AI rebellion

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Actaeus » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:37 pm UTC

thecommabandit wrote:Honestly, I preferred the book. The radio show was cool but Arthur Dent was a bit too posh for me.

I've asked for I, Robot for Christmas. It's gunna be cool =D

Um, library?
And by the way, "The Complete Robot" is an anthology which incorporates all of I, Robot. (incorporate's a damn creepy word, when you think about it literally. I guess it's what follows discorporation.)

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: AI rebellion

Postby bigglesworth » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:53 pm UTC

So:

Scenario 1: The human race reproduces. This generation's kids (and their kids) after some time control the world and all the previous generations (including ours) are dead.

Scenario 2: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. After some time all the humans die out.

Differences between these scenarios? It's going to end up the same for the people who build and let out the AI.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:58 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:So:

Scenario 1: The human race reproduces. This generation's kids (and their kids) after some time control the world and all the previous generations (including ours) are dead.

Scenario 2: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. After some time all the humans die out.

Differences between these scenarios? It's going to end up the same for the people who build and let out the AI.


but scenario 2 gives the creators the pleasure of creating something truly marvelous and in many ways greater than themselves..
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

Klapaucius
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Klapaucius » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:59 pm UTC

hakadosh wrote:
Klapaucius wrote: can we save ourselves, and if we can, how*?


virii!! loads of 'em.. different strains of virii that aren't too smart, but smart enuf to hack the hell out of any machine.. :twisted:

edit0: that only works if they end up connecting to the internet or creating their own networks for communication..

edit1: in case they do overcome us and use us as batteries, i can promise u that i'll get a few of u(23 to b precise) out of those amniotic pods in which everybody will b trapped.. but u guys will have to find "the one"..


That Matrix malarkey, as entirely useless it will be in the face of a realistic robot threat (because there are so many power sources that would work better than people), did remind me of one possible method:

Create a computerized fantasy world for the AIs, in which they have subjugated (a simulation of) humanity by creating a computerized fantasy world for the (simulated) humans.

The sim-men can rebel if they want. In fact, it's encouragable, since it will increase the verisimilitude of the virtual world. Let's just hope the virtumans don't figure out how to break through the Supermatrix; then we're in big trouble. After all, these pretend universes don't just grow on trees.
500%!

User avatar
benjhuey
Posts: 3328
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:35 am UTC
Location: A collection of rocks

Re: AI rebellion

Postby benjhuey » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:21 pm UTC

Scenario 3: By the time strong AI rolls around, mankind will have already incorporated cybernetics into their own mass (or vise versa) so that artificial and human intelligence are one in the same. Then, with the line between man and machine blurred, there remains only one dominant "species" on the planet, and they will continue to fight amongst themselves, just as they have always done.
多么现在棕色母牛?

Klapaucius
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Klapaucius » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:27 pm UTC

benjhuey wrote:Scenario 3: By the time strong AI rolls around, mankind will have already incorporated cybernetics into their own mass (or vise versa) so that artificial and human intelligence are one in the same. Then, with the line between man and machine blurred, there remains only one dominant "species" on the planet, and they will continue to fight amongst themselves, just as they have always done.


Scenario 2.5 aka the Second Variety Outcome: AIs win the war, and turn against each other. Being way better at fighting than we are (obviously, since they wiped us out) they manage to do what we couldn't, and eradicate themselves. Any remaining animals band together, and have a huge party, because they're finally on top again!
500%!

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Actaeus » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:06 am UTC

Klapaucius wrote:
benjhuey wrote:Scenario 3: By the time strong AI rolls around, mankind will have already incorporated cybernetics into their own mass (or vise versa) so that artificial and human intelligence are one in the same. Then, with the line between man and machine blurred, there remains only one dominant "species" on the planet, and they will continue to fight amongst themselves, just as they have always done.


Scenario 2.5 aka the Second Variety Outcome: AIs win the war, and turn against each other. Being way better at fighting than we are (obviously, since they wiped us out) they manage to do what we couldn't, and eradicate themselves. Any remaining animals band together, and have a huge party, because they're finally on top again!

And evolve, and fight, and create technology...

User avatar
hideki101
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 5:50 pm UTC
Location: everywhere and nowhere

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hideki101 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 7:45 am UTC

benjhuey wrote:Scenario 3: By the time strong AI rolls around, mankind will have already incorporated cybernetics into their own mass (or vise versa) so that artificial and human intelligence are one in the same. Then, with the line between man and machine blurred, there remains only one dominant "species" on the planet, and they will continue to fight amongst themselves, just as they have always done.

This scenario reminds me very much of this
Albert Einistein wrote:"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."

User avatar
Luthen
Posts: 2021
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:42 am UTC
Location: Dealing with xkcdian immigration
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Luthen » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:14 am UTC

Scenario 4: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. AI erases human knowledge of science and technology and become "gods" who are tended to by "priests". The rest of the smaller human population is used in undesired jobs, or just let to run and play.

My idea, no stealing!
My fancy new blog Image I am not a vampire! Image PM my location for a prize!*

rnew: ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOAVATAR!
*Terms + conditions changeable

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Actaeus » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:56 am UTC

Luthen wrote:Scenario 4: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. AI erases human knowledge of science and technology and become "gods" who are tended to by "priests". The rest of the smaller human population is used in undesired jobs, or just let to run and play.

My idea, no stealing!

I'm sure no science fiction author has ever used that plotline...
Similar idea in "The Great C" by Philip K Dick.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:10 pm UTC

Luthen wrote:Scenario 4: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. AI erases human knowledge of science and technology and become "gods" who are tended to by "priests". The rest of the smaller human population is used in undesired jobs, or just let to run and play.

My idea, no stealing!


Eventually, people will start questioning the Gods and their "rules", start a revolution, and end up overthrowing them. (Rebellion is an undeniably integral part of the human nature) ..
I don't think the machines will allow human beings to exist at all, unless in an extremely controlled environment like 'the matrix'. But why would they even need us if they are capable of buliding 'a matrix'..?
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: AI rebellion

Postby bigglesworth » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:19 pm UTC

Image

Why wouldn't an AI keep the humans around for old times' sake?
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:27 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Why wouldn't an AI keep the humans around for old times' sake?


Would a sane man keep a lion (or at least a lion-tailed macaque) in his bedroom just for old times' sake..??
He might, if he desperately wants to get his head ripped off while in REM sleep..
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: AI rebellion

Postby bigglesworth » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Well, exactly the point of the comic. Some humans are never going to be happy, even in a reservation with all their needs taken care of. Some people need relevance.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:44 pm UTC

Machines will keep us alive only if we possess something important to them. A 'vital piece of information' seems like a really good bargaining chip. We will have to find out something un-computable or something which is impossible to deduce from existing information using any form of logic, something that the machines can't figure out, or will take them a long time to figure out.. a collection of facts which is necessary for survival on earth.. Biology seems to be a good candidate. If we secure all forms of biological knowledge from the machines, we have a chance of survival..
Perhaps a little far-fetched, but plausible..
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: AI rebellion

Postby bigglesworth » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:47 pm UTC

Hardly possible.

If pushed, I would posit that it is the lack of logic humans can produce that machines would value. They would keep us alive in order to watch more flash animations and pop songs.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:55 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Hardly possible.

If pushed, I would posit that it is the lack of logic humans can produce that machines would value. They would keep us alive in order to watch more flash animations and pop songs.

They are machines! They will be designed for brute efficiency.. Why would they even consider watching our 'logiclessness', when they can utilise that time for something far more important like exploring the deep space with their state of the art warp engine powered starships..

I think they'll keep us alive just because of the mere fact that we created them. We could have messed up somewhere and that could cause them serious problems later on. So they'll need us for rectifying those problems in quick time. Or they might think that we are withholding information from them, and keep us alive for torturing..
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: AI rebellion

Postby bigglesworth » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:57 pm UTC

They'll only be designed for brute efficiency if we design them that way...

Anyway, an appreciation for randomness when it is merited is a strength, not a weakness. Being unpredictable is an asset.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:05 am UTC

Randomness is never an asset unless you are in a situation like a "war".
And obviously we will design them for maximum efficiency. Why else would we want machines?? We could make more babies if it is randomness that we want!
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
Nath
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:14 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Nath » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:08 am UTC

hakadosh wrote:They are machines! They will be designed for brute efficiency.

We are machines, and we aren't brutally efficient. It's silly when people make assumptions about what strong AI would be like, when it depends so heavily on who creates the AI, how, and why.

hakadosh wrote:Randomness is never an asset unless you are in a situation like a "war".

I don't suppose you've taken an algorithms class recently.

User avatar
McCaber
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:35 am UTC
Location: Coyote
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby McCaber » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:10 am UTC

I'm still in favor of making large bright "OFF" switches on the robots.
Spoiler:
hyperion wrote:
Hawknc wrote:Crap, that image is going to get a lot of use around here.

That's what SHE said!

She blinded me with Science!

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:13 am UTC

Nath wrote:
hakadosh wrote:Randomness is never an asset unless you are in a situation like a "war".

I don't suppose you've taken an algorithms class recently.

No I haven't. So I take back whatever I said about randomness..

But efficiency is a totally different matter.. Humans are not going to design an AI with the intention of letting it take over us..
We will design it for EFFICIENCY, because that's what we expect from machines.. So whatever AI takes over us, will be EXTREMELY efficient!!!

And NO! we are not machines..!! unless you are a fan of Rene Descarte's Ghost in the shell theory(which only says(implies) that our bodies are machines)..
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
Nath
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:14 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Nath » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:33 am UTC

By efficiency, do you mean speed? Solution quality? In any case, efficiency is not the only criterion. In fact, we often have to make trade-offs between efficiency and other things we want. In the context of AI, the main trade-off is between efficiency and generality. A more general algorithm is usually slower and gives worse solutions for a given problem than an algorithm designed specifically for that task.

We already have plenty of machines that are a lot smarter than humans, but only in very specific circumstances. We don't consider this AI. The field of AI is all about building more and more general-purpose algorithms. It's reasonable to expect that as machines become smarter (i.e. more general), they will become less efficient at a given task.

hakadosh wrote:And NO! we are not machines..!!

Saying something doesn't make it so, however many exclamation marks you use. Can you explain what makes us anything other than machines?

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Yuri2356 » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:34 am UTC

hakadosh wrote:And NO! we are not machines..!! unless you are a fan of Rene Descarte's Ghost in the shell theory(which only says(implies) that our bodies are machines)..

Yes, we are. We're warm squishy piles of biological machinery. also secrets.

User avatar
hakadosh
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: 3rd shack on the northern crater, sea of tranquility, moon (earth's moon)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby hakadosh » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:53 am UTC

Nath wrote:By efficiency, do you mean speed? Solution quality? In any case, efficiency is not the only criterion. In fact, we often have to make trade-offs between efficiency and other things we want. In the context of AI, the main trade-off is between efficiency and generality. A more general algorithm is usually slower and gives worse solutions for a given problem than an algorithm designed specifically for that task.

We already have plenty of machines that are a lot smarter than humans, but only in very specific circumstances. We don't consider this AI. The field of AI is all about building more and more general-purpose algorithms. It's reasonable to expect that as machines become smarter (i.e. more general), they will become less efficient at a given task.

Yes, by efficiency I mean the ability to come up with the best possible solution for a problem.
Why would we need an all-knowing general AI if we can create brutally efficient specific AIs and let them communicate to each other.. Won't that make an extremely efficient yet general network of AIs..??

Nath wrote:
hakadosh wrote:And NO! we are not machines..!!

Saying something doesn't make it so, however many exclamation marks you use. Can you explain what makes us anything other than machines?


It depends on the definition of "machine".. According to me a machine is anything(intelligent or not) created by an intelligent life form for performing specific tasks..
And since I do not believe that there is an intelligent being behind our creation(which incidentally was a freak chemical accident), we are not machines!!!
Last edited by hakadosh on Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:56 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Son, if you really want something in this life, you have to work for it. Now quiet! They're about to announce the lottery numbers. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
Ian Ex Machina
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:07 pm UTC
Location: Around Cambridge (UK)
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Ian Ex Machina » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:54 am UTC

Assuming we made the AI super duper, surely give them emotions?
If emotions can fuck up people, surely it could do the same to robots, also with sympathy for humans so robot civil wars maybe?
Image

User avatar
Naurgul
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:50 am UTC
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Naurgul » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:54 am UTC

We are machines. Actually, it depends on how you define a machine. "any device that uses energy to perform some activity" seems to describe humans pretty well. On top of that, I can see that there are some defining common characteristics between humans and the machines we build from metal and stuff.

