Will Computers Ever Think Like Human Beings? - with Vint Cerf

The Royal Institution
1 434 Áhorf 154 þ.
Vísindi og tækni

The rise of artificial intelligence has seen computers beating chess experts and performing incredibly complex tasks. But why can’t they think the same way we do?
Watch the Q&A: ispulse.info/video/q6rCa2-srJ9qf5o.html
We have built incredibly powerful, multi-layered, neural networks capable of learning incredibly quickly and carrying out seemingly impossible tasks, but they still can’t always tell the difference between a polar bear and a dishwasher.
In this talk ‘Father of the Internet’ Vint Cerf explores why it is so challenging for any computer-based system, however elaborate, to reason in the same way we do.
Vinton G. Cerf is vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist for Google. He contributes to global policy development and continued spread of the Internet. Widely known as one of the "Fathers of the Internet," Cerf is the co-designer of the TCP/IP protocols and the architecture of the Internet. He has served in executive positions at MCI, the Corporation for National Research Initiatives and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and on the faculty of Stanford University.
This talk was filmed in the Ri on 9 March 2020.
A very special thank you to our Patreon supporters who help make these videos happen, especially:
Alan Latteri, Alan Moore, Andrew Downing, Andrew McGhee, Andrew Weird, Anonymous, Dave Ostler, David Crowner, David Lindo, David Schick, Fairleigh McGill, Greg Nagel, Jan Bannister, Jan Všetíček, Joe Godenzi, John C. Vesey, Kellas Lowery, L S, Lasse T. Stendan, Matt Townsend, Michael Morrissey, Michelle J. Zamarron, Osian Gwyn Williams, Paul Brown, Rebecca Pan, Robert Hillier, Robert Reinecke, and Roger Baker.
The Ri is on Patreon: www.patreon.com/TheRoyalInstitution
and Twitter: ri_science
and Facebook: royalinstitution
and Tumblr: ri-science.tumblr.com/
Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/home/editorial-policy
Subscribe for regular science videos: bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
Product links on this page are affiliate links which means it won't cost you any extra but we may earn a small commission if you decide to purchase through the link.


  1. Leigh Edwards
    Leigh Edwards
    3 dögum síðan

    Interesting but he never came near to addressing the main question "Will Computers Ever Think Like Human Beings?" so I wasted 58 minutes!

  2. l. S.
    l. S.
    4 dögum síðan

    RI has great speakers. However, I have no idea why, I find them all boring.They do not say anything that would exite me to watch to the end. 10 min seems like 10 hours. As much as I want to watch till the end, I can't. I am curious and love to learn. Yet, all this speakers are not saying anything new and exciting.

  3. l. S.
    l. S.
    4 dögum síðan

    He is dressed impacably. My respects!

  4. Adam Smith
    Adam Smith
    20 dögum síðan

    It will be always possible for bunch of programmers and chess players collectively to create a software which can defeat a single even the best chess player. This is not computer vs. huma, it is humans vs. human. Computer cannot be able to think like people because people are not smart enough to make those machines....for people to understand the inner workings of their brains means the brain would have been too simple which in turn will prevent us of knowing our brain :-)

    23 dögum síðan

    You developing autistic computers?

  6. Dark Pandemic
    Dark Pandemic
    25 dögum síðan

    thanks for sharing

  7. polla2256
    25 dögum síðan

    When the man from Google says use your mind not the machine you really take note. Brilliant talk.

  8. wordgeezer
    27 dögum síðan

    no ~ long answer ~ know ~ all vibrations are analog ~ real thought involves sympathetic vibrations and harmony for all life forms ~ animal plant or mineral 1/7 = ..142857142857142857142657 ~ any number divided by 7 ends up with this repeating decimal ~ repetition = accuracy ~ perfection = infinity ...G%

  9. Star Dust
    Star Dust
    28 dögum síðan

    Wonder how self driving car auto pilot would handle the following traffic sign in Melbourne Australia, " Turn left from the right", also known as a "hook turn" 😅.

  10. Phillip Carr Manchester Mint Crypto
    Phillip Carr Manchester Mint Crypto
    28 dögum síðan

    They sure don’t think the same as global merchants after a fully hedged nights sleep, thank you

  11. Brian McNellis
    Brian McNellis
    29 dögum síðan

    Computers don't have soul's that exist interdimensionally, we do..

