The Dominant Life Form in the Cosmos Is Probably Superintelligent Robots

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Just great, we are all going to die at the hands of superintelligent robots. I hate to be the one to say "I told you so," but I told you so! :(

“All artificial life forms would need is raw materials,” he said. “They might be in deep space, hovering around a star, or feeding off a black hole’s energy at the center of the galaxy.” (That last idea has seen its way into a number of science fiction novels, including works by Greg Bear and Gregory Benford). Which is to say, they could be, essentially, anywhere.
Click to expand...
 
The brain-enhancement technology using implants caught my eye. There will be those who receive it and there will be those who won't. I see the potential for world wide civil war among us humans because of this ... because that's how we roll. :(
 
AI is an absolute myth. It makes for convenient deus ex machina-type plot points in science fiction, but it's got absolutely nothing to show for it in reality.
 
there has been billions of years for stuff to happen out there
 
dmonkey said:
AI is an absolute myth. It makes for convenient deus ex machina-type plot points in science fiction, but it's got absolutely nothing to show for it in reality.
Click to expand...
What? AI is advancing. And at some point we are going to be able to replicate a brain on the computer. This is reality, not a myth.
 
Schneider said:
I’m not saying that we’re going to be running into IBM processors in outer space.
Click to expand...
This. The common assumption that artificial intelligence has to occur on the equivalent of modern (but faster) CPU architectures is absurdly limited thinking. Even if possible, it may prove so impractical that other methods achieve greater success first.
 
dmonkey said:
Your statement was fiction, not "reality". As fictional as AI is at this point in time, and likely in the future.
Click to expand...

There are varying degrees of AI.
What you are talking about is human-equivalent AI, and no, we aren't at that point yet.

Real-world AI right now, is about where the Internet was at circa 1992.
Give it 20 more years, and you will most likely see autonomous robots.

Now true sentient AI, which is the equivalent to us (or beyond), I don't see happening with out current CPU architectures (CISC/RISC), nor classical programming.
It is going to truly take something akin to a ZISC architecture, and a very flexible, self-adapting programming language in order for this to happen.
 
Red Falcon said:
There are varying degrees of AI.
What you are talking about is human-equivalent AI, and no, we aren't at that point yet.

Real-world AI right now, is about where the Internet was at circa 1992.
Give it 20 more years, and you will most likely see autonomous robots.

Now true sentient AI, which is the equivalent to us (or beyond), I don't see happening with out current CPU architectures (CISC/RISC), nor classical programming.
It is going to truly take something akin to a ZISC architecture, and a very flexible, self-adapting programming language in order for this to happen.
Click to expand...

"Strong" AI is what was referred to in the article, and it seems what most people mean when they talk about AI. Personally, I doubt it's going to happen for a number of reasons, but the consensus is such that people assume it's only a matter of incremental advances before an "intelligence" is borne full-grown out of a sea of bytes. Deus ex machina.
 
dmonkey said:
"Strong" AI is what was referred to in the article, and it seems what most people mean when they talk about AI. Personally, I doubt it's going to happen for a number of reasons, but the consensus is such that people assume it's only a matter of incremental advances before an "intelligence" is borne full-grown out of a sea of bytes. Deus ex machina.
Click to expand...

I hear you on that, technology in our world is far too fragmented at the moment.
Actually, if you want a very good read, check this out: http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/skynet.html

I would really like to see us fighting against machines/robots than against each other.
 
dmonkey said:
AI is an absolute myth. It makes for convenient deus ex machina-type plot points in science fiction, but it's got absolutely nothing to show for it in reality.
Click to expand...
AI shouldn't even really be distinguished as anything other than intelligence.

A domestic house cat may not build a space ship and travel to the moon anytime soon, but it has intelligence.

Our "AI" is rapidly approaching that level, with the ability to process huge amounts of data efficiently with a flawless massive database of information at its disposal for a truly "networked" mind.

Consider how long it has taken for intelligence to evolve on Earth (from the first rudimentary reactionary nervous systems to the human brain), and how rapid AI development has been in just the last twenty YEARS.

IMO, just as life has continued to evolve and improve itself over time, humans aren't the "end" species either, and I think its inevitable that what we call "AI" will be the next logical evolutionary step to replace man and there's nothing wrong with that. All species are just a link in a long chain towards life's goal of bringing order to disorder, or as someone once said the way for the universe to experience itself.

DNA isn't so special after all, its really just a very primitive information storage system. Now that we have far more efficient means of storing and passing on information, artificial life would be able to evolve, improve, and replicate itself at a far more rapid rate and expand across the cosmos.

Earth may be rare, but considering how ridiculously massive the universe is, its extremely unlikely there aren't a buttload of other systems just like Earth where life would have evolved just like here but earlier to the point that they are beyond their primitive biological origin.
 
Red Falcon said:
I would really like to see us fighting against machines/robots than against each other.
Click to expand...
Why does it have to be a fight? Why can't it be a peaceful gradual transition, to perhaps the point even that humans are still around just that they are more or less irrelevant.

Take sharks for example, they are still around, but they don't really compete with us. But even though they were once one of the most advanced species on the planet, they just haven't really changed and have passed the torch of progress on long ago.

Humans may just become more or less irrelevant as AI is slowly but surely developed for the personal gain of a few, at the expense of surpassing the masses. If the AI can leave Earth and expand across a vast universe for resources, many of which may not even really compete with what we have here (not like they need grains and rivers), they could simply evolve at a rate far more rapid than we can as a biological organism making us irrelevant and just a relic. And as long as the humans aren't actively interfering with them, they would have no reason to go on a genocidal mission against man anymore than we do against sharks.

Heck, they might even try to care for us and setup sanctuaries and the like the way we do for chimpanzees. Just look at Ferguson, we could certainly use the help of a benevolent far more intelligent and powerful AI. ;)

It doesn't have to be "us or them".
 
Good luck programming them with good and evil:

"It wasn't a fair universe, nor a kind one. If there was a God, his love and forty-five cents would buy you coffee.
No one seemed to be at the cosmic controls anymore. It was every man for himself, until SKYNET became alive and
filled the void left by a seemingly disinterested God. Its vision was very controlled. The ultimate dream of man, carried out
by one of man's lowliest tools; eliminate evil men. But there was a touch of evil in all men, and SKYNET was having
trouble separating the worst of them out. So the totality of humanity, with all of its biologic messiness, wasn't wanted.
And to this machine-god, forgiveness just did not compute. Only cold retribution for the sins of the past."
Click to expand...
 
Ducman69 said:
Why does it have to be a fight? Why can't it be a peaceful gradual transition, to perhaps the point even that humans are still around just that they are more or less irrelevant.

Take sharks for example, they are still around, but they don't really compete with us. But even though they were once one of the most advanced species on the planet, they just haven't really changed and have passed the torch of progress on long ago.

Heck, they might even try to care for us and setup sanctuaries and the like the way we do for chimpanzees. Just look at Ferguson, we could certainly use the help of a benevolent far more intelligent and powerful AI. ;)

It doesn't have to be "us or them".
Click to expand...

Uh...it only doesn't seem like a fight because the sharks can't fight back - we're slaughtering the shit out of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_threatened_sharks
 
"All artificial life forms would need is raw materials"
Click to expand...

Star Trek TOS's "The Doomsday Machine" acted like this.. broke down planets into rubble which it then consumes for fuel.

STE_DDM1.jpg


It was in Star Trek.. so must be true!!

Steve.. your warnings have been heard here on Earth..

Robots One Step Closer To Killing Us All
Wall-Climbing Gecko Robots Are Going To Kill Us All
Robots Are Going To Kill Us All!
Killer Running Robots Will Kill Us All
If you thought getting away from killer robots from the future was hard now, wait until they are made of this stuff!
Proof Robots Are Going To Kill Us All
Killer Robotic Ape In Development - I, for one, welcome our new robotic ape overlords. Damn you dirty robotic apes! Damn you!
Robots Are Going To Kill Us ALL!
Please Welcome Our New Robot Overlords


Now time for you to go off to other planets ASAP to spread your "Robots are going to kill us all" message and stop this impending destruction of higher forms of organic life!!
 
dmonkey said:
Your statement was fiction, not "reality". As fictional as AI is at this point in time, and likely in the future.
Click to expand...
Applied to the limited scope of Earth, sure at present at least. Applied to the scope of the universe and the Billions of years it has been in existence the trillions of galaxies and the untold number of possible life supporting planets it isn't. The notion that we are alone or unique or even the most advanced when you look at the big picture is laughably self centered and narcissistic.
 
dmonkey said:
Obviously, I can't provide you with a formal proof, but to speak of it as an inevitability is to delude yourself.
Click to expand...

It is inevitable because there is no reason that it isn't possible. The only thing that holds it back is computational power and knowledge of how more complex brains work.
 
I don't see why AI is an impossible concepts, if AI is simply a sea of bytes, then we are a sea of organic molecules with electrical impulses, yet we still possess intelligence. And we happened naturally.
 
"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."
 
Ducman69 said:
Take sharks for example, they are still around, but they don't really compete with us.
Click to expand...

Well, they can't exactly thrive on land. You don't think they would hesitate to fuck our shit up if they could?
 
Parja said:
Well, they can't exactly thrive on land. You don't think they would hesitate to fuck our shit up if they could?
Click to expand...
They are too dimwitted to ever be a real threat, which my point was that such a gap in intelligence could surely occur where robots start building smarter robots that start building smarter robots, to where in 100 years they make the progress that takes humans 1000 years, and humans just become a non-threatening part of the background.

Something the robots might keep around in "nature preserves" (aka The Milky Way) while they dominate the rest of the galaxy, and just reflect on us as ancestors the way we look back at the first fishes that came out of the sea, or the ape like forefathers of modern man.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Applied to the limited scope of Earth, sure at present at least. Applied to the scope of the universe and the Billions of years it has been in existence the trillions of galaxies and the untold number of possible life supporting planets it isn't. The notion that we are alone or unique or even the most advanced when you look at the big picture is laughably self centered and narcissistic.
Click to expand...

The billions of years and the scope of the universe is ridiculously small in the scope of the probability of abiogenesis which is ~10-40,000. This goes up dramatically with each stage of evolved life. Anything over 10-150 is considered an impossibility.
 
Funny story, did you notice that this is literally the plot for the game series Mass Effect?
 
Hmmmm Google announces there's no need to fear AI not too long ago... they know something... or they've been infiltrated already!
 
Jospeh said:
What is impossible about an AI that mimics a brain?
Click to expand...

We are about as far away from an AI that can actually understand the world, as we are from writing on stone tablets.

Even Google's amazing self driving car is not really that amazing when you realize it is mainly using a more advanced version of street view, where ever object is already mapped into the computer. The cars don't even have the ability to understand the difference between a paper bag (that they could safely drive over) and a spike strip that would flatten the tires, so they are both treated the same - (the car either stops or drives around it if it's far enough off to the side).

An AI that actually mimics the brain? Maybe one day, but not with our current level of technology, and not while any of us are still around.
 
Ducman69 said:
Earth may be rare, but considering how ridiculously massive the universe is, its extremely unlikely there aren't a buttload of other systems just like Earth where life would have evolved just like here but earlier to the point that they are beyond their primitive biological origin.
Click to expand...

Except you are forgetting about the time scale. How many civilization destroy themselves or die out? Even if they are around for 100,000 years, that's a blink of an eye in the universe's time line. The odds that 2 civilizations are around at the same time, and close enough to contact each other is still very remote unless these civilizations last for millions of years.
 
I don't think it needs to mimic the brain, it just needs a thought and learning process algorithm and the hardware to support such calculations to develope an AI, it can figure out the missing bits, just like humans do. Making it portable (IE as the central part of a moving robot say) is definitely further down the road.
 
chenw said:
I don't think it needs to mimic the brain, it just needs a thought and learning process algorithm and the hardware to support such calculations to develope an AI, it can figure out the missing bits, just like humans do. Making it portable (IE as the central part of a moving robot say) is definitely further down the road.
Click to expand...
You might be correct that we don't actually need to mimic the brain, but we don't exactly have any leads besides the biological systems in our own heads and in other species around us.
 
nutzo said:
Except you are forgetting about the time scale. How many civilization destroy themselves or die out? Even if they are around for 100,000 years, that's a blink of an eye in the universe's time line. The odds that 2 civilizations are around at the same time, and close enough to contact each other is still very remote unless these civilizations last for millions of years.
Click to expand...

If even a single civilization in the Milky Way has been around for 100,000+ years they should be all over the place. A fleet of exploration ships powered by nuclear pulse propulsion and building additional ships at each star could explore the entire galaxy in a million years or so. We're already capable of building such ships, though not of the necessary size and reliability just yet.

All we can say for certain about extraterrestrial life based on the current evidence is that its possible. There's no evidence against the idea and life appears to have arisen naturally on Earth somehow, but that's all the information we have. We don't have enough data to make claims like "the dominant form of life is probably X."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top