Can a program ever experience the taste of oranges?

A machine could analyze the oranges and have a better understanding of the taste than any human could

>>58736987
If it could, how would you be able to tell it's not just pretending?
The question should be 'can a program ever convince you it can experience the taste of oranges'.

File: what_the_fuck_am_a_reading.png (416KB, 500x672px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 500x672px

>>58737029
>understanding of taste equals taste

>>58737063
How do you define "experiencing taste"?

>>58736987
Most likely some day.
Would probably have a wider palette range than we ever could too.
>Install an eletronic tongue.
>Bionic eyes to see better.
>Brain chips to make you think faster and with higher levels of abstraction.

>>58737084
1. Find orange
2. Peel and put it in your mouth
There, that's the taste of orange.

File: gc-ms.png (192KB, 600x438px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 600x438px

>>58736987
Well, this isn't oranges, but what do you think operates gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis machines if it isn't software - fucking magic?

>>58737101
>peeling oranges before eating them

>>58737404
>mass spectrometry
>taste

Do you think my taste buds care what the relative occurrences of an element's various atomic weights are?

>>58737664
>Not having a refined palate.
Kill yourself subhuman

>>58737552
>muh peels
>but anon t-the peel is the tastiest part!

can a programmer ever experience the taste of pussy?

File: 1479153259778.jpg (28KB, 303x311px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 303x311px

>>58737063
>the total sum of the individual parts of a particular taste does not equal the prior stated taste
>implyingggg

>>58736987
If humans have qualia, then so will any intelligence we create.

>>58737783
nope

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

>>58737664
Just because you have shitty organic tastebuds compared to our metal overlords there's no need to be snappy about it.

>>58737880
Close someone in a room that never ate oranges. Now teach them everything there is to know about the taste of oranges. Next, give them an orange. Suddenly, they have more info than they previously had even with all the data available.

tl;dr qualia bitch

How the fuck could we artificially generate any taste or smell?

>>58736987
This is the dumbest fucking thread in the history of /g/.

>>58738538
its a legit question and you are just one of the dumb fucks who can't post something with more value than battle station or some animu faggotry.

>>58736987
why do humans like oranges? because they are sweet. so why do we like sweet things? because our brain rewards us with serotonin release and other substances that regulate our house hold with a positive feeling. the sugar not only helps us function but it makes us happy.

a program that experiences taste as humans do is probably an designed (semi?) organic being.
other than that, as mentioned above, the machine/program would understand without much effort why we enjoy the taste of sweet things, anything else would most likely need the same complex structure as a human being.

>>58738670
>why do humans like oranges? because they are sweet. so why do we like sweet things? because our brain rewards us with serotonin release and other substances that regulate our house hold with a positive feeling
Yes but there is a very specific taste to oranges.

>>58736987
no, because a program cannot have a soul

>>58738538
As opposed to waves of threads where manchild /v/edditors arguing which brand of their videoautism enablers is the best?

Nah buddy.

>>58738503
you don't that's the point. our smell is like a probe, but not very developed compared to other living beings. we distinguish between smells we enjoy, like our favorite foods, or things we hate, like unwashed fat neckbeards.
an "intelligent" program would be able to be more precise in its analysis of smell and could act accordingly.

if you smell something burning you probably don't know exactly what's burning but if you don't expect this smell, your automatic reaction should be fear. a machine could probably tell you what's burning and if it's dangerous or not.

its a different way of interpreting information

>>58738701
true, but that is based on the bio chemicals and the reactions to other things. an orange changes its taste and other attributes once it oxidized. if you break it down it just an analysis of its biological/chemical attributes

File: i-dont-know-what-the-fuck-is-going-on.jpg (99KB, 630x741px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 630x741px

>>58738787
But I actually like the taste of oranges, presumably so do you. Can a program ever like the taste of oranges?

>>58738720
what defines a soul?

>>58738805
Another soul

>>58738802
as i said previously in this post >>58738670

your program would probably be a designed organic being, that is maybe grown with a default consciousness like human but it is not human because it's artificial.

you can program humans as well but that's yet another very complex matter which is difficult to combine with such a hypothesis.

>>58738838
so, if i tell you you don't have a soul, you don't have one? your argument is pretty dumb

>>58738858
But that's how it works

>>58738802
also, yes, i fucking love oranges

>>58737063
But the machine would be "experiencing the taste of oranges".

Not in the way you or I would, but human experience isn't the only type of experience.

>>58736987
can a program use a variety of neurotransmitters?
until computers have an analogue to neurotransmitters they will not like or enjoy or "feel" anything.

