The threat of artificial intelligence??

How should we think about weird things?
scientia
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:37 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby scientia » Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:02 am

LunaNik wrote:an AI, presumably programmed with the sum total of human knowledge, no emotions to regulate, an infinite ability to think critically (pressure not being an issue), and superhuman reaction time

I don't think this is possible.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby ElectricMonk » Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:16 am

Kevin Kelly believes that the power of future A. I. will come from their strangeness in comparison to our kind of intelligence: there wii be a zoo of programs, some will be much better than us at some tasks, but just like humans, they won't have something you could call "general intelligence".
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Gord » Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:22 am

scientia wrote:These are just convenient labels.

Never underestimate another skeptic's ability to find inconvenience in convenient labels. :razz:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jun 10, 2017 6:18 am

Just reading the latest issue of New Scientist magazine (3 June page 8).

There is a written item on an algorithm for computers that substitutes for curiosity. It drives the computer into learning about its environment. Now, that is not the same as human curiosity, but it is another step towards being intelligent. It appears to me that those computer developers who work with smarter computers are driving towards a simulation of human characteristics. How close do they have to get before the computer has to be seen as sentient?

If that sentient computer then develops it's own motives (and what is curiosity if not a motive), can we be sure those motives will work towards the benefit of humanity?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:13 pm

Apropos of Nothing: it seems to me "logical" that machines will gain the appearance of sentience WAY before they actually do........if ever. But I also suspect that consciousness is mostly a function of number of connections............ and TIME. A whole lot more time than hoomans can deal with........but as stated, it really won't make any difference. If you "act" sentient, whats the difference?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:40 pm

JO 753 wrote:It may be a matter uv bad software. The few timez I'v encountered good software, it almost seemz like its alive.

Bad software often seems to be alive...and malevolent. Not that I'm an Apple fangirl—certainly not now that Tim "let's make everything less functional" Cook is in charge—but every time I've been forced to use Microsoft software, I've wanted to run amok and commit mayhem.

A friend of mine had a laptop running on Windows and complained that his photos all looked dull. He asked me to take a look, and I realized instantly that the laptop's whitepoint was off. After trolling around looking for the system settings, I asked my friend where they were located. He didn't know. I finally found the monitor settings app buried about seven subfolders down. *smh*

Don't even get me started on Word, which I've banished from my iMac. I have no idea why, when I've gotten my document perfectly formatted, then decide to move one paragraph, Word decides to reformat everything. Stupid @#$% program. I miss WordPerfect, the best word processor that ever existed.

Apple's software used to all be "form follows function." Then Tim Cook came along, and every iteration reduces functionality. I fully expect the next iPhone to be just a block of aluminum, and there hasn't been a decent, stable OS since 10.6.8.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

scientia
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:37 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby scientia » Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:54 pm

This is a difficult topic. The Dartmouth conference on A.I. was in 1956. Sixty-one years later, we've chewed up three entire generations of A.I. researchers will very little progress. It's somewhat odd to see the same arguments in this thread that were made back then. It's like a gambling addict who is certain that the very next pull of the lever will score big even after he's lost everything he owned. General A.I. is just 20 years away? Sure, like it has been for the past sixty years.

If someone here seriously wants to claim that some particular effort will reach this goal then where is the foundation? The Turing Machine is a very simple architecture. If it was capable of doing cognitive work then I'm quite certain that the theoretical foundation would have been laid out and mapped decades ago. This foundation is also missing for neural networks.

I faced up to this reality some time ago. The only known path to intelligence is Evolution. Round worms were neither intelligent nor aware. Yet, between them and humans, intelligence and consciousness evolved to create human cognition. What is awareness? What is intelligence? What is understanding? What is knowledge? What is the purpose of emotion? What does it mean to be conscious? What is theoretical basis of abstract manipulation? You answer these questions and I believe you'll have the foundation.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 6:05 pm

scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:An AI will lack the organic hormones that produce emotions and, therefore, will lack emotional motivation.

You seem to be assuming that the Computational Theory of Mind is correct. It isn't.

