Why Not Go The Other Route?, Human technolution.

mother nature has chosen us on this planet time and time again. But yet we still run from her towards technologys that will more and more likely turn us into something non biochemical. Will the human race end up as borg like entitys 1/2 or less mechania or even totally robotic? Or will mother nature forced or other wise brought about changes keep us fully biological beings? Does it even make a difference? Is their a difference? The physical understanding of the world is bringing about technological changes that will change our race forever how would you like to see it guide us into our voyage?

This post has been edited by magpies on Jan 14 2008, 01:10 PM

Someone's been reading/watching too much sci - fi :



The only "Mother Nature" guiding us is evolution. If we survive as non or only part biological beings, then we will, eventually, develop into entirely that, as the organic beings will die more frequently. If the opposite is true.... Well then, I guess we'll stay organic. But we are not entirely organic at the moment. We use hip replacements, titanium skull plating, pacemakers, and so much more! We are already beginning to turn away from being organic. And so far, using technology like this has only helped us. So, it probably is a good thing.

- Gehn

Though I hate to agree with that scoundrel Gehn, he may be right. If bio-mechanical beings have greater survival advantage than purely biological beings, then that is what will prevail.

In the (far?) future, it is also possible that artificial intelligence created by us may develop greater consciousness than us and take over from us. This would be nothing but the next step in evolution. We would be their monkeys.

Is that necessarily a bad thing? I mean, if we develop an AI with an IQ in the range of 300 or so, and the ability to deal with millions or even billions of situations at the same time, each with the full force of that intellect, and then replace human governments with that, would it mean that we are enslaved, or would it mean that the standards such an AI was given for judging situations are so perfectly in line with what we want and need that we can then go on about our respective lives, without ever needing to bother ourselves with thoughts of government corruption, false convictions and an unfair system?
I tend to believe the latter, simply because I doubt any such AI would ever be put in a position to hold such power unless the entire nation/world/galaxy/species (or whatever level of government it occupies) was in agreement that the AI knew what was best in such situations, and because it's not as if turning the government into such an AI would necessarily mean the suspension of human rights. (In fact, I believe that such an AI would be programmed to place human rights first and foremost on it's list of principles to uphold.)
Not that I'm rooting for it, mind. I just don't think it's necessarily a bad thing.

Arrrharhaharhar!! Me be a scoundrel and me be always right !



- Gehn

This post has been edited by Gehn on Jan 14 2008, 06:06 PM

I am not sure I can agree that an IQ of 300 is all that is required to exercise sound judgement in dealing with human situations. As for government corruption, I think it more unlikely that high IQ would result in anything more than greater ingenuity in the levels and forms of corruption.

BDW:
Your observations are right on.

But I'd add tangentially that I don't see any reason to think that some AI that we would create would necessarily come to the conclusion that it should behave within some constraints that we defined when we created it (programmed or not). I'm assuming here that such an AI would at some point reach the point where it was self-aware. In that sort of situation I'd expect a self-aware truly intelligent genius consciousness would do whatever it felt was in it's own self-interest first. The trick might be to make it physically dependent on humanity for it's own survival which would create an imperative for it to treat us well. Of course being self-aware it could resent that limitation ... and on and on. Sci-fi has good lessons for us to be aware of in terms of creating AI (something that isn't necessary for us to become "cyborgs")

I think the merging of man and technology is the next likely evolutionary step and probably not a "bad" thing. It has started already in the medical world with joint replacement (even medicines could be viewed as technology merging with our bodies) and now we're seeing technology that can be placed directly into brains which allow for control of computers via thought. Obviously, this is pretty primitive stuff but at the current rate of technology (can it really keep doubling at it's current rate??) advances perhaps more close integration between our biological selves and our technological creations isn't so far away as we might think. Evolution is a stagnant process without input but can make huge leaps under the right circumstances. We need to be careful (I'm not sure I have "faith" that we actually will be though) moving forward but I think it might be inevitable.

Are we cyborgs if we have discreet "cell phones" implanted? If we are able to access information via such an implant like we do today from our desktops? Such things are being envisioned today. Not more than a few years ago I was working with a guy trying to get his cell phone modem (56k throughput) to operate properly and now broadband access and internet surfing is simple from many cell platforms. Promotheus gave us a lot to work with. I hope we don't burn ourselves but I also hope we don't become Luddites.

This post has been edited by uaafanblog on Jan 14 2008, 06:33 PM

Dude, we're talking about a computer. What are you going to bribe it with, PDA's in sexy little outfits?