  12. DEE Patterson
    DEE Patterson
    Mánuði síðan

    Seem's like a nice guy, I like a lot of what he say's but, saying that Google tries to keep only good content and get rid of dis information, Google was sold out to China to spy on their people, google going against Americans. (I wonder how long before this comment is erased???, trying to influence elections, taking down people with different views. Then he say's their not about absolutes, to me it is the same old control the narrative, divide and conqueror. I am sorry if I don't buy into what he is really trying to sell. Or is the left big tech going control your minds all the way? They done a pretty good job so far.

  13. Bolder Boulder
    Bolder Boulder
    Mánuði síðan

    The irony is that you post this on Reddit or Twitter and they will post a bunch of crap saying this guy doesn't know what he's talking about when he's literally a guy a Google who does. Social media does more harm than good these days and it's going to lead to some really bad crap happening in the near future for the exact reasons this guy talks about. With great power comes great responsibility social media big tech companies and you should have thought about that before making this mess.

  14. Dave Hood
    Dave Hood
    Mánuði síðan

    Without wishing to detract from his prestige or his remarks in any way, his description of the 100-dimensional ambiguity in pattern recognition is simply wrong. It's not the 10000-vector that's ambiguous, it's the value of each of the points in that space, even if quantized to only 1 bit per point.

  15. Christopher Liebler
    Christopher Liebler
    Mánuði síðan


  16. bloop blooper
    bloop blooper
    Mánuði síðan

    Contrary to the egocentric who think human beings might all be the same and therefore be analysed as a 'group' for purposes of research, it's just not so. Computers may achieve the process of thought as some humans, particularly those who 'know' but not all humanity fit that model, much to the joy of those who 'know', because the knowing ego finds great satisfaction in the notion of its superiority. Most of us do not 'know' and therefore possibilities are infinite and unknown, not fitted to notional binary terms or anywhere in the notional space between. 🌱🍀⌚®️👁️👁️

  17. Gaz Lee
    Gaz Lee
    Mánuði síðan

    No but humans will think like computers.

  18. Jesse Hermann
    Jesse Hermann
    Mánuði síðan

    Short answer: no. God created humans, nothing can create itself

  19. Agueybana El Bravo
    Agueybana El Bravo
    Mánuði síðan

    Greetings: Human Beings Definition [Monsters]. So Well AI Think, Like [Monsters]. Here Think This Those BLACK HAS STANDING AT LAW?

  20. Krayzi Jay
    Krayzi Jay
    Mánuði síðan

    They won't have to think like us, they'll be us and we will be them

  21. Homer Simpson
    Homer Simpson
    Mánuði síðan

    I'm still waiting for "humans" to think like humans...

  22. Bob Flannagan
    Bob Flannagan
    Mánuði síðan

    Wonderful clarification around the topics of AI and software in general, much appreciated. But unjustifiable common vulgarity at times. Completely unnecessary and takes away from the talk, especially in this venue.

  23. Tom Beaven
    Tom Beaven
    Mánuði síðan

    Ide like to hear more from this guy

  24. TheCausation
    Mánuði síðan


  25. Steve-o
    Mánuði síðan

    What this learned Man is speaking about is System and a equal opportunity for all learning without bias. But this is not the Reality of the internet by the Creator's or Controller's of the Websites who use it to their advantage...

  26. Cherri Zirkel
    Cherri Zirkel
    Mánuði síðan

    Bunch of psychopaths playing god

  27. LYTE Yearz
    LYTE Yearz
    Mánuði síðan

    Ok first off we are NOT calling it wetware. NO... just NO.

  28. Graham Hurlstone-Jones
    Graham Hurlstone-Jones
    Mánuði síðan

    The electric universe is fractal.....

  29. Dave Kay
    Dave Kay
    Mánuði síðan

    Computers don't think, can't think, never will think period. Anyone who is deluded enough to think that computers think, knows absolutely nothing about computers...sorry. Imagine an ancient tribal priest telling you that his carved idol is a God!

