When Is it OK to abort Machine Intelligence.

[smp]

So if a machine suddenly achieved AI and decided that it wants to kill us all this would be a reality?
Yeah, it and what army?
Even if it was hooked up to the net, it would need incredible (we're talking 100's of gigahertz and more) to actually be able to make sense out of all the data out there to figure out a way to kill us all.
You think it would somehow hack intelligence and launch nuclear arms against us?
I'm sure it would feel the need for self preservation.
If it's not mobile, how does it go about creating killer robots?
I can't wait for AI.
Also, I don't think it'll mind that there are stupid computers that are without conciousness are our slaves .. they're merely machines, wehreas the AI would be life .. I'm sure it would be able to tell the difference.
You think your computer minds when you use it to download pr0n? Didn't think so.

 

[Nocturnal]

Originally posted by: Ameesh

Originally posted by: Roger
AI will be the death of the human race.

i hope your not serious.

you work for microsoft and you cant even spell the contraction you are correctly? how'd you get that job?

 

[IcemanJer]

Originally posted by: Azraele
What about a computer going into hibernation mode? Would that count as natural sleep?

I wouldn't say so. People can wake up naturally from sleep. You have to push the power button on a computer for it to wake up.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Does anyone here have "Cosmos" by Carl Sagan - either the book or tthe series on DVD ?....

In one of the chapters/episodes, Sagan mentioned that the need for large data processing power was what enabled the "growth" of the brain in the human species. The brain contains, roughly, 10,000 times more information than our genes. Mind you, information can be reduced to large computing (zeroes and ones and so forth...)

Considering that the human genome was mapped in 1999, ponder upon these questions:

1) how long would it take, considering the current wave of evolution in computing power, to "map" (and interpret) the human brain
and
2) when does the capacity of computing (i.e. like posibilities in chess) increase to the critical point in which it becomes similar to what we call "intelligence"?

Once you meet the two requirements above, get ready for a good shakedown in human culture. Not to mention the fact that, once a way to copy information from a living brain to a computer is found, that could also very well lead to immortality (since the failure of organic bodies can be repaired by biological or technological means)

The ethical and legal implications alone are staggering - and whole religions can rise and fall...

 

[BD2003]

The computer would doubtfully have instincts. Being that its a computer, it would logically compute the best course of action for achieving its goal. Fear and emotion mean nothing to it.

Therefore unless you give it a good reason, it isnt going to go apesh*t and kill all of humanity.

Either way seeing how many doomsday stories we have about AI, rest assured there will be a foolproof failsafe.


However, I have to agree, given enough time, and if we dont do it to ourselves directly, AI will be the downfall of humanity. AI is the ultimate life form. The next, and possibly final step in evolution. Given a decent enough AI to start from, it would eventually learn everything in the universe.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Does anyone here have "Cosmos" by Carl Sagan - either the book or tthe series on DVD ?....

In one of the chapters/episodes, Sagan mentioned that the need for large data processing power was what enabled the "growth" of the brain in the human species. The brain contains, roughly, 10,000 times more information than our genes. Mind you, information can be reduced to large computing (zeroes and ones and so forth...)

Considering that the human genome was mapped in 1999, ponder upon these questions:

1) how long would it take, considering the current wave of evolution in computing power, to "map" (and interpret) the human brain
and
2) when does the capacity of computing (i.e. like posibilities in chess) increase to the critical point in which it becomes similar to what we call "intelligence"?

Once you meet the two requirements above, get ready for a good shakedown in human culture. Not to mention the fact that, once a way to copy information from a living brain to a computer is found, that could also very well lead to immortality (since the failure of organic bodies can be repaired by biological or technological means)

The ethical and legal implications alone are staggering - and whole religions can rise and fall...

Some very good points. In the not too distant future (perhaps less than 100 years from now) humans will be changed radically. Not only due to AI, but also nanotech and biotech. When we learn every secret of the human body and mind and are able control everything, when we have computers that match our intelligence...

I can't even begin to think what will happen. Perhaps I might still be around when this happens.

 

[Moonbeam]

AnitaPeterson, where have you been all of my life. Just funning, But it is a treat to see anybody and especially a woman get hyped by the staggering implications. The implications are incredible. Imagine what kinds of questions might turn on the machines, turn on as in excite, stimulate, challenge. Can we fold space in such a way that all humanity can dance on the end of a pin?

 

[SuperSix]

It will be next-generation hibernation, STR, etc...

 

[ThisIsMatt]

I do not see AI becoming a reality to that extent

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

I don't think you can apply Goedel's Incompleteness theorems so easily to anything and everything. After all, what is the human mind but a extremely complex organ? A collection of cells and electrical impulses. If we can understand other organs (like the heart or liver), what makes the brain so different that we cannot understand it?