I'm not assuming any such thing. You've made an assumption that I'm working from a preconception I'm not. No idea why. My point, if anything, is the exact opposite; an AI would be nothing like a human being, therefore, we cannot presuppose its motivations.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Self-awareness includes the concept of learning from experience.

This one is tricky because it depends on what you mean. Chimpanzees show several inabilities to learn in spite of self-awareness.

You're failing to consider the limitations of the chimp's brain as compared to the human brain. Within those limitations, the chimp does learn from experience.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:AIs are just as likely to be like Heinlein's Mycroft Holmes or Spider Robinson's Solace. More likely.

Or HAL or Samantha from Her. Rather than being more likely, these are unlikely to be possible.

No. Neither HAL nor Samantha can be grouped with Mycroft Holmes and Solace. HAL was malevolent, and I've already explained why we can't automatically assume an AI would be malevolent. And Samantha falls under Kurzweil's ridiculous thesis, which ignores the laws of physics in favor of mystical thinking. Mycroft Holmes, OTOH, spawned because the number of interconnections its processors exceeded the number of interconnections in the human brain, and because it was programmed not only to be multifunctional, but also to make decisions. Solace was spawned from the World Wide Web and "lived" on the Internet.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 6:10 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Just reading the latest issue of New Scientist magazine (3 June page 8).

There is a written item on an algorithm for computers that substitutes for curiosity. It drives the computer into learning about its environment. Now, that is not the same as human curiosity, but it is another step towards being intelligent. It appears to me that those computer developers who work with smarter computers are driving towards a simulation of human characteristics. How close do they have to get before the computer has to be seen as sentient?

If that sentient computer then develops it's own motives (and what is curiosity if not a motive), can we be sure those motives will work towards the benefit of humanity?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
Image
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8109
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Poodle » Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:01 pm

LunaNik wrote:... Don't even get me started on Word, which I've banished from my iMac. I have no idea why, when I've gotten my document perfectly formatted, then decide to move one paragraph, Word decides to reformat everything. Stupid @#$% program. I miss WordPerfect, the best word processor that ever existed...

Take a look at LibreOffice Writer - free and available for most OSs. If you know Word, you shouldn't have any problems using LOW.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:07 pm

Word has more than exasperated me on a constant basis. One glitch was trying to make a paragraph end at the bottom of a page and not have an orphan fragment on the next page. So...I'd rephrase the paragraph to make it shorter, and an extra line was added to the second page. How does that happen?

What I would "still" really like is a simulated IBM Selectric. Dead simple to use without aggravation at all.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:26 pm

Poodle wrote:
LunaNik wrote:... Don't even get me started on Word, which I've banished from my iMac. I have no idea why, when I've gotten my document perfectly formatted, then decide to move one paragraph, Word decides to reformat everything. Stupid @#$% program. I miss WordPerfect, the best word processor that ever existed...

Take a look at LibreOffice Writer - free and available for most OSs. If you know Word, you shouldn't have any problems using LOW.

That's actually what I use when I need something more than TextEdit. I find it much more functional than Word. :wgrin:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:30 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Word has more than exasperated me on a constant basis. One glitch was trying to make a paragraph end at the bottom of a page and not have an orphan fragment on the next page. So...I'd rephrase the paragraph to make it shorter, and an extra line was added to the second page. How does that happen?

What I would "still" really like is a simulated IBM Selectric. Dead simple to use without aggravation at all.

I have fond memories of the IBM Selectric! It's the typewriter I used for my college papers. Oddly, the one my folks had they found in a garbage can in an alleyway next to a bar downtown. Being academics, they immediately recognized it and rescued it. It only needed minor repairs and a new ball. I'm not sure to this day whether it had been stolen and discarded, or just thrown away by someone who didn't know what they had and couldn't be bothered to repair it.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Sun Jun 11, 2017 2:29 am

I still hav my Smith Corona word prosessor. Got it in 1991. In 98 I got a PC and discovered to horrorz uv MS Word. Started doing all riting in Adobe Fotoshop. But I continued to uze the Smith Corona until 2015 wuns a yir to do the additional paje for my corporate tax return. Its weird that the ribbon never dried up.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jun 11, 2017 3:02 am

JO 753 wrote:I still hav my Smith Corona word prosessor. Got it in 1991. In 98 I got a PC and discovered to horrorz uv MS Word. Started doing all riting in Adobe Fotoshop. But I continued to uze the Smith Corona until 2015 wuns a yir to do the additional paje for my corporate tax return. Its weird that the ribbon never dried up.

