同。 我在这里的目的是尝试概述一下我认为是第一个在线的“真实” AI。 我不对构建它的人的意图或他们将其联机后的行为做任何假设。 我的目的是描述我认为社交媒体和机器学习技术之间的相似之处，以及这对整个社会意味着什么。 也许正在发生的是人类之间的带宽在如此短的时间内急剧增加的自然结果。 随着带宽的增加“处理能力”的增加，信息增加可能会显示出不同的现实模式。

It’s also possible that different groups of powerful people are competing with other groups of powerful people, and we are the nodes in their attack AI. Push in a particular brand of psychologically manipulated propaganda, and have an army of drones attack your target.

也有可能不同的有权势群体正在与其他有权势的群体竞争，而我们就是他们攻击AI的节点。 进行特殊品牌的心理操纵宣传，并让无人驾驶飞机攻击您的目标。

Both are equally possible as far as I’m concerned. My only aim with this article is to muse on the idea of an integration between machine and biology to create the first, true artificial intelligence.

就我而言，两者都有可能。 我对本文的唯一目的是想想机器与生物学之间的集成，以创建第一个真正的人工智能。

结论 (Conclusion)

I’ll grant, the idea I’m laying out here is not one that necessarily meshes with contemporary ideas of what a ‘True’ Artificial Intelligence would be. We have this image in our imagination of being able to talk to our phone like it’s a person. Ask it a question, and get an answer back.

我同意，我在这里提出的想法不一定与现代关于“真正的”人工智能的想法相吻合。 我们的想象力在于，我们可以像一个人一样与我们的电话通话。 问一个问题，然后得到答案。

My argument is that this technology already exists, it’s just different in some details than we initially imagined, but it is here, and it is being used, and that perhaps, as so often before in the world of technology, we have to change our idea of what AI actually means. If I open Twitter, and tweet a question, I will get an answer.

我的观点是，该技术已经存在，在某些细节上与我们最初想象的不同，但是它在这里并且正在被使用，并且也许就像在技术界以前一样，我们必须改变自己的技术。关于AI实际含义的想法。 如果我打开Twitter，并发一个问题，我将得到答案。

The answer I get will depend upon the nodes in the network I interact with most often, but the point is I WILL get an answer, or at least, I will get responses that I can determine an answer from, which is all that Machine Learning really does, anyway.

我得到的答案将取决于我经常与之交互的网络中的节点，但关键是我将获得答案，或者至少，我将获得可以确定答案的答案，这就是机器学习的全部内容。确实如此。

翻译自: https://medium.com/the-innovation/does-true-ai-already-exist-82bddf6e9692