Rodney Brooks Quotes

A computer would deserve to be called intelligent if it could deceive a human into believing that it was human.

What's casual for a robot isn't necessarily what's casual for a human.

I have problems with machines which aren't gestural.

We want to build intelligence that augments human abilities and experiences.

When you go to a voice-based interaction, you can't tell people, 'Ask me this question and structure it in this way.' And if they ask a question, and you have a bad answer, first time, maybe they'll be okay with it. Third time, they're going to say, 'This is a complete waste of time. I'm going away.'

We need to build EQ in our AI systems because, otherwise, they're not going to be as effective as they were designed to be.

I often tell my students not to be misled by the name 'artificial intelligence' - there is nothing artificial about it. AI is made by humans, intended to behave by humans, and, ultimately, to impact humans' lives and human society.

The sad thing about artificial intelligence is that it lacks artifice and therefore intelligence.

I've come to a view that humans will continue to do what we do well, and that computers will continue to do what they do very well, and the two will coexist, but in different spaces.

My goal for technology has always been to reach a point where the technological mediation becomes invisible.

If you want to solve very complex problems, you will have to end up letting machines work out a lot of the details for themselves, and in ways that we don't understand what they are doing.

I think I'd take a human butler over a robot one.

By 2029, computers will have emotional intelligence and be convincing as people.

I closely follow everything about user interface or human-computer interface: technology that makes computers closer to the way the human being actually functions.

Truly smart technologies will remind us that we are not mere automatons who assist big data in asking and answering questions.

I've always been interested in technology, but specifically how we can use machines to engage the imagination. I started using computers when I was young and was fascinated by creating rules and instructions that allow a computer to engage in a dialogue with humans. The stories found in the data all around us can do just that.

If computers remain far worse than us at image recognition, a certain over-confident combination of man and machine can elsewhere take inaccuracy to a whole new level.

As far as what is the line between human and machine? That's a great question.

Artificial intelligence is growing up fast, as are robots whose facial expressions can elicit empathy and make your mirror neurons quiver.

We've seen computers play chess and beat grand masters. We've seen computers drive a car across a desert. But interestingly, playing chess is easy, but having a conversation about nothing is really difficult for a computer.

Through our evolution, we're so specialized for social interaction. So, if you can really design robots that can interact with people, in this very natural, interpersonal way, I think that would be great. You wouldn't have to have people read manuals, in order to operate them.

Robots have gotten steadily more capable, but humans' expectations that robots should have minds keeps biting robot developers.

If we're going to achieve compassion in the machines and also feel safe with the machines, to raise machines with human-like values, we need to make them human-like by simulating, or perhaps eventually imitating, human beings in high accuracy from top to bottom.

Since the rise of Homo sapiens, human beings have been the smartest minds around. But very shortly - on a historical scale, that is - we can expect technology to break the upper bound on intelligence that has held for the last few tens of thousands of years.

The big question society will have to answer is whether it wants computers thinking like humans.