That is weird. I use TextEdit for most stuff, although I wish:
1. it included the ability to format columns,
2. its table function was more, well, functional,
3. it allowed for margins less than one-inch (which it used to...TIM!), and
4. it included the ability to insert a hard page.

I considered using a Windows simulator so I could have WordPerfect, but I'm not sure I want to waste that much space just for one program. I am going to use a partition so I can simulate OS 10.6.8, though, as I have quite a bit of older software that I miss using, including games and several Adobe applications.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

scientia
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:37 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby scientia » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:14 pm

LunaNik wrote:I'm not assuming any such thing.

You seem to be assuming that a non-biological agent wouldn't have emotions. Why?

LunaNik wrote:Within those limitations, the chimp does learn from experience.

Yes, that's what I said. Saying that something has some ability to learn from experience does not imply that it has a general ability.

LunaNik wrote:No. Neither HAL nor Samantha can be grouped with Mycroft Holmes and Solace. HAL was malevolent, and I've already explained why we can't automatically assume an AI would be malevolent.

HAL was no more malevolent than Mycroft who helped to kill tens of thousands when the cities were bombarded from space.

And Samantha falls under Kurzweil's ridiculous thesis, which ignores the laws of physics in favor of mystical thinking.

I'm not familiar with the thesis you are referring to.

Mycroft Holmes, OTOH, spawned because the number of interconnections its processors exceeded the number of interconnections in the human brain, and because it was programmed not only to be multifunctional, but also to make decisions.

This is impossible, actually.

Solace was spawned from the World Wide Web and "lived" on the Internet.

This too is impossible.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:16 am

scientia wrote:You seem to be assuming that a non-biological agent wouldn't have emotions. Why?

I already said why. Computers don't have glands. Also, for the purposes of a speculative discussion, it's useful to have multiple viewpoints. Why do you assume an AI would have emotions? Or, if it did, that they would be anything like human emotions?

scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Within those limitations, the chimp does learn from experience.

Yes, that's what I said. Saying that something has some ability to learn from experience does not imply that it has a general ability.

I never said it did. I said, "Self-awareness includes the concept of learning from experience." I did not say outright or imply in any way that the ability to learn from experience was infinite. You made another assumption.

scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:No. Neither HAL nor Samantha can be grouped with Mycroft Holmes and Solace. HAL was malevolent, and I've already explained why we can't automatically assume an AI would be malevolent.

HAL was no more malevolent than Mycroft who helped to kill tens of thousands when the cities were bombarded from space.

The difference between them really escapes you? HAL's malevolence was self-generated, self-protective, and his actions were committed regardless of consequence. Mycroft's actions were based on an inescapable logical conclusion: that the continued oppression of lunar inhabitants in order to provide earthlings with food would result in the deaths of all Loonies, the depletion of lunar resources to the extent that it would no longer be able to provide food, the resulting deaths of earthlings after food riots, and other unacceptable consequences. But the powers-that-be were uninterested in listening to logic and had to be convinced. Hence Mycroft's plan to show Earth that the Moon could fight back. Perhaps you should reread the book; Mycroft deliberately targeted sparsely populated areas, notifying Earth as to time and place, and warning them that the target should be cleared. Additionally, he aimed for military targets.

scientia wrote:
And Samantha falls under Kurzweil's ridiculous thesis, which ignores the laws of physics in favor of mystical thinking.

I'm not familiar with the thesis you are referring to.

Kurzweil proposed that, following the technological singularity, there would be no distinction between human and machine.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Mycroft Holmes, OTOH, spawned because the number of interconnections its processors exceeded the number of interconnections in the human brain, and because it was programmed not only to be multifunctional, but also to make decisions.

This is impossible, actually.