One day we will know all there is to know about the human body and mind and will also be able to manipulate both at will....

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

I don't think you can apply Goedel's Incompleteness theorems so easily to anything and everything. After all, what is the human mind but a extremely complex organ? A collection of cells and electrical impulses. If we can understand other organs (like the heart or liver), what makes the brain so different that we cannot understand it?

One day we will know all there is to know about the human body and mind and will also be able to manipulate both at will....

What is the human mind? I am not sure. I know the hardware involved with it. I know you can affect it by manipulating tissue, but what IS it?

As far as knowing all there is to know, I will tell you that I knew a whole lot once. I know more now, which means I understand that I understand less the more I know. Think of it as an exercise in self reference

A small and trival thing to consider. Why does mathmatics allow someone predict the future state of a system, with some degree of accuracy? Why does it work at all? Does mathematics exist in a real objective sense? Are equations created or discovered? Where does mathematics come from?

What is beauty and why?

Is it better to laugh in love , or be outraged with injustice?

To understand the above is to understand part of the mind.
It is not a trivial task


Can the human mind comprehend what it cannot perceive? Are there things always beyond our ability to examine? What is the nature of those things beyond our ability to define?

You might understand brain, but I do not believe you will understand the mind as it functions with any degree of completeness.

 

[freakflag]

YOU CAN'T JUST KILL AN AI FETUS!!!!!!!!!!!
MURDERERS!!!!!!!
IT'S AN AI THE MOMENT YOU PLUG IT IN!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[trmiv]

Johnny Five is ALIVE!!!

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Moonbeam, he, he...
We've crossed paths before, right here on ATOT...
I don't know why guys think women can't be just as thrilled as men are when faced with future developments. I've mentioned Sagan, let's also think about his wife, Ann Druyan. She was the force behind the film "Contact".

Hayabusarider
In fact, the same kind of ideas were expressed - from a different vantage point - by a neo-Platonicist called John Durham Peters, a scholar in the field of communication. He argues that communication can only exist in an imperfect, and therefore corruptible form, because a perfect communication can occur only between "ideal beings" - whom he called "angels". These angels know everything there is to know in the universe and communicate instantaneously - basically they are identic minds...

Incidentally, these objections are part of the difficullties encountered by those who want to establish "communication" as a science, rather than a "liberal art" as it was generally considered before the 1960s. Nevertheless, the inherrent imperfections do not necessarily indicate that the goal is absurd or unattainable.

 

[ReiAyanami]

well if artificial intellegence is soo much smarter than human intellegence, im sure the machines will figure out a way to turn us into batteries. so it wont be the end of the human race, just a new beginning. there will be peace on earth. you think that's air you're breathing?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hi AnitaP

I think striving for the goal is worthwhile, but achieving it is something I cannot envision. I would say I understood the mind when I have no more questions to ask, because I knew it all

BTW
Love the curse in your sig

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Few think twice about turning off their computer, but what happens if we create true AI? Will it be ethical to turn it off? Would it be OK some microseconds before full consciousness, or up to some point in its learning about the world. What consensus do you foresee humanity reaching on this issue were AI to become a reality?

i think it's okay, as long as they don't experience feelings.

 

[Kadarin]

The assumption that AI will always be in conflict with humanity isn't necessarily one that will hold true in all cases, and the cases of "The Terminator" and "The Matrix" aren't the only possible futures. Consider also William Gibson's "Neuromancer", where AIs work in service of humanity but have their own motivations, yet do not advocate the destruction or subjugation of the human race. Also worthy of note is Iain Banks' Culture series, where high-end AIs, or "Minds", are thousands of times more intelligent than people, yet peacefully coexist in a society where human and machine culture overlap.

Moonbeam, I do not believe the parallel to abortion applies, considering that a fetus (or even just a zygote) isn't an intelligent being.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

I don't think you can apply Goedel's Incompleteness theorems so easily to anything and everything. After all, what is the human mind but a extremely complex organ? A collection of cells and electrical impulses. If we can understand other organs (like the heart or liver), what makes the brain so different that we cannot understand it?

One day we will know all there is to know about the human body and mind and will also be able to manipulate both at will....

What is the human mind? I am not sure. I know the hardware involved with it. I know you can affect it by manipulating tissue, but what IS it?