>>58738870
you are not even trying kid, go masturbate to some animu trap or some shit.

>>58738877
>Not in the way you or I would, but human experience isn't the only type of experience.

now that is something very interesting to say. how do you know that we taste the same? maybe my experience of taste is entirely different than yours? you will never know, because you are not me.

>>58738927
Do your best to describe the taste of orange

>>58738927
Whoah dude you're really tripping me out it's like I'm in 8th grade again.

>>58738942
how so?

>>58738937
im not a poet ... it's a refreshing and sweet taste that makes me enjoy nature and its fascinating complexity, its perfect imperfection. taste for me is a combination of the actual ingestion of something and wisdom around life i guess

come on guys, this is one of the better threads and ya'll fags just let it die ....

File: okay.jpg (16KB, 251x239px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 251x239px

>>58739005
>it's a refreshing and sweet taste that makes me enjoy nature and its fascinating complexity, its perfect imperfection. taste for me is a combination of the actual ingestion of something and wisdom around life i guess

>>58739005
wrong, taste, in terms of foodstuffs, is a visceral interpretation of the signals our taste buds are sending to our brains. Ingestion is after the fact and wisdom doesn't play into it. A toddler has no wisdom but can still taste food.

>>58738670
>its a legit question
You have defined too broad parameters for anyone to answer it in a good way.
It would be impossible to know what would be possible in the future, we can only know for certain that we do not currently have the capabilities, nor the need for such a thing.

I find it unlikely that taste would be made over a chemical breakdown of food, should we make something that generates / analyzes food, and I don't see any reasons to why it would be easy to obtain or specifically useful.

>>58739005
>how so?
"How do you know that we both see the same color we call 'red'?" type thinking is a phase middle/high school kids go through.

I mean you're not wrong. Hell, we don't even taste things the same way as our selves from the past did. I remember going on some shit diet and just chips and a glass of lemonade tasted fucking amazing. Entirely different than it did before and after I was on the diet.

Of course I can never know if you and I experience tastes similarly, but we have the same mechanisms and can attempt to use the same words to describe them. It's the best we have. It's one of those inherent "of course it is" type things. It's entirely moot and virtually pointless to discuss.

>>58739053
how does it not? sure you are right about taste buds sending signals to our brain, but i can still enjoy it more knowing that maybe i have grown these tomatos, or i cooked the meal. maybe the company makes the meal enjoyable.

>>58739060
that is why i said probably, i didn't define it, i speculated.

>I find it unlikely that taste would be made over a chemical breakdown of food,

that is exactly what you do when you eat

>>58739138
>i can still enjoy it more knowing that maybe i have grown these tomatos, or i cooked the meal. maybe the company makes the meal enjoyable.
Sure, but they're definitely not a prerequisite to the ability to taste something.

>>58739123
yeah but at an early age you are incapable of grasping the complexity of life, you are more or less occupied by yourself, i would say being egocentric.

but agreed, this makes this subject so fascinating

>>58739156
no but i would think it is different from "i eat because i am hungry" to "i eat because i like it" maybe it is present subconsciously.

when im depressed, food doesn't taste good or at all, nor do i enjoy eating.

>>58739183
>occupied with

>>58739183
Having a grasp of the complexity of life is not a prerequisite to the ability to taste food. What are you smoking?

>>58739366
why not? let's break it down some more, you can correct me or point out whenever i make a flaw. also im currently dry so not smoking anything atm.

you eat as toddler, not because you like it but because you need to in order to survive. you probably taste something. we differentiate between tastes like, bitter, sour, sweet, etc very early on. one of the reasons why kids generate eating habits, because of preference. now what is a preference? preference is accumulation of knowledge about something. so taste has a prerequisite, you just don't realize it that it is defined by your life from the very beginning.

taste is defined by you and the complexity of life is part of your choice

>>58739476
last sentence is garbage ..

>>58739476
the joy of taste that is. taste itself doesn't need it, in that regard you are right

>>58737086
The idea of body expansion pack is both fascinating and unsettling.
On one hand you can get more memory storage, on the other hand
>penis expansion pack! Totally not a fake and virus ridden addon!
...unless addons are sandboxed or we have a vanilla fallback mode.
It's getting more complicated as i think about it.

>>58739476
We're talking about two completely different definitions of the word taste.

In the sense that you're using it, "taste" is a property of you and you alone. You're referring to preference.

In the sense that the OP is using it, "taste" is a property of the orange. OP is referring to a sensation.

You're severely off topic.

