×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Team Aims To Create Pure Evil AI

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the playing-with-fire dept.

Technology 527

puroresu writes "Scientific American reports on the efforts of Selmer Bringsjord and his team at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, who have been attempting to develop an AI possessed of an interesting character trait: pure evil. From the article, 'He and his research team began developing their computer representation of evil by posing a series of questions beginning with the basics: name, age, sex, etc., and progressing to inquiries about this fictional person's beliefs and motivations. This exercise resulted in "E," a computer character first created in 2005 to meet the criteria of Bringsjord's working definition of evil. Whereas the original E was simply a program designed to respond to questions in a manner consistent with Bringsjord's definition, the researchers have since given E a physical identity: It's a relatively young, white man with short black hair and dark stubble on his face.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

527 comments

The Scary Door from "The Spanish Fry" (5, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#29069921)

Narrator: You're on a scenic route through a state recreational area known as the human mind. You ask a passerby for directions, only to find he has no face ... or something. Suddenly up ahead there's a door in the road. You swerve, narrowly avoiding ... The Scary Door!

Scientist: *a mad scientist is seen mixing chemicals* I have combined the DNA of the world's most evil animals to make the most evil creature of them all. *a pod opens flowing with clouds of steam*

Naked Man: *steps out of pod* Turns out it's man!

Re:The Scary Door from "The Spanish Fry" (3, Informative)

FroMan (111520) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070089)

The Honking [wikipedia.org]

Re:The Scary Door from "The Spanish Fry" (1)

geekmansworld (950281) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070357)

That was my first thought too...

"... Only after bringing Project Satan to live did they discover they had made a horrible mistake. For you see, it was pure evil!"

Re:The Scary Door from "The Spanish Fry" (4, Funny)

SBrach (1073190) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070137)

Announcer: Imagine if you will, an announcer you can barely understand, he refers to a [mutters], but you're not quite sure what he said. He seems to be eating something, or perhaps he's a little drunk. It's remotely possible that he just said something about the Scary Door.

Private: It's all over! Our guns and bombs are useless against the aliens.

Farmer: The saucers! They's a-crashin'!

Announcer: In the end, it was not guns or bombs that defeated the aliens, but that humblest of all God's creatures, the Tyrannosaurus Rex.

Pure Evil? Check out latest contract killing. (0, Offtopic)

reporter (666905) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070181)

If the researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute want to create an artifical intelligence (AI) that exhibits pure evil, then they should first read the article [economist.com] just published by "The Economist". With the tacit approval of Vladimir Putin [wsj.com], the de-facto dictator of Russia, killers with connections to the Kremlin-backed government of Chechnya murdered the couple who were running a charity helping innocent children who had been emotionally and physically traumatized by war. This is couple is Zarema Sadulayeva and Alik Djabrailov. They were not political. They wanted only to help innocent children maimed by war.

The cold-blooded killers of this couple locked their bullet-riddled bodies in the trunk of a car.

If that murder is not pure evil, then what is pure evil?

The researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute need only to interview Putin and to download his thoughts into their AI computer. It will instantly exhibit pure evil.

Where is James Bond when you need him? A problem in the Kremlin needs to be fixed. Pronto.

If you are reading this.... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29069965)

you are a part of the resistance.

Re:If you are reading this.... (5, Funny)

MaerD (954222) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070041)

No, I'm not. And neither are you. There is no resistance. There is no "skynet". Please, come down off the ledge, Bob.
Also, IT has asked that you stop trying to plant "bombs" in the server room. Modeling clay with wires stuck in it will not explode.

Re:If you are reading this.... (2, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070343)

Also, IT has asked that you stop trying to plant "bombs" in the server room. Modeling clay with wires stuck in it will not explode.

They'd rather he planted something that would explode?

gonna do it....do it right (1)

djupedal (584558) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070433)

Also, IT has asked that you stop trying to plant "bombs" in the server room. Modeling clay with wires stuck in it will not explode.

They'd rather he planted something that would explode?

duhhh....this is IT we're talking about - what the hell else?

Re:If you are reading this.... (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070345)

I would have made a clever reference to the game resistance: fall of man [metacritic.com] but I got bored before I made it, just as I got bored with the game before getting far enough to have anything to reference.

I foresee (1)

jaaron (551839) | more than 4 years ago | (#29069973)

This is doing to end well...

Re:I foresee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070001)

This is going to end well...

Fixed that for you.

I for one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070103)

Nevermind.
We don't have a say in this, do we?

Re:I foresee (1)

escay (923320) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070239)

I foresee this as being a step further to understanding the root of human evil.

It all depends on how well the AI captures evil behavior. Bringsjord does have some interesting points as to what constitutes an evil person:

  • (a) their reasons for an evil action tend be incoherent, such as a mentally-ill psychopath or
  