Possible misconseptions considering artifical intelligense

The golden years of AI (artifical intelligence) were in 1960-1970. New era has started in 1990´s. I have several times met problems in conversations about AI with people who doesn´t have a clue what AI research really is, so I want to inform that AI research is whole lot more than science fiction and most notably because those who think so, knows only topics which you can find in science fiction. It is really awkward situation where you mention AI and everyone starts to tell you that human life is so complicated that it is impossible to put in for example in mathemathical formulas. Usually when someone tell´s that, it is impossible to assure them that it is probably not the case.

First of all, there was a time when people thought that it is possible (why not but it is like too hard to start with) and in our finger tip´s to produce an intelligent (as human) computer program. Back then people didn´t know much about human brain, pshychology was poor and cognitive science young.

Now days when someone tell´s that he/she is studying AI, it doesn´t mean that he/she is trying to construct an android or program which is at least or more intelligent than a human being. (Strong AI). He or she is more likely interested in studying the mechanisms which allows program to learn for example the difference between day and night without programming included by the third party. Or the mechanisms whics allows us to produce language etc.

I could write aeons here, but I dont bother because anyone who is interested in AI can find their information for example here. But let me give an short example. We can build a robot which can hover around object´s by ultrasound orienteering and when it comes to low batteries, it automatically finds a power source and links to it for reload, actually this has been build in sixties. Let´s assume that every "power source" is either red or green. Only red ones give energy. We can program the robot to notice the difference between red and green but when we let it to hover around things, even though it can make the difference between red and green it wont learn that only red ones can give energy by trial and error. It would only systemathically go through to another energysource as long as it finds one with power. This is the heuristics of learning, the trial to definition and definition trial for learning. This is what AI researcers do. Does it differ much from neurological scientist´s or cognitive pshychologist´s?

Now you can imagine the HUGE difference between programming and learnig. This has to be one of the simplest form of learning and no machine can perform it. AI research studies this. Now you can imagine the difference between science fiction AI or strong AI and the AI which is more likely to be prooduced in few years. Note that once machine can learn it is fast, faster than human brain. And it can teach it self. Be afraid. More about this semiapocalyptical outcome you can read from here.

Thightening the net arount the definition of intelligense and consciousness is the main goal. The road which one chooses might differ but goals are mutual. Better understanding of human mind.

PS: the picture in itself is out of contecst but it helps to figure how one can represent fairly normal "function" (mental) in more... Schemantic way... Note that it is greatly simplified, but a more complex schemantics in this particular blog is not needed. And I want to mention that I am not a God nor Wikipedia but still if anyone is interested in my personal opinion in something or would like to have my guidance I would be more than happy to be in your use so send me a mail or comment... I´m not popular so I will answer ;)