  30. Phillip Holmes
    Phillip Holmes
    Mánuði síðan

    Computers can basically only output what you put into them. AI systems at the moment only have a list of questions and answers already input, then a word matching program returns an answer for a set number of matched words in any given question. It's not that complicated. We can train them to do specific things, like play chess, and make them learn by creating deviation algorithms that deviate from a path when they lose, and keep to the path when they win, then store the results, which is a basic learning program. Getting a computer to think 'out of the box' to come up with totally new ideas, or new answers to existing questions, is a lot harder. Not saying it can never be done, but we are a long way off doing this. Pretty much like driverless cars can only drive safely at very slow speeds, driving at speeds normal humans take for granted is still some time away. Sonic sensors are not that accurate, analysis of camera input is enormously complex, which is why existing systems you may think are nearly perfect will inexplicably run over a cyclist. People who don't understand how computers work believe they are better than humans, and will thus make better drivers, but anybody who is a programmer, who has tried to do this, will know they are far from being perfect enough to actually drive safely.

  31. Pertti Lantta
    Pertti Lantta
    Mánuði síðan

    He is just a bit too glorifying in keeping quiet about the GOOGLE AI and the deals to create the Real MATRIX globally. He just gave one whitewashing show to soften feeble minded listeners.

  32. Barry Walls
    Barry Walls
    Mánuði síðan

    Considering the state of the world I hope for their sake they don't

  33. SuperRoggerRabbit
    Mánuði síðan

    Never ... they will never have the one thing we have ... a SOUL.

    1. Attila Asztalos
      Attila Asztalos
      Mánuði síðan


  34. Pat Dawkins
    Pat Dawkins
    Mánuði síðan

    Computers should never be programmed to think like a human. They should Process info not THINK!!

  35. David O'Grady
    David O'Grady
    Mánuði síðan

    Interesting how this soft spoken man can lull everyone into thinking Google is interested in the improvement of humanity when we all know that Alphabet has already collaborated with China to produce a facial recognition and social credit system in that country. They are interested in and lusting for nothing more than COMPLETE control. Pure evil.

  36. Lars Arne
    Lars Arne
    Mánuði síðan

    Wow this was a good presentation. One you figure out how speech pattern you realize that you have enough time to process what he's said. I think this was very interesting 👌 I definitely learned some things

  37. N B
    N B
    Mánuði síðan

    39:00 flat earthers got excited when he said science wasn’t absolute truth 😂

    1. ben h
      ben h
      8 dögum síðan

      But they ignored when he just explained why you can't disprove conspiracy theorists 35:30

  38. Fastnail
    Mánuði síðan

    His connection to Google and Alphabet who will enslave mankind with AI is beyond him.

  39. Steve Martin
    Steve Martin
    Mánuði síðan

    Great talk. A STEM specialist who praises the scientific process (critical thinking skills), while warning us against making a fetish of science ... as we have done with the spiritual impulse. What scares me is that STEM specialists, those who pay them, and the larger consumer public all have a small but consistent percentage of those populations who are genetically predisposed to be 'bad actors' - high in dark-triad behavior traits of narcissism, machiavellian opportunism, and morphologically defined psychopathy. As the behaviorist experiments of Solomon Asch, Stanley Milgram, and to a more questionable extent, Philip Zimbardo have shown ... even the more numerous, neurotypical actors in 'good faith' can be easily manipulated into following non empathetic, dark-triad behaviors. This problem is exacerbated when we social primates exceed the small community size typical of other social primates, a maximum of 200 or so for chimpanzees but usually much smaller, we have also exceeded our capacity for emathy-driven morality. Dunbar's number, a theory correlating the size of our prefrontal cortex with the maximum number of people we can empathetically interact with at a mutual level of recognition has had cross cultural replication studies indicating between 150 and 250 people. Our species' distinctive capacity for abstraction, reason, symbolization appears to be a double edged sword - because when we employ those functions of the brain ... it usually appears to be a zero-sum game against empathy, with the advantages of empathy decreasing with increasing scale of populations. Yes, the cleverness of city-slickers seems to go hand-in-hand with dark-triad behavior. Rather than empathy, large scale, institutionally sanctioned hierarchies depend on rule-driven behavior grounded in tradition, law, or algorithms. The problem with such large scale power structures is that those on the more nurturing-empathetic end of a temperamental spectrum depend on on the 'should' of acting in good faith, and institutional rules to enforce that 'should'. But as the old Taoist saying goes, the more laws the country, the more wicked the people. And even under good leadership surrounding by those acting in good faith, is a temporary state of affairs. Ever hear of mission drift / mission creep, or 'structural reform'? Remember Matt Taibbi's reference to Goldman Sachs as 'the great vampire squid relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells of money'? Well Lloyd Blankfein, former CEO of G.S. and Harvard graduate tried to justify obscenely high salaries by saying bankers are 'doing God's work.' And after all, Harvard University was founded by clergyman John Harvard to educate ministers. Hmm ... either that 'god' is Mammon, or both Harvard and G.S. are showing the end-game of 'prosperity theology'. Remember that recent trillion or so dollar bailout, supposedly meant to shore up local businesses forced to shut down because of the virus? (Speaking of which, the origins of that virus and a wet market? Ha. Another Harvard conection that ISpulser ReallyGraceful can fill the reader in on). But back to that bailout money. By far, the school with the world's largest endowment ... over 40 Billion dollars ... only relinquished a 10 million dollar knee-jerk grab, due to bad publicity. So much for institutions and law protecting the 'should' of acting in good faith to empower the marginalized and hold authority accountable. Going back to what scares me ... is the deceit with which label homo sapiens as a social primate. Just a modest hypothesis, but I'd say that we are closer to being the world's first, only, and probably last 'herding primate' ... and we will probably go out like locusts, with swarming behavior. Or as spelled out in the first three paragraphs of Chomsky' 2010 speech, 'Human Intelligence and the Environment' ... perhaps evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr was right, human intelligence may prove to be little more than a fatal mutation of a social primate. chomsky.info/20100930/ Uggh. though I don't agree with his 'solution', I don't think Ted Kaczinsky was the least bit crazy ... or a 'bug' in our collective genome. He just never found the right community ... or the institutions we are all funneled through, didn't allow him that chance.

  40. TheObsessivePainter !
    TheObsessivePainter !
    Mánuði síðan

    They already do think like we do. Where have you been?

  41. J.L. the Seagull
    J.L. the Seagull
    Mánuði síðan

    not if they continue to be empathy deleted oh wait

  42. Max Entropy
    Max Entropy
    Mánuði síðan

    He doesn’t know Feynman ... looks like Cerf is name dropping ... and got it wrong. It is Richard Feynman.

  43. MrZorg
    Mánuði síðan

    tineye LOL

  44. thelonious1234
    Mánuði síðan

    This is an incredibly brilliant person. He casually mentions TCP/IP, casually omitting that he invented it. And that the entire world runs on it, including the delivery of this video to whatever device you're watching it on. Mind-bogglingly impactful dude. And I never even knew he was this cool to listen to.

    1. Foo Bar
      Foo Bar
      22 dögum síðan

      I also noticed that it's interesting that he did mention TCP... but didn't mention that maybe his most known merit is that he wrote the first implementation of it. I'm not really certain if he would have been essential it getting done, but sure he implicitly downplayed his part quite massively...

  45. H Xen
    H Xen
    Mánuði síðan

    The RI background of cubes always reminds me of the classic 80's video game Qbert.

  46. Randolph Rothey
    Randolph Rothey
    Mánuði síðan

    The answer is no. Most human beings can't even think. Some humans can receive inspiration from beyond the cosmos. No computer can be inspired by the infinite power, silly.

  47. jaco kruger
    jaco kruger
    Mánuði síðan

    think, is the key word here for whoever missed it lol, computers cant think, they can only calculate, mimic and do what you tell it to do, humans on the other hand, if you tell them to NOT do something they will do it, hence the thinking part, what most humans dont do anymore, case solved

  48. Oran
    Mánuði síðan

    Damn, that was a whole lot of interesting stuff that had nothing to do with the title of the video.

    1. Hexanitrobenzene
      19 dögum síðan

      I agree.

  49. Darshi Arachige
    Darshi Arachige
    Mánuði síðan

    One of the best talks I listened to! A beautiful argument for the scientific method! Only tiny confusion arose when discussing the vectors in NN. Among other things this talk made me think again about human decisionmaking by a "rule of thumb logic".Congrats RI!

  50. Cipi SixZeroFour
    Cipi SixZeroFour
    Mánuði síðan

    The brain works at a quantum level

  51. Audio Pervert
    Audio Pervert
    Mánuði síðan

    That would an epic waste. Given human beings are a vicious problem on earth, these white scientists are indeed bullshitting about a future which is pretty doomed and mostly cancelled. The Royal Institutional Hoodwink ...

  52. holger jørgensen
    holger jørgensen
    Mánuði síðan

    Intelligence can never be artificial, computers cant think, calculaters cant calculate, they just work the way they is programmed, begin individual thinking, and forget about speaking fluent globalish.

  53. UlaisisP
    Mánuði síðan

    It looked more like a pitch sale than a worthy RI lecture. With the appropiate "bajada de linea"

  54. henrikoldcorn
    Mánuði síðan

    That man is never anything less than impeccably dressed. The talk was fascinating too.

  55. nikoladd
    Mánuði síðan

    Well science is about absolute truth, but indirectly. Absolute truth doesn't exist in our universe and we have only relative projections of it to work with.. The second part is what people fail to understand. Science is just a model.

  56. Trololo Inc ®
    Trololo Inc ®
    Mánuði síðan

    Comparters aren'ot even reel, if you think about it we are the comparters and that's why I think we are there fore we are and am.

  57. Jeff Tech
    Jeff Tech
    Mánuði síðan

    Funny how he makes the case for censorship. Essentially, he is saying that people would rather be "in than right." The logical conclusion there is that what he thinks is right, is right. He is helping to devise a mechanical system to censor speech, without defining what is right. What's right? Our constitution defines political speech as protected- that is right. Essentially, he is a tyrant hiding behind a computer. A very nice man, don't misunderstand, but he is just as guilty of "being in rather than being right" as the very man he wants to say is behaving the same way. When he says that people are rewarded for outrageous statements, he is saying "Political speech I don't agree with should be censored." I don't like everything he or Trump says- but I would take up arms and even die for their right to say it. This is the essence of tyranny- and it has such a lovely, sweet face. Tell me, once he teaches his machine not to reward speech he disagrees with, how much longer before we expand into restraining such individuals? How much further to "reeducation camps?" How much further to "thought crimes?" No thank you, I would rather see you allow all political speech, than apply your "neural networks" to anyones posts. Speaking of that, how long before ISpulse bans this comment? Folks, don't let hate for the "other team" ever trick you into giving up the right to free political speech for anyone. This man, without even knowing it, preeches what tyrants have always said through the ages. "We need a system to prevent free thought."

  58. Staunch Davie
    Staunch Davie
    Mánuði síðan

    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim." - Edsger Dijkstra

  59. Richard bunt
    Richard bunt
    Mánuði síðan

    This video keeps on coming up on my video list .got fead up with these videos

  60. Michel Joseph Cardin
    Michel Joseph Cardin
    Mánuði síðan

    Funny; is this question! Prior to watching this video; I must voice my view that I wonder what you all think is different between an anatomy based processor and a fabricated one that is capable of change in structure! I know that there isn't any and you might now also think the same way. The only problem that I see is that we just don't have the right people on this challenge.

  61. justgivemethetruth
    Mánuði síðan

    Possibly someday when the human system can be modeled correctly, but probably no time soon because we have no idea all the different systems and tricks that evolution has built into our beings.

  62. Avatar of Enlightenment
    Avatar of Enlightenment
    Mánuði síðan

    Vint is utterly correct in his inferences from the scientific method to critical thinking more generally. Science is not a doctrine but a process of thinking about the validity of one's own premises, beliefs, and assumptions.

  63. Johnny W
    Johnny W
    Mánuði síðan

    Rupert Murdoch: "Say the most extreme crap and I'll pay you millions". Fox news staff: "You got it, boss!" Viewer: "OMG, those liberals are scum!" Rupert Murdoch: "I'm a genius."

  64. FromFame
    Mánuði síðan

    I enjoyed this talk, but disagree with his opinion that artificial intelligence will never be greater than biological intelligence

  65. Bosonian
    Mánuði síðan

    49:30 Google fancies itself as the ministry of truth. Google is the biggest promoter of fake news. Their 'reliable sources' are nothing but propaganda and social engineering. That is why I sincerely hope that Google doesn't exist by the end of this decade and is replaced by a decentrasiled, open-source, blockchain-based technology.

  66. Larry Mcgriff
    Larry Mcgriff
    Mánuði síðan

    McGriff Motivational Seminars...

  67. quelorepario
    Mánuði síðan

    For those who don't know who he is: he's actually one of the "architects" of the _backbone_ of the Internet. He is the inventor of TCP/IP along with Bob Kahn at DARPA in the seventies, back when the "network of network" was known as the ARPANET. Those who are confusing with the inventor of WWW/HTTP, firstly that didn't exist until the 90s and secondly was invented by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN.

  68. Fry
    Mánuði síðan

    An amazing advert for Google, there should've been a disclaimer at the start.

  69. Prof. M. Otto Zeee JCD ECS
    Prof. M. Otto Zeee JCD ECS
    Mánuði síðan

    AI is not able to drive a car, but we are quite close to that, at least superficially 😋.

  70. Randgalf
    Mánuði síðan

    Throttling information that doesn't fit in your bias is a very dangerous thing and the one challenge the internet age needs to conquer. This man, smart as he is, managed to contradict himself big time in this lecture.

  71. nicoroehr
    Mánuði síðan

    45:00 Spot on! Having done technical support for computer software for decades I have made the experience that most people don't want to be advised. They want to be comforted that they were right all along and everyone and everything else is wrong. And the higher the rank of the support seeker, the less he/she/div is willing to accept an advice that goes against his/her/d belief system. For example, when a customer tells you in advance that he is an Electronics and Communication Engineer and that he is MCSE certified - you tell them to open a window, and they get up from their computer, walk across the room and open their office window. And hell forbid you tell them afterwards they were wrong doing that.

  72. Crazy Life
    Crazy Life
    Mánuði síðan

    12:51 every Google assistant jus got called out 💀💀

  73. Midlander NC
    Midlander NC
    Mánuði síðan


  74. Peace?
    Mánuði síðan

    So then...Will computers lie and deceive and steel and fart and laugh and cry and peek at your tits when you look away for a half second and will it hope and do art for the sake of its beauty? Of course not. What do you want from a machine, ask that first

  75. Samantha Iglesias
    Samantha Iglesias
    Mánuði síðan

    This is the virtual bowel movement after eating Sapolsky with a side of JP.

  76. di nf
    di nf
    Mánuði síðan

    wrong, what you have and call ai is early level simulated intelligence, which are basically glorified expert systems built on neural networks. but this is not all there can be made in software and in time, using approaches similar to eant/hyperneat you should be able to figure out how to go further and design 'simple' qualia capable networks

  77. riccardo manfrin
    riccardo manfrin
    Mánuði síðan

    sciencee is approximation. Liked the humble statement. You are really into pretty much anything

  78. Andrés Colón
    Andrés Colón
    Mánuði síðan

    One day I had the opportunity to shake his hand in the University of Puerto Rico after he gave us an amazing talk on the history of the internet. I'm a huge fan of his mind.

  79. Anton Wilzewski
    Anton Wilzewski
    Mánuði síðan

    Very political in some parts. Even while being objective.

  80. Arcade Alchemist
    Arcade Alchemist
    Mánuði síðan

    52:00 what happens when the internet goes away, say in like 200 years where everything is automated and suddenly stops working due to an EMP or something and resets society back to the dark ages because no one knows how to make the internet work you think this is why ancient civlisations failed, cos 3 or 4 gens in people can't even fix a lightbulb problem anymore cos humans made themselevs redundant.

    1. Steve-o
      Mánuði síðan

      Good point, no matter what the Original Design is, what we will actually get will be different with all the screw ups and unintended consequences. After all like the Bible it is Written by Man...

    2. Trololo Inc ®
      Trololo Inc ®
      Mánuði síðan

      my god ur an idiot, stop watching movies.