Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why not machines

Page 1 of 19 [ 295 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 19  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

28 Sep 2008, 3:04 am

Seriouslym, why wouldnt the earth be better off under the control of machines, humans dont seem to be doing that good of job.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

28 Sep 2008, 3:09 am

Eggman wrote:
Seriouslym, why wouldnt the earth be better off under the control of machines, humans dont seem to be doing that good of job.


Well, because you can't mate with them.

Humans aren't meant to be doing that good of a job. They're meant to be humans. Be proud that you can make mistakes. You wouldn't want to brave yourself to death.


_________________
sticks and stones may kill you.


Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

28 Sep 2008, 3:13 am

Sure you can.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

28 Sep 2008, 3:56 am

^ eeeewwwww :lol: . Machines will only do what we program them to do and as you stated we are not doing a very good job, so seeing as we will be doing the programming it will probably just be one big f**k up.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Keith
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,321
Location: East Sussex, UK

28 Sep 2008, 4:55 am

What's with the first reply seemingly to always be a FULL quote of the above thread? I would understand if there were a few posts in between ... but to be the first to reply by quoting the entire thread above in it's entirety ??



chever
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

28 Sep 2008, 12:53 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
^ eeeewwwww :lol: . Machines will only do what we program them to do and as you stated we are not doing a very good job, so seeing as we will be doing the programming it will probably just be one big f**k up.


There are computers that essentially 'program themselves', and they are starting to exceed our own abilities.


_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"


ouinon
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

28 Sep 2008, 1:10 pm

Eggman wrote:
Wouldn't the earth be better off under the control of machines? Humans don't seem to be doing that good of job.

Without considering whether humans are actually "in control of the earth", would like to point out that if it is under our control then it is already under the control of machines, us. We happen to be one of the most complex, advanced, types of machine around.

.



claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

28 Sep 2008, 1:14 pm

I already allow machines to control my life.



Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

28 Sep 2008, 2:31 pm

Keith wrote:
What's with the first reply seemingly to always be a FULL quote of the above thread? I would understand if there were a few posts in between ... but to be the first to reply by quoting the entire thread above in it's entirety ??

Whats with not staying on the subject?



Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

28 Sep 2008, 2:33 pm

Eggman wrote:
Seriously, why wouldnt the earth be better off under the control of machines, humans dont seem to be doing that good of job.


I Agree :wink:

DentArthurDent wrote:
^ eeeewwwww :lol: . Machines will only do what we program them to do and as you stated we are not doing a very good job, so seeing as we will be doing the programming it will probably just be one big f**k up.


Not necessarily. Machine complexity is increasing year by year, AND if we dont already we will soon have machines that can correct programming errors made by silly humans.



chever
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

28 Sep 2008, 2:39 pm

LOL, it's already possible to reorganize sh***y code by analyzing a digraph of its flow control, although that's not a lot

Regardless, I don't know how fast computers will become functionally sentient, but I can say this: they aren't getting 'dumber'


_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

28 Sep 2008, 4:42 pm

claire333 wrote:
I already allow machines to control my life.


Curious, do you want to expand upon that?


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

28 Sep 2008, 4:54 pm

Machines have no conscience, no emotions, no care about human life. They run on dry logic. Humans aren't made that way because we have emotions, we have needs, we have (although disappearing) a conscience.
Too, would humans not be needed to make machines?



chever
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,291
Location: Earth

28 Sep 2008, 5:04 pm

snake321 wrote:
Machines have no conscience, no emotions, no care about human life. They run on dry logic. Humans aren't made that way because we have emotions, we have needs, we have (although disappearing) a conscience.


Machines do not have these kinds of constraints, and, from the perspective of survival, can be considered superior.

snake321 wrote:
Too, would humans not be needed to make machines?


Image


_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"


Last edited by chever on 28 Sep 2008, 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

28 Sep 2008, 5:05 pm

snake321 wrote:
Machines have no conscience, no emotions, no care about human life. They run on dry logic. Humans aren't made that way because we have emotions, we have needs, we have (although disappearing) a conscience.
Too, would humans not be needed to make machines?



Why would machines Need emotions? In fact, why would they have no *needs* in the first place?
The concept of Want/desire is so fundamental that I dont know if I could explain it to someone or something that asked me what it is. :?



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

28 Sep 2008, 8:57 pm

chever wrote:
snake321 wrote:
Machines have no conscience, no emotions, no care about human life. They run on dry logic. Humans aren't made that way because we have emotions, we have needs, we have (although disappearing) a conscience.


Machines do not have these kinds of constraints, and, from the perspective of survival, can be considered superior.

snake321 wrote:
Too, would humans not be needed to make machines?


Image


So, basic compassion is a trait of inferiority? You'd trust a machine that doesn't give a damn about you to run your life? A machine that treats you like a set of digits, rather than a human being? Do you love yourself at all?



Last edited by snake321 on 28 Sep 2008, 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.