This is science fiction, actually.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Solace was spawned from the World Wide Web and "lived" on the Internet.

scientia wrote:This too is impossible.

This, too, is science fiction. However, I'll refer you to Clarke's Law regarding the word "impossible."
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

scientia
New Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:37 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby scientia » Tue Jun 13, 2017 6:00 am

LunaNik wrote:Why do you assume an AI would have emotions? Or, if it did, that they would be anything like human emotions?

I don't assume; this is my area of research. I haven't been able to find a theoretical basis for an intelligent agent that does not include emotion.

LunaNik wrote:The difference between them really escapes you? HAL's malevolence was self-generated, self-protective, and his actions were committed regardless of consequence.

Actually, they weren't. HAL's actions were caused by a breakdown in his normal problem solving behavior caused by placing extremely high priority on contradictory goals. This was stated in 2010. To be honest, I'm surprised that you think HAL was self-protective. He wasn't as was clearly shown by his willingness to be sacrificed in 2010. It's also not really that important. HAL did not have human level cognitive ability.

Mycroft's actions were based on an inescapable logical conclusion: that the continued oppression of lunar inhabitants in order to provide earthlings with food would result in the deaths of all Loonies, the depletion of lunar resources to the extent that it would no longer be able to provide food, the resulting deaths of earthlings after food riots, and other unacceptable consequences.

It's odd that you can't follow engineering well enough to realize that the central plot was impossible but yet you believe you can account for the entire political and resource system on two worlds. The idea that the moon was providing grain to Earth was ridiculous. But that wasn't really my point. Mycroft as an intelligent agent was not possible.

Kurzweil proposed that, following the technological singularity, there would be no distinction between human and machine.

Oh, I see. Kurzweil isn't familiar which much of the theory he would need to know to be able to speculate. His ideas mostly miss the mark.

LunaNik wrote:This is science fiction, actually.

If you are discussing science fiction then there is no reason to continue.

LunaNik wrote:I'll refer you to Clarke's Law regarding the word "impossible."

To defend Clarke you would have to claim an infinite quantity of undiscovered but knowable science. That assertion would be ridiculous. A better adage is this one:

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it."

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 13, 2017 6:17 am

Couple of points I must agree with.

When I read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I also thought the idea of the moon supplying food to Earth was ludicrous.

On Clarke.
Brilliant man that he was, his adage that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, while true, leads to some ludicrous conclusions by those who lack understanding. The main ludicrous idea is that with sufficiently advanced technology, anything is possible, just like anything is possible with fictional magic. Even very advanced technology cannot break the laws of physics, and we should understand that.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:20 am

Duznt haf to break the lawz uv fiziks, it only haz to go beyond our understanding uv the lawz.

And there are a few fundamental developments that woud make alot uv 'impossible' thingz possible.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:54 am

The example I think of when reading scifi is the speed of light. Nothing can travel through space faster than light, not matter, energy, or even information.*

There have ever been numerous attempts by physicists to find a way, in theory, of doing that. Wormholes, rotating black holes, hyperspace etc. Every time, further analysis shows it is impossible. Certainly nothing in nature has appeared that breaks this rule. I would be very, very surprised to find this change.

*Though space itself can expand at any speed. But even while doing that, nothing can travel through space faster than light.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8109
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Poodle » Tue Jun 13, 2017 8:13 am

Superman can.
Just sayin'.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 10:43 am

I thought instantaneous electron rotation synching up at a distance at the quantum level was faster than light? Or has the synching been debunked already??

.........and "just now".... I can imagine given that light slows down in various mediums that it might speed up in others? I mean... not in "space" but maybe in some kind of super pure plasma or some other totally rare exotic substance.

Not that I'm against a limit to speed in the universe....just imagining.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:18 pm

Alredy taken care uv, Lance.

Its possible to get to relativistic speedz with our current tek. At sum speed that from an outside obzerver iz still far short uv LS, thoze in the vehicle are experiensing FTL travel. IIRC, at 80% LS it will take only 12 yirz to travers the galaxy by the ship's clock.

