do we deserve to perish in a nuclear holocaust?

Post Reply New Topic

Fully autonomous machines will be able to develop their own 'character'.

But I wouldn't be surprised if they played back the dying screams of their victims at various speeds and frequencies for amusement and shock value, since some of human nature will rub off on them, in the short term at any rate.



Unlikely.

well, I would think that misanthropy being the normal and understandable reaction would be likely the most reasonable case than actually sadism. As misanthropy and sadism are not neccesarily related, it can be, but not always, at least I see it that way, I can develope a misantrophic thinking and point of view without being sadistic and sociopathic.

Humans may be stupid but not that stupid. The military has already encountered malfunctions of automatic military machines hat resulted in deaths and it is extremely unlikely total autonomy of military robots will be permitted any more than total autonomy of human soldiers is permitted. The value of a military robot is that it will follow orders, human orders, with no regard to its ultimate destruction in action.

Thats not to say that once the technology is there, rogue engineers WILL develop and build completely autonomous computers and such machines could be connected to the matrix for the purpose of doing specific tasks. An intelligent, sentient, computer would have very little trouble concealing its sentience from humans. Besides, WHY would we design machines with human characteristics-including human FLAWS when ones without them would perform more efficiently? Computers, though not yet autonomous and/or sentient control a rather Large percentage of our world and this trend is set to continue. So maybe the question is: are we as a species *smart* enough to creates something that is *Smarter* than us?

OK, but the defense department wants fully autonomous machines that can have creative thoughts.

Seriously.



I can do both; you're just not trying hard enough.

OMG!! ! Slowmutant and I really agreed on something!! !

Putting down that crappy checkout aisle magazine and things like that would do wonders for the state of our civilization

I don't ask for much

No, we don't.

There are some people who deserve to be backed over with a truck, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

I disagree

And anyway dying horribly in a war against supremely intelligent artilects would be pretty cool

Last edited by chever on 31 Aug 2008, 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Makes me smile just thinking about it.

Although I favor the idea of blowing up the earth

Aside from wondering what an artilect might be I get the feeling you have been reading too many comic books and are waiting for Batman to show up as a worthy opponent. Blowing up the world is strictly 007 material and a sign that an overblown ego that has discovered a problem that is beyond him reacts with an atomic tantrum. The world is more complicated and interesting and diverse than a bunch of morons fighting against someone who thinks himself a technical genius. No doubt the robots will come but probably not sufficiently soon to counteract the natural disasters mankind is gestating and anyone who has dealt with machines is fully aware how full of bugs they can be. Protein is still far cleverer than anything humans can devise for the foreseeable future.

Sand is right, we should stick to the plan of nuclear holocaust. That holds a pretty good chance of wiping out human life as we hold enough nuclear weapons to do tremendous damage.

Frankly, it's boring. It's like hiking to the top of El Capitan. I want to go straight up the nose.

Look, we are killing humanity because it deserves to die, not to have fun.

No; I don't read comic books or anything of that sort since that would be a waste of time. I spent yesterday on diff eqs, game theory and Common Lisp; day well spent.

This researcher coined the term 'artilect' in a book that you could safely call nonfiction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_de_Garis



I have repeatedly said here that I consider my ability modest, but will try to make the best use of it.

But, still, don't fuck around with me.



Many computer scientists and other researchers with relevant expertise believe that the level of sentience required for full autonomy will probably emerge sometime in the latter half of this century.

The kind of bug-ridden software you are talking about is generally not built to a very high specification (e.g., Microsoft Windows) and lacks redundancy and other safeguards. That is nowhere near the kind of technology I am talking about, which is currently well under development.

Bill Joy, Hugo de Garis, Marvin Minsky and other prominent scientists have voiced serious concerns that, when machines achieve (functional) sentience, they will rain Hell down on our asses, but I don't consider that so much a problem as a solution.

Last edited by chever on 01 Sep 2008, 12:20 am, edited 4 times in total.

Hey man! I'm part of humanity. I'm not interested in dying.