Patience, young one. These things will be answered in due time. And you are getting off topic. Our little side discussion isnt about whether math is discovered or invented, its about the mind.
The brain is just another organ, sooner or later people will find out all there is to know about it. At the rate discoveries are made today, it is ridiculous to believe that it won't happen, ever.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

I don't think you can apply Goedel's Incompleteness theorems so easily to anything and everything. After all, what is the human mind but a extremely complex organ? A collection of cells and electrical impulses. If we can understand other organs (like the heart or liver), what makes the brain so different that we cannot understand it?

One day we will know all there is to know about the human body and mind and will also be able to manipulate both at will....

What is the human mind? I am not sure. I know the hardware involved with it. I know you can affect it by manipulating tissue, but what IS it?

Patience, young one. These things will be answered in due time. And you are getting off topic. Our little side discussion isnt about whether math is discovered or invented, its about the mind.
The brain is just another organ, sooner or later people will find out all there is to know about it. At the rate discoveries are made today, it is ridiculous to believe that it won't happen, ever.

I think we will have to agree to disagree, but think on the math. It does have to do with the mind

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Drat! Just lost a lot of typing.

Ok, I am extremely doubtful of recreating human consciousness, because computers are by nature devices that follow instruction in a specific and defined order. These instructions are also known as algorithms. Now algorithms do not care if they are run on a computer, or written down in a book and the directions followed manually. If minds can be recreated on a computer, then Einsteins mind can be recreated by following directions in a massive tome. It would run slowly, but would act in every way like Einstein. Doesnt seem likely to me. Now AI is another thing. If a machine ACTS like it is intelligent, then people will treat it like it is so. Would it be ethical to turn off a machine that merely acts like a mind? Yes. The injury would be to the person who suffered at the thought of turning it off.

If the machine WAS conscious, then the ethical thing IMO, would to be to ask permission before turning it off. Destroying such a machine could be tantamount to murder.

Also, guys Kurt Goedel pretty much rulled out understanding all that there is. There will always exist unprovable, unknowable truths, and the only way a human mind can be understood is by a higher mind. By definition, any mind that could understand a human one is not human, and beyond the comprehension of us.

Sorry to rain in your parade guys

I don't think you can apply Goedel's Incompleteness theorems so easily to anything and everything. After all, what is the human mind but a extremely complex organ? A collection of cells and electrical impulses. If we can understand other organs (like the heart or liver), what makes the brain so different that we cannot understand it?

One day we will know all there is to know about the human body and mind and will also be able to manipulate both at will....

What is the human mind? I am not sure. I know the hardware involved with it. I know you can affect it by manipulating tissue, but what IS it?

Patience, young one. These things will be answered in due time. And you are getting off topic. Our little side discussion isnt about whether math is discovered or invented, its about the mind.
The brain is just another organ, sooner or later people will find out all there is to know about it. At the rate discoveries are made today, it is ridiculous to believe that it won't happen, ever.

I think we will have to agree to disagree, but think on the math. It does have to do with the mind

I guess so. Too bad I won't get the chance to say "told ya so"

 

[Moonbeam]

Astaroth33 Quote:

Moonbeam, I do not believe the parallel to abortion applies, considering that a fetus (or even just a zygote) isn't an intelligent being.

-------------------

How about building an AI but taking it apart before turning it on?

AnitaP: Unfortunately I'm too dumb and afflicted with a terrible memory to remember our encounter. I get a vague impression I might have been with you on some issue, possible a feminist one, but I wouldn't want to bet. Anyway, I knew what I said was sexist, but I wanted to give you a complement of some kind for interesting thoughts. I tried to phrase it as best I could not to imply that. I know lots of women are just as excited by ideas as lots of men are. I have been fascinated by the possibility of AI since I was knee high to a grasshopper and in all the years since the few people I know who share that fascination have mostly been men. I live in a small world, maybe. I didn't mean to imply either that just because I think you're cool for that interest, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with women who don't think so.

Your point on communication was generally over my head, but it sparked a few thoughts. The notion of identic minds is an interesting one. I have often thought it would be easier to die knowing that somebody left behind thought like me. While the importance of that thought for me lies in the area of examining the incredible potential vanity it conceals, it has some application here as well, I think. What would be the content of identic minds. Could they have identic consciousness from different loci. Does the angle of view, perspective change the content. When we see a thing, a cube, do we see what we see or do we see the idea of a cube. What is thought? I guess I'm asking some of the things Hayabusarider is.

Azraele, you disappeared, I hope you know I wasn't really mad at you. You cracked me up and I just like you generally.

Be back, doggie pawing at my leg. It's walkewalk time.

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Approximately 30 minutes before the end of the movie.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: ATLien247

Originally posted by: Ameesh

Originally posted by: Roger
AI will be the death of the human race.

i hope your not serious.

Ever hear of Cyberdyne Systems?

Ever hear of The Matrix?