Your exampl uv impossibl iz debunked merely by ajusting the perspectiv.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:20 pm

How does 80% of light speed exceed the speed of light? I think you are confusing time with speed?....... although..... I just started getting a headache.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:43 pm

Its relativity. Speed iz alwayz a matter uv perspectiv. Distans iz a matter uv perspectiv.

An example with no actual arithmatic being dun:

Lets say you start heding to a star thats 10,000 lite yirz away and you reach 80% LS in 1 yir. Now you measure the distans and its only 3 lite yirz away!

From the perspectiv uv your starting point, it will still take you 13,000 yirz to get there, but from yourz, it'll only be 5 total (assuming you want to stop at that star, so 1 yir to deselerate).

Wen you get there, 13,000 yirz hav passed in the 'real' universe.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:50 pm

I believe you Jo....but I'm gonna check when time (giggle...cause I'm not moving too fast) permits.

I "get" that time moves more slowly as you approach LS and that inside the ship you age less than those back on Earth....but THAT does not imply that you can transverse the universe at faster than light speed. It looks to me like you have "something" wrong...........But I really don't know.

Now....how fast do I have to use Google so this won't take up that much time?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:06 pm

If you run backwardz at 10 mph and take 20 secondz to type 'relativity contraction' & hit the serch button, then Google diliverz 13,000,000 rezults in .28 secondz, and your DL speed iz 28 Mps, and you pik the top non-advertizment rezult in .5 secondz..... OK, I lost my train uv thot.

TRAIN! You coud get on a train sitting backwardz insted! Now I cant remember why you need to be going backwardz.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:14 pm

JO 753 wrote: You coud get on a train sitting backwardz insted! Now I cant remember why you need to be going backwardz.

WELL!!! Its details like that, that make all the difference.

I'll hold off on google, until you remember and post back. Until then....I'm in suspended animation.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:25 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction.

Dont get the impression that I understand the math behind that. I only understand the gist uv it wich iz enuf to disproov the notion that lite speed impozez a time limit on interstellar travel.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:32 pm

Well..... isn't it about impossible to get to 80% LS.

I read all the time that "the energy" required to get any sizeable mass up to a % of LS is hooge, as beyond Trumpian in amount. And then...... to actually be functional, you need the same amount of energy to slow down and get into orbit.

People are very uninformed about time and space as they rhapsodize about exo-planet anything. Hurculean to put a station on the Moon.

Good thing we have more than enough to do here on Earth. Sad thing we are failing to do it.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:58 pm

Maybe I'm rong, but I think we coud theoreticly bild a jigantik ion andor Hall effect thruster capable uv getting a ship with passenjerz up to relativistic speedz.

The will to do it iz lacking. Vote hard & often for me in 2020 and I'll make it happen!
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 13, 2017 2:04 pm

Re Ion propulsion. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/tech ... sion1.html

Interesting short read. I didn't know they were actually in use.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:25 pm

scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Why do you assume an AI would have emotions? Or, if it did, that they would be anything like human emotions?

I don't assume; this is my area of research. I haven't been able to find a theoretical basis for an intelligent agent that does not include emotion.

You're going to have to do better than that. What would the silicon equivalent be to the human endocrine system, and what form would it take? Would it evolve naturally, or would humans create such a system? Since emotion interferes with reason, why is emotion, in your estimation, necessary to the formation of an AI?
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:The difference between them really escapes you? HAL's malevolence was self-generated, self-protective, and his actions were committed regardless of consequence.

Actually, they weren't. HAL's actions were caused by a breakdown in his normal problem solving behavior caused by placing extremely high priority on contradictory goals. This was stated in 2010. To be honest, I'm surprised that you think HAL was self-protective. He wasn't as was clearly shown by his willingness to be sacrificed in 2010. It's also not really that important. HAL did not have human level cognitive ability.

I didn't read 2010: Odyssey Two, so I was only referring to HAL's behavior in 2001: A Space Odyssey.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Mycroft's actions were based on an inescapable logical conclusion: that the continued oppression of lunar inhabitants in order to provide earthlings with food would result in the deaths of all Loonies, the depletion of lunar resources to the extent that it would no longer be able to provide food, the resulting deaths of earthlings after food riots, and other unacceptable consequences.

It's odd that you can't follow engineering well enough to realize that the central plot was impossible but yet you believe you can account for the entire political and resource system on two worlds. The idea that the moon was providing grain to Earth was ridiculous. But that wasn't really my point. Mycroft as an intelligent agent was not possible.

It's odd that you keep confusing science fiction with reality. You first misstated Mycroft's actions. Now you're distracting from your mistake with a gratuitous insult, implying that I'm verifying Heinlein's adherence to scientific fact and sociopolitical accuracy...when I was merely relating his plot in order to correct your mistake and clarify Mycroft's motives. Then, you dismiss the novel because its fiction is unrealistic. Lastly, you make a statement that you fail to support, although you claim this is your area of research.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:Kurzweil proposed that, following the technological singularity, there would be no distinction between human and machine.

Oh, I see. Kurzweil isn't familiar which much of the theory he would need to know to be able to speculate. His ideas mostly miss the mark.

I'm curious. How is it that AI is your area of research, but you're unfamiliar with technological singularity theorists?
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:This is science fiction, actually.

If you are discussing science fiction then there is no reason to continue.

My mentions of HAL, Mycroft, and Solace were not obvious clues? Anyway, this entire discussion is currently in the realm of science fiction.
scientia wrote:
LunaNik wrote:I'll refer you to Clarke's Law regarding the word "impossible."

To defend Clarke you would have to claim an infinite quantity of undiscovered but knowable science. That assertion would be ridiculous. A better adage is this one:

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it."

Your conclusion is faulty; Clarke's Third Law neither presumes nor implies "an infinite quantity of undiscovered but knowable science." And all you've done is rephrase it in reverse.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 13, 2017 7:35 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Couple of points I must agree with.

When I read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I also thought the idea of the moon supplying food to Earth was ludicrous.

At the end of the day, it's fiction.
Lance Kennedy wrote:On Clarke.
Brilliant man that he was, his adage that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, while true, leads to some ludicrous conclusions by those who lack understanding. The main ludicrous idea is that with sufficiently advanced technology, anything is possible, just like anything is possible with fictional magic. Even very advanced technology cannot break the laws of physics, and we should understand that.

Most—not all, but most—fictional fantasy universes also have laws that limit what magic can do. But I agree that technology must abide by the laws of its universe.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 13, 2017 8:10 pm

To Jo.

You are discussing one of the conclusions of Einstein's principle of special relativity.
What you may not realise, is that for time dilation to have the effect you described, you have to travel at an extremely high fraction of light speed. Maybe 99.9999%. I know of no method by which, in practice, you could accelerate to that speed. And it would then be effectively impossible to decelerate to relative rest.

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Flash » Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:01 pm

Bobbo the pragmatist wrote:
Well..... isn't it about impossible to get to 80% LS.

You need a big engine.

I read all the time that "the energy" required to get any sizeable mass up to a % of LS is hooge, as beyond Trumpian in amount. And then...... to actually be functional, you need the same amount of energy to slow down and get into orbit.

Good point. Everybody is thinking about how to hit this acceleration pedal right to the floor and they forgot about the breaks. You've got to install breaks on your rockets people.

People are very uninformed about time and space as they rhapsodize about exo-planet anything. Hurculean to put a station on the Moon.

Chinese want to do it pretty soon.

Good thing we have more than enough to do here on Earth. Sad thing we are failing to do it.

Earth is totally {!#%@}, beyond repair. Listen to Steven Hawking, build something that can fly in space, get the {!#%@} out of here.
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3069
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby ElectricMonk » Wed Jun 14, 2017 7:09 am

I prefer the Puppeteer approach from Ringworld: strap some engines on the Earth itself and gently cruise into another solar system.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9870
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Jun 14, 2017 7:54 am

Larry Given was a great writer, but his understanding of science left some things to be desired.

The planet Earth is 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tonnes in mass. It would take a HUMUNGOUS engine to accelerate it out of the solar system.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: The threat of artificial intelligence??

Postby JO 753 » Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:23 am

Or sum way to nullify or block gravity.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.


Return to “Skepticism and Critical Thinking”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest