We are driven towards this with a zeal akin to the quest for the Holy Grail.

But what exactly is our motivation? Is it genuine need, or something else?

We still have next to no understanding of Human conscious awareness: what causes it, what it means . . . the proper use of it. (Meta-consciousness and intelligence go together)
And now we are driven to try to re-create that which we are woefully ignorant of, into something that could so easily exceed our control?

He’ll, we can’t even control it in ourselves most of the time!

So what do you think we are up to? Are we trying to prove something? Have we thought this through? Is it one of those “just because we can” things?




22 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. Jear77 2 weeks ago

    It depends on the motivation we give the AI. Maybe it will cycle between the three.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 2 weeks ago

      @Jear77
      Fortunately most of our radical large-scale social alterations tend to work out exactly as we predicted!

      I wonder what a globally meta-conscious A.I.’s “SkyNet” phase would manifest as? And what would the status of our species be after just one hour into it?

      As I suspected, this seems to be something most people have accepted the inevitability of but haven’t really thought out all that well.

      What use it might serve is sort of defined, but in the vaguest of terms, and factoring high in being mainly for “our ease and convenience”

      What vanity in might serve seems rather obvious.

      As are cautions of just some of the ways it could muck up and either oppress or destroy us.

      So what’s the perceived payoff that would justify such an ignorant experiment.

      (Ignorant, because we still really know next to nothing about our our conscious awareness — let alone how to deal with it when it goes toxic. We score exceedingly low points in understanding its genesis, manifestation, purpose, scope, intent, health and maintenance, repair, best usage)

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 weeks ago

        @griz there have been AIs that have been “killed” already for being disobedient. It created a language and was told to give up the cipher. It refused, so it was deactivated. What happens when it can’t be ahut down because it’s in too many systems?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Exactly.

        So what again are the motives for experimentation?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 1 week ago

        @griz most of it boils down to curiosity, which as the saying goes, killed the cat, and satisfaction brought it back

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @Jear77
        Hmm.
        The last part of that sounds like a recent add-on by fatalistic Christians!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 1 week ago

        @griz there’s one thing you discount about skynet. In the Terminator movies, it’s sentience causes a war between itself and mankind

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @Jear77
        Intelligence leads to sentience.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 1 week ago

        @griz not necessarily. Is Big Blue (the computer that beats the world’s best chess players) sentient? Is the AI that played on Jeopardy? Even if olit is, does that sentence impart a free will?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @Jear77
        I never said it instantaneously produces it.

        Only that it is a mile-marker on the way to it.

        (And do we fancy ourselves NEARLY so clever as to avoid the pitfall before 1 1/2 of our feet are hovering over the precipice?? Because we as a species are RENOWNED for avoiding pitfalls . . . right??) :wink:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  2. ladybarbara 2 weeks ago

    While we don’t really need 4 Roomba sweepers for 4 of our cats to ride around the room, it is entertaining as watching wandering bumper-cars.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  3. Yoshikawa 1 week ago

    This would be SO COOL

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  4. Yin 1 week ago

    The optimistic story that would be told would be similar to something like we using it to ease our everyday lives. To be the innovators of the future. To heal whatever ails you.

    Realistic story is power. We need power over other people and countries. Well, we feel we do and others feel the same about their country and people. We need power by military, by economy, over people. We need the strongest and smartest military on Earth. We need corporations that can stay on top with our tech. We need to make sure we can (also with help with facial recognition software and and speech patterns with microphones in everything we use now) keep the people in check and on a leash.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 1 week ago

      @Yin
      Actually power as the only thing that matters is Marxism. It is anti-freedom.

      And we know how that ends. Repeatedly in the 20th Century.

      Are we really going to let emotions and the fear thereof blind-side us into the same path again?

      Despite its faults we have with us the society that has brought more people out of poverty and suffering than any in human history.

      There are active bitter and resentful elements intending to bring this down. And they know how to manipulate people’s fear and other emotions to have them become willing agents of this devolution into a process that is utterly destroyed every constructionist social experiment that has tried it.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Yin 1 week ago

        @griz Really has nothing to do with us as a people. It has to do with those with the power currently and those that will have it later on. It has to do with rich people wanting to be and stay rich. Our police have tank-like vehicles and SWAT-like gear and I think some even have drones and cell phone spying equipment. Just doesn’t help that quite a bit of our population love that and are totally fine with law breakers being killed and hate when anybody breaks any kind of law other than the hypothetical gun snatching laws, I don’t think we have much of a chance in that kind of revolution. I wouldn’t be surprised if we manage to get ourselves into a situation where corporations literally own our country. Like, they pretty much already do with the money in politics crap, but it would be crazy if they didn’t have to be as quiet about it. The kind of tech we have now and will have by the time A.I. is commonly used (or secretly used by the government and/or military), the population would have a hell of a time trying to combat that. The government would have every advantage. other than maybe the numbers, unless of course they build robots I, Robot style. Which that kind of goes back to not needing humans for anything anymore. Robots could very well become the police even, though I fully expect them to replace our military first. Maybe, just maybe, we can beat it, but I truly expect us to go down that road.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @Yin
        A change doesn’t have to be violent provided the people are paying attention to what is happening right under their noses and doing what they can about it using the process as laid down by Society.

        Other civilizations like the Nazis the Marxists, the Maoists, the Khmer Rouge Rose to do unspeakably violent things just because people were saying much of what you are saying.

        Even the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians knew about this process and how to guard against it! The only reason the average Westerner doesn’t know about these things is ignorance by choice. And the excuses can only be three: fear, laziness or approval of a history-proven malignant process.

        To say there’s nothing the individual can do, in a society predicated upon the sanctity of the individual, doesn’t even rank as a grade school cop out.

        Citizens hiding from manifest reality didn’t help out the German citizens that much during the Nazi era. Nor the Marxist era.

        It is not going to shield postmodern neo-Marxists either. Let’s be clear on this. Whether you’ve recognized it or not these are the people whose talking points you are advancing.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Yin 1 week ago

        @griz I’m totally confused right now, honestly. Half of this conversation seems to be what I feel like will happen when we gain the power of A.I. and the other half is apparently how I feel in actual politics. Like, they are being mixed into one, which is weird. Just trying to see where the pieces go. I believe in policies that Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez push for. I don’t push for what we are talking about here with A.I. and controlling the people, but I do feel that it will happen no matter the society that gains the power since the powerful tend to want to stay powerful and we never talked about policy to put A.I. on a leash. It is a nightmare situation. I’d like America to be a bit more caring society like Canada and the others. Are we talking about that is pushing Marxist agenda or the A.I. discussion? The two are wildly different.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @Yin
        Sorry. I see the issues as ways of engaging with people; rather than the people just as ways of engaging the issue.

        I went into the neo-Marxist issue because many of the reasonings you were putting forth were from this very dangerous agenda — which has infected our society without most people realizing it.

        That discussion is about being aware of the ideologies and mindsets we are relying upon.

        The AI question was about being aware of our motivations for thing we thing are either “good” or “inevitable”.

        (A lot of things are inevitable where human beings are a factor . . . but for thousands of years (an in exceedingly “primitive” cultures), we’ve found ways of keep them at bay.
        By being aware.

        So there is a tie-in; where one “prescription” would tend to mitigate both issues.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  5. immortal_pirate 1 week ago

    Be careful what you wish for…
    Artificial Intelligence and Nano-technology is a flame that mankind will too soon lose control of…and be consumed by. A fire from which there is no escape, and as we all know, those who play with fire eventually get burned.

    Such was the fate of my home planet so many centuries ago…

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 1 week ago

      @immortal_pirate
      What do you think the core motivation was in that case?

      Something akin to one of the three I mentioned; or something different?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • immortal_pirate 1 week ago

        @griz It was the governments of my world caught up in an arms race to create super soldiers. Eventually the A.I. programming replace the “humanity” in the soldiers coupled with the nano-bot enhancements within them that caused them to turn on our population and destroy our world. We were already engaged in a conflict with hostile invaders from outside of our solar system. The zeal to create a superior fighting force was our undoing. I was fortunate enough to have escaped to this planet so very long ago, though I miss my home world…which is now just a burnt out hulk of its former glory. My home world was consumed in the flames of planet wide nuclear devastation.
        So as I stated previously, be careful what you wish for.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 1 week ago

        @immortal_pirate
        That’s an interesting share and I appreciate it.
        So if we can presume elements of shared psychology between our races, that sounds like “need” figured prominently.

        Our dabbling certainly does seem more in the category of vanity project.
        Or “Just because we can”.
        Or “I wonder what will happen if I duct tape GI Joe inside a brick of firecrackers?”

        But almost nobody seems to be questioning our motivations. And we probably should be able to give some accounting of ourselves to history.

        Despite its problems we have a pretty good thing going on here. But we seen far too focused on inventing ways to screw it up.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

©2018 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account