>>58739718
>OP is referring to a sensation.
OP is referring to the interpretation of a sensation*

We have computers that can do that. They already react to sound, touch, light, etc. We can give computers senses. Preference has nothing to do with the sensation itself.

>>58736987
it can analyze citric content and tell you how a human might perceive it.

>>58737086
>installing botnet in your body
neo/g/ get out

>>58736987
taste=emotion. until robots can feel, no. We don't even understand why humans are capable of feeling yet. Until we understand how humans are able to feel emotions when can not implement such functions into machines.

>>58736987
But oranges aren't the only fruit, OP.

>>58739790
We can taste something and, provided our tongues aren't damaged, say whether it's sweet, sour, bitter, etc with enough accuracy that others will agree; just the same as if you were to say that sandpaper is rough, that airplanes are loud, or that the sky is blue.

>>58739718
what about the case of preferring a sensation, like eating an orange instead of a grapefruit?

i don't think i am severely off topic, maybe just slightly.

the taste, as you say op states it, as sensation has a link to preference. sure you can taste the property of an orange, it is sweet, maybe it's sour, maybe it's rotten. but what your taste buds analyze will develop into a preference automatically, otherwise it will be just an analysis of a fruit, not the actual taste as in sensation.

the question should be what defines taste and how does an intelligent being differentiate between tasting and analyzing.

>>58739870
that's the non-emotional component of taste. the reason people like eating is because it creates positive emotions.

>>58739892
that would imply every human being likes oranges, and i know a few who don't because it's either to sweet, to sour or both.

>>58739878
>what about the case of preferring a sensation,
That's not in question here.

>>58739892
No, it is the entire component of taste. Anything that goes on after that is not taste. It is a reaction to taste. Just like pulling your hand away is a reaction to hot, or smelling a certain type perfume reminds you of your dead grandmother. The memory of your grandmother is not synonymous with the smell of the perfume, but a reaction to it.

>>58739925
>No, it is the entire component of taste. Anything that goes on after that is not taste
in that case, OP's question is extremely trivial

>>58739676
> Penis expansion pack
The more I think about it, the better it sounds

>>58736987
"Experience" is too vague and the question as you put it can generate endless unproductive debate. Consider reading http://lesswrong.com/lw/og/wrong_questions/

>>58739953
>lesswrong
Fuck off retard

>>58739925
if your lone answer is
>That's not in question here.

then you did not understand single word i wrote nor do i believe you understand how a human develops taste. what you looking for are clear borders in a subject that has none.

>>58739878
The taste of an orange and the personal preferences of the person eating the orange are two different things. If we shared the orange, we would probably both agree that it tastes sour and/or sweet. But you might love it and I might hate it. Our tastes (as in sense) would agree, but our tastes (as in preferences) would disagree. You can't use the two words as though they're interconnected, even if they're etymological twins, because the two different uses of them describe two different phenomena.

>>58739925
let me be more precise with something that you might be able to understand better:

if you were to eat shit, literally, your taste buds would analysis the foul taste, your nose would confirm it and you would have an immediate response in your brain "this is disgusting, i don't like it". the sensation this would give you would probably be a bad one, unless you have a scat fetish.

if you eat something for the first time, you test it. you analyze the taste and based on your individual breakdown of chemicals in your mouth and brain you will develop a preference automatically. and possibly every choice later in life when you eat something, will be influenced by it, because your decision on eating something will always follow a preference limited by circumstances.

>>58740033
that is why i said that the question should be different

>>58739878
>the question should be what defines taste and how does an intelligent being differentiate between tasting and analyzing.

maybe add how preferences are developed

File: neural_net2.jpg (67KB, 791x388px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 791x388px

>>58740096
If I were to eat shit, my taste buds would send the properties of taste of the shit to my brain, and the neural pathways in my brain would activate in such a way that tells me "this is shit", and many of those neural pathways share a connection with a feeling of disgust, and I would feel disgusted. This would all happen imperceptibly to me, but it's not instantaneous. There is still a process, and before any of it begins, I must first experience the taste of shit.

>>58740124
>that is why i said that the question should be different
You're probably right OP may very well have meant "can software experience the sensation of taste of an orange" as I'm saying, or it could have meant "can software ever develop a preference for the sensation of taste"

>>58740152
do you first need to taste shit in order to tell it is something that you wouldn't eat? that's why we have our nose, it is an indicator that tells us if something is good to eat or not, and other things as well

>>58740183
still both interesting questions

>>58740184
My nose is stuffed.

>>58740218
well in this case you have to trust someone elses judgement: don't eat shit, it's disgusting from what i can smell!

selfish bump for AI philosophy