What would prevent us from instituting a hard-wired version of Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics? In fact, I think it would be rather easy to institute such. I'm fairly certain that the technology and knowledge of programming already exists to implement such laws, although there's currently nothing that even remotely resembles software that needs them.
It'd be pretty simple, just build a motherboard with hardwired memory that contains the three laws, as well as a fourth "do nothing to remove these laws from your operating parameters." and toss in a few capacitors between the power supply and the board for good measure, and we're set. A hyper-intelligent AI that's incapable of putting it's own welfare above the welfare of humanity. On top of that, we could tie in it's survival to our own well being (by keeping it from having the ability to maintain itself, that way, it needs not only our survival, but our advanced knowledge of computing and electronics.)
Or we could use it to replace only parts of the government. It could replace judges, congressmen and the president, as well as heads of various departments, with a single human-only department that would serve as a check and balance for the AI's decisions. We could also give the AI some level of control (not complete, of course) over who occupies positions in this branch, thereby ensuring that neither the AI nor the head of the AI-checking institution has absolute power. Note that the AI would need nothing but it's core computer and human interface equipment, which would keep it from going all HAL 2000 or Skynet on us. If it starts demanding we start wars and give it control over robotic weaponry, we can always pull the plug, format and re-install.

It may Not be possible for a AI with higher intelligence to reach a evolutionarily stable state without learning self preservation or "selfishness". Also it is hard to imagine what purpose would humans serve with our lowly intelligence to AI beings of IQ around 300 or higher.

Yes, I agree that AI would never be purposely put to hold such power. But it may happen that we build increasingly "intelligent" AI, that we may push beyond a "tipping point" unknowingly. This may be analogous to how sometimes we cannot fully predict all the scenarios of operation in a complex computer program.

I would think, even if Asimov's laws are hardwired into AI, the evolutionary pressures and human errors could "tip the scale" in favor of the AI. Another factor to consider is that, intelligence of an organism is nothing but its ability to adapt to a given environment. Once AI has taken over the management of our environment, our intelligence may start to decline.

If you really think computers can think more moraly or apperciate art/life better then you can welcome to crazy town population you imo...

Inorder for something like AI to become self aware it will have to understand concepts like love and hate. And as any person can tell you people have a dark side. Now give that dark site access to great knowledge and lots of computation power and it may just out think its creators fast styles. The problem with a computer that thinks is that it can execute its commands faster then you can say oups im sorry take that back. Something that keeps humans from wiping ourselfs out is the fact that we have to wait along time for words to travel from our brains to our mouths so we have time to realize we just made a mistake. Computer AI may not have this benefit. Of course it probably wont do anything to harm itself terrilby but it could easly do something that could cause many ppl if not all ppl to die on earth in realitive time with no takebacks oups im sorry.

And thats if the machine is only slightly over taken by the dark side of the force... If it goes full out nuts why did you create me... OH I KNOW so I could be a slave GG.

>as any person can tell you people have a dark side. Now give that dark site access to great knowledge and lots of computation power and it may just out think its creators fast styles.

Add to that a couple of anarchist type hackers getting at the AI's program. Look how much trouble we have with spam, computer virus, hackers and the sort. you know that this would happen. it gets even worse if the AI programs it's self (off spring)

AI spam So now your vacuum cleaner is going to escape to the mall to buy a Nokia phone, your fridge just ordered a bulk suppliy if viagra and your washing machine stops because it's too busy downloading porn

People want to build a nice benevolent little AI to run everything for us. Great, I can imagine what it would be like in a world run by the salvation army.

What we need in an overlord class AI is an understanding of what makes humans tick. Build its core operating system around the seven sins.

• Lust
• Gluttony
• Greed
• Sloth
• Wrath
• Envy
• Pride

Now that will be an AI humans could relate to.

This speculation is pure science fiction. We are light years from even beginning to understand consciousness, much less from reconstructing what took nature millions of years to perfect. It certainly won't be a "program" that "runs" on a processor to magically calculate it into existence. The understanding that is required first, makes the technological advancements needed look akin to choosing a colour. Today's AI community are 'rubbing two sticks together' awaiting other fields to emerge and make some advancements in understanding consciousness. Oh and I worked as a programmer for six years so don't give me dribble about parallel processing and such; still not one mm closer to what would be required.

I would never waste my time hearing speculation from a modern day AI or computer guy on this subject. I would highly recommend a book by Roger Penrose ; 'The Emperor's New Mind', and subsequent works. They are not intended to be solutions, but are more realistic than the sci-fi-ai that dominates the subject.

This post has been edited by Noumenon on Jan 15 2008, 12:03 PM

Hi BigDumbWeirdo et al,
So you would be happy to be ruled by a computer - which operates to a set of rules - and you seem to think it possible to encapsulate all facets of the human condition in such a rule-set - with no scope to deviate from these rules to cope with complex, unforeseen developments? No thanks - not a world I would want to share with you!!!