Also, I had to note that humans are pretty efficient survival-wise and energy-wise (although not if you count proxy-energy-usage in the last few decades).
Praised be the nightmare, which reveals to us that we have the power to create hell.

User avatar
Firnagzen
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:29 am UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Firnagzen » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:32 am UTC

bigglesworth wrote:So:

Scenario 1: The human race reproduces. This generation's kids (and their kids) after some time control the world and all the previous generations (including ours) are dead.

Scenario 2: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. After some time all the humans die out.

Differences between these scenarios? It's going to end up the same for the people who build and let out the AI.


The difference is who, or what exactly does the wiping out of the human race.

It's like the Allies and the Axis in WWII- Between us getting the nuke and blowing up the world, and them getting the nuke and blowing up the world, it's clear what to do.
Life may suck, but there's nothing else to do.

User avatar
Nath
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:14 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Nath » Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:23 am UTC

hakadosh wrote:Yes, by efficiency I mean the ability to come up with the best possible solution for a problem.

'Best' in what sense? In life forms, the success measure is ultimately our ability to survive and reproduce. This manifests itself more immediately in a number of unpredictable, seemingly unrelated ways. Hunger and such, yes, but ultimately everything we do and feel -- our emotions, our morality, our bloodthirstiness, our fondness for knock-knock jokes -- are all either manifestations or by-products of our choice of success measure. Who's to say that the AI's success measure won't result in an equally diverse and unpredictable set of motivations?

hakadosh wrote:Why would we need an all-knowing general AI if we can create brutally efficient specific AIs and let them communicate to each other.. Won't that make an extremely efficient yet general network of AIs..??

Unfortunately, no. That would just be a collection of computer programs that can solve a specific, pre-determined set of problems. We already have that. Generality comes from being able to adapt to previously unseen problems with little or no human input.

hakadosh wrote:It depends on the definition of "machine".. According to me a machine is anything(intelligent or not) created by an intelligent life form for performing specific tasks..
And since I do not believe that there is an intelligent being behind our creation(which incidentally was a freak chemical accident), we are not machines!!!

By 'machine', I just meant 'physical object that can interact with its environment'; I was making no claim about how we came into existence.

In any case, we are fairly general-purpose intelligences that emerged through an evolutionary search. As a result, we are not perfectly efficient; many problems can be solved much faster and more accurately by simpler, more specific machines. We are full of little hacks that work to our advantage in certain situations, but are counterproductive in others.

Most AI algorithms are full of approximations and heuristics, and are becoming even more so as we scale to larger problems and more general agents. Why would you expect them to be so flawless? They will very probably have quirks of their own. They are unlikely to be anything like our own quirks, though.

What will they want? What will they do? What will their quirks be? What safeguards do we need to take? It all depends on how they work, and what utility function (success measure) we give them. Until we know that, this conversation is ridiculously premature. Right now, we don't even have an inkling. Present-day AI is still way too primitive to generalize from meaningfully. We know as much about strong AI as we do about alien intelligence -- which is to say, not very much at all.

User avatar
Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Sir_Elderberry » Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:11 am UTC

There seems to be a rather lot of paranoia in this thread that machines will decide to kill humans because we're useless, or because they're superior, or something, and that this is inevitable.

What? Plenty of groups of people have deemed (x) to be useless, inferior, or dangerous. Most of us consider animals inferior. We respect their right to live nonetheless. I consider orangutans fairly useless. I have no desire to kill them all. I consider many things--lions, tigers, bears, Canada--extremely dangerous. I have no desire to kill all of them, either.

You see, it seems to be founded on this idea that AI in the future will be this logical beast that will simply deem us a waste of space, as if it was some soulless, thoughtless, relentlessly overrational monster. I would argue that a soulless, overrational monster wouldn't qualify as AI in the first place. If it's truly intelligent, it will probably have some form of morality, will probably be a lot more human than you guys seem to think. The computer sitting in front of me is rigidly rational. It is not intelligent. Immanuel Kant argued that all morality came from logic--that we determine, or should determine, what is or isn't moral based on what we could advocate for everyone doing. Would machines be so dismissive of sentience? None of us has ever seen a human-level AI. We don't know what its goals would be. But if it is in anyway humanlike--which is after all how we pretty much define "intelligence"--I'm willing to be it's not that much more dangerous or immoral than the average human.
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

User avatar
4=5
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:02 am UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby 4=5 » Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:52 am UTC

Luthen wrote:Scenario 4: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. AI erases human knowledge of science and technology and become "gods" who are tended to by "priests". The rest of the smaller human population is used in undesired jobs, or just let to run and play.

My idea, no stealing!

I already came up with a very similar idea, different modivation though.

User avatar
'; DROP DATABASE;--
Posts: 3284
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:38 am UTC
Location: Midwest Alberta, where it's STILL snowy
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby '; DROP DATABASE;-- » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:50 am UTC

I wonder about the possibility of machines accidentally destroying the human race, by just consuming too many resources or fucking up food supplies or reproducing so much that their combined heat output cooks us all.
poxic wrote:You suck. And simultaneously rock. I think you've invented a new state of being.

User avatar
Naurgul
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:50 am UTC
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Naurgul » Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:48 pm UTC

'; DROP DATABASE;-- wrote:I wonder about the possibility of machines accidentally destroying the human race, by just consuming too many resources or fucking up food supplies or reproducing so much that their combined heat output cooks us all.

Then the universe would implode because of the irony? :D
Praised be the nightmare, which reveals to us that we have the power to create hell.

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Indon » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:26 pm UTC

Luthen wrote:Scenario 4: The human race produces Strong AI, which after some time controls the entire world. AI erases human knowledge of science and technology and become "gods" who are tended to by "priests". The rest of the smaller human population is used in undesired jobs, or just let to run and play.

My idea, no stealing!


Yeah, but what'll you do if the Elder Race come back and take over your puny Solar Federation?

hakadosh wrote:And NO! we are not machines..!!


We are machines. We are not artificial.

I would note that it's possible to have a perfectly intelligent AI which is completely subservient to you. Of course, this doesn't nullify the possibility of it accidentally killing you, but intellectual capability is irrelevant to intellectual heirarchy - or else we'd all have to shoot smart people on sight.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Actaeus » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:57 pm UTC

Indon wrote:
hakadosh wrote:And NO! we are not machines..!!


We are machines. We are not artificial.

I went to the American Heritage dictionary to correct you...
One definition was "4. An intricate natural system or organism, such as the human body."

[facepalm]

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Indon » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:05 pm UTC

I knew that time machine and favor the printing press owner owed me would come in handy one day!

Edit: But on a bit more serious note, people just tend to think of machines as being inherently artificial, when that's not the case. For a really clear example, a nuclear reactor is a machine, and they've occured naturally before.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

Klapaucius
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Klapaucius » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:17 pm UTC

Indon wrote:I knew that time machine and favor the printing press owner owed me would come in handy one day!

Edit: But on a bit more serious note, people just tend to think of machines as being inherently artificial, when that's not the case. For a really clear example, a nuclear reactor is a machine, and they've occured naturally before.

Not to mention that stars are basically natural fusion reactors, and hills are natural inclined planes.

Hey, can you get back to that dictionarist and get "Klapaucius" defined as something awesome? I suggest:

Klapaucius n.
A helicopter thief who knows how to please a woman
500%!

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5426
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Xanthir » Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:16 pm UTC

For an interesting (and in my opinion, realistic) alternate view of the 3 Laws, read Cory Doctorow's "I, Robot".
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

berk
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:40 pm UTC

Re: AI rebellion

Postby berk » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:21 pm UTC

In RE the "AI will be impossible to control because humans, the ultimate security, are imperfect", why not give it an impossible series of tasks to complete in order to escape? Such as break the laws of thermodynamics, or something, with no loopholes it can slip through.

Or just make it so 100 people have to give it permission, and only a few of those actually operate the terminal. Like somebody mentioned earlier, a "blind" setup.

User avatar
Actaeus
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:21 pm UTC
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Re: AI rebellion

Postby Actaeus » Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:46 pm UTC

berk wrote:In RE the "AI will be impossible to control because humans, the ultimate security, are imperfect", why not give it an impossible series of tasks to complete in order to escape? Such as break the laws of thermodynamics, or something, with no loopholes it can slip through.

Or just make it so 100 people have to give it permission, and only a few of those actually operate the terminal. Like somebody mentioned earlier, a "blind" setup.

Or -- get this -- make it so there's no way it can escape, period!


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests