Will advances like AI and nanotechnology make humans obsolete?

[LadyJessica]

Interesting topic. However some answers just don't make any sense.

a computer language works with 1 and 0. regardless of how many combinations you can make of those
numbers, they are intrinsically limited to mathematical applications, which negates this 'infinite computational
power'. a person's limits are not bound to a 1 and 0. math simply does not exist in human behavior.

That's just at a basic level. At the basic level a neuron fires, or it doesn't. that in itself is like 1 or 0. It is the aggregate of all our neuronal interaction that produces what we call "thought" and "consciousness." The same can be applied to computers as well if we can set them up correctly.

One thing that crossed my mind about advanced AI though is that wouldn't it eventually ask itself "What's the point?" and come to the realization that it's more efficient to simply not exist and destroy itself?

So it would be a nihilistic AI? It could happen. Plenty of people come to that conclusion everday and commit suicide.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Ultima
One thing that crossed my mind about advanced AI though is that wouldn't it eventually ask itself "What's the point?" and come to the realization that it's more efficient to simply not exist and destroy itself?

Forbidden planet

Star Trek - Nomad

etc

etc

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: syzygy[/i]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

"math simply does not exist in human behavior."

Huh? It's called Irrational Computations

You find a lot of that on here for example.

well, probabilities and esoteric number games are amusements for pointy-headed people.
they don't translate to real-life applications where being wrong can be a source for inspiration,
for example.

Being Wrong is an intrical part of the Human existence, mostly to learn from being wrong and a lot of time stay wrong too

Originally posted by: Ultima[/i]
Math actually does exist in human behavior. Get down to it and everything is just mathematical interactions between molecules. A neuron either fires or it doesn't. Looks like 1 and 0 to me. However,The point of AI would NOT be to emulate a human being nor to model it on survival-of-the-fittest evolution. Make an AI like that and it will destroy us. I don't see any reason why you couldn't eventually do it though with advances in technology.

1's will always want to be zero's and Zero's will always want to be 1's = Good Vs Evil

 

[myusername]

Don't forget Dark Star

Whether or not true AI can exist, it will require a power source, and petrochemical based industry to create nanomachines. Since we're going to run out of oil and die-off back into the dark age within the next two decades, it's pretty much irrelevant unless our AI manages to become self-aware and develop it's own power source and material supply line in that timeframe.

 

[dmcowen674]

1-14-2004 Robot Scientist Conducts, Interprets Lab Tests

LONDON - It doesn't look anything like R2-D2 of "Star Wars" fame but British researchers said on Wednesday they have created an intelligent robot capable of doing experiments and interpreting the results.

The robot scientist can formulate theories, do research and could be useful in discovering new drug targets. It works as well as a graduate student but is unlikely to put anyone out of a job.

It sits on top of a desk and is attached to a computer.

In the latest issue of the science journal Nature, the researchers told how the robot scientist gained top marks when asked to determine functions of genes in yeast.

"It was given background knowledge about the biochemistry but it had no knowledge of the genetics and had to deduce the genetic relationships," Oliver said.

Now that it has passed its first scientific hurdle and proved that it can uncover something that was already known, Oliver and his colleagues want to see if it can discover something new.

 

[djNickb]

Originally posted by: myusername
Don't forget Dark Star

Whether or not true AI can exist, it will require a power source, and petrochemical based industry to create nanomachines. Since we're going to run out of oil and die-off back into the dark age within the next two decades, it's pretty much irrelevant unless our AI manages to become self-aware and develop it's own power source and material supply line in that timeframe.

THE MATRIX

 

[Genesys]

i hope so. machines think logically [unless for some god forsaken reason we decide to program emotions into an AI subsystem] so any task they get set to do, they execute with utmost efficiency.

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: Genesys
i hope so. machines think logically [unless for some god forsaken reason we decide to program emotions into an AI subsystem] so any task they get set to do, they execute with utmost efficiency.

I think designing AI after humans is a big, big mistake that will only lead to our death (Darwinism anyone?) and I hope scientists and governments are smarter than to make a super-intelligent AI with emotions and the like. The best AI anyone could hope for would not have concepts like ambition, greed, survival instinct, evolutionary techniques, etc.. built into it, although if the AI is powerful enough it would be able to understand those concepts. It would be intelligent, but not the same kind of intelligence as a person.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Since we're going to run out of oil and die-off back into the dark age within the next two decades

Ironically, that is percisely the prediction made over 20yrs ago during the 70's As to the topic.... Johnny Five is alive!

 

[biostud]

Yes, since there is no meaning with us beeing on Earth so we're already obsolete, or rather we're definately not needed

 

[Zebo]

Theres no such thing as AI. Most researchers in the field use the term Psudo Intelligence becuase no machine can think on it's own. All is programmed. Things like self dirived initiative and generalizations are as yet immpossible. But then again maybe we're just too proud and are looking for wiggle room and CS Lewis could be wrong..

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Ultima

Originally posted by: Genesys
i hope so. machines think logically [unless for some god forsaken reason we decide to program emotions into an AI subsystem] so any task they get set to do, they execute with utmost efficiency.

I think designing AI after humans is a big, big mistake that will only lead to our death (Darwinism anyone?) and I hope scientists and governments are smarter than to make a super-intelligent AI with emotions and the like. The best AI anyone could hope for would not have concepts like ambition, greed, survival instinct, evolutionary techniques, etc.. built into it, although if the AI is powerful enough it would be able to understand those concepts. It would be intelligent, but not the same kind of intelligence as a person.

thats basically the same lines i was thinking along. make them super smart, super efficient, and emotionless.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Personally I want a chip implanted to monitor my cells so if one gets cancerous it gets zapped before it can cause any harm. Then I want an implant so I can download data for all kinds of skills and knowledge. Then I want super-duper eyes that can zoom in on stuff, see XRay and all that. Then I want a robotic immune system that at all times hunts through my body looking for nasty germs and whatnot, killing them off before they can make me sick.

Oh yeah, baby, LOAD ME UP!

Jason

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Theres no such thing as AI. Most researchers in the field use the term Psudo Intelligence becuase no machine can think on it's own. All is programmed. Things like self dirived initiative and generalizations are as yet immpossible. But then again maybe we're just too proud and are looking for wiggle room and CS Lewis could be wrong..

Theoretically it is possible. Saying "no machine can think on its own" is false because even computers today can think on their own. Flies can think on their own too but that's not intelligence. If you're talking about "self-awareness" that is a philosophical question, as nobody knows what self awareness really is. Maybe a supersmart AI would not be self aware, or maybe the only thing required in this universe for self awareness is intelligence. In the end does it matter? Maybe I'm the only self-aware human alive, and the rest of you only think that you are self-aware.

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Personally I want a chip implanted to monitor my cells so if one gets cancerous it gets zapped before it can cause any harm. Then I want an implant so I can download data for all kinds of skills and knowledge. Then I want super-duper eyes that can zoom in on stuff, see XRay and all that. Then I want a robotic immune system that at all times hunts through my body looking for nasty germs and whatnot, killing them off before they can make me sick.

Oh yeah, baby, LOAD ME UP!

Jason

Hahaha.. actually, I don't think it's too far fetched to look for the promise of immortality within our lifetimes.. save for getting caught in a nuclear explosion, falling in a lava pit, getting shot in the head, etc..

 

[Ultima]

oops...

 

[Zephyr106]

Theres no such thing as AI. Most researchers in the field use the term Psudo Intelligence becuase no machine can think on it's own. All is programmed.

All is programmed when programmers set the limits, but couldn't a computer that can program new code to run itself get around this?

I'm really interested in these topics because I'm replaying Deus Ex 1: nanites and AI play heavy roles.

Zephyr

 

[LadyJessica]

Theres no such thing as AI. Most researchers in the field use the term Psudo Intelligence becuase no machine can think on it's own. All is programmed. Things like self dirived initiative and generalizations are as yet immpossible. But then again maybe we're just too proud and are looking for wiggle room and CS Lewis could be wrong..

What is the definition of "intelligence"? How are we any more intelligent than a computer? Because we can do more? Because we can "reason"?

Let's take things to a more fundamental level. How is an individual neuron any more intelligent than a computer? That changes things quite a bit as I say that the computer is more "intelligent" than a single neuron. At least it's more versatile. A neuron can fire a pulse that releases some neurotransmitters; that's about it. A computer, on the other hand, can simulate millions of neurons while it's downloading porn for you off the internet.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: LadyJessica

Theres no such thing as AI. Most researchers in the field use the term Psudo Intelligence becuase no machine can think on it's own. All is programmed. Things like self dirived initiative and generalizations are as yet immpossible. But then again maybe we're just too proud and are looking for wiggle room and CS Lewis could be wrong..

What is the definition of "intelligence"? How are we any more intelligent than a computer? Because we can do more? Because we can "reason"?

Let's take things to a more fundamental level. How is an individual neuron any more intelligent than a computer? That changes things quite a bit as I say that the computer is more "intelligent" than a single neuron. At least it's more versatile. A neuron can fire a pulse that releases some neurotransmitters; that's about it. A computer, on the other hand, can simulate millions of neurons while it's downloading porn for you off the internet.

if youre going to do it that way, compare it piece to piece, not piece to whole.

how about neurons to the tracers on any imprinted circut board? all they can do is relay electrons from the start of that tracer to the end.
and humans are more intelligent than computers because we have the capacity for independant thought. a computer only runs a series of calculations for us and displays the result.

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: LadyJessica


if youre going to do it that way, compare it piece to piece, not piece to whole.

how about neurons to the tracers on any imprinted circut board? all they can do is relay electrons from the start of that tracer to the end.
and humans are more intelligent than computers because we have the capacity for independant thought. a computer only runs a series of calculations for us and displays the result.

Only for now

 

[Moonbeam]

2 million manufacturing jobs disappeared, not moved, but disappeared world wide last year due to robots. I'm going to open a business selling sented lubricants to girl machines.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
2 million manufacturing jobs disappeared, not moved, but disappeared world wide last year due to robots. I'm going to open a business selling sented lubricants to girl machines.

The boy machines will be happy about that.. friction wears out the machines fast..

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
2 million manufacturing jobs disappeared, not moved, but disappeared world wide last year due to robots. I'm going to open a business selling sented lubricants to girl machines.

The boy machines will be happy about that.. friction wears out the machines fast..

I like it how the guys call themselves tools.

 

[LadyJessica]

if youre going to do it that way, compare it piece to piece, not piece to whole.

how about neurons to the tracers on any imprinted circut board? all they can do is relay electrons from the start of that tracer to the end.
and humans are more intelligent than computers because we have the capacity for independant thought. a computer only runs a series of calculations for us and displays the result.

That doesn't work either. a better comparison is a cpu and a neuron since they're both fundamental units of a computer and brain respectively. Now you say we're more intelligent because we have the capacity ofr independant thought. Have you ever wondered fundamentally what that entails? Given, that our brains our brains are composed of neurons (and some supporting glial cells) that just pass signals here and there, the logical conclusion is that our "independant thought" is a compilation of the signals that our neurons pass around to each other. A computer runs whatever instructions it is fed. Neurons aren't much better. They just receive multiple signals and fire/not fire depending on the signal aggregate. Can't say there's much intelligence there.

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: LadyJessica

if youre going to do it that way, compare it piece to piece, not piece to whole.

how about neurons to the tracers on any imprinted circut board? all they can do is relay electrons from the start of that tracer to the end.
and humans are more intelligent than computers because we have the capacity for independant thought. a computer only runs a series of calculations for us and displays the result.

That doesn't work either. a better comparison is a cpu and a neuron since they're both fundamental units of a computer and brain respectively. Now you say we're more intelligent because we have the capacity ofr independant thought. Have you ever wondered fundamentally what that entails? Given, that our brains our brains are composed of neurons (and some supporting glial cells) that just pass signals here and there, the logical conclusion is that our "independant thought" is a compilation of the signals that our neurons pass around to each other. A computer runs whatever instructions it is fed. Neurons aren't much better. They just receive multiple signals and fire/not fire depending on the signal aggregate. Can't say there's much intelligence there.

It's weird and cool how the sum of these neurons and the connections between them can create things such as memory, our visual processing, etc... we're more than the sum of our parts. I believe it will be the same way with AI. If you tried to look at the source of an AI that could rewrite its code, it wouldn't make any more sense than trying to figure out our brains at the neuron level. It's what the combination of those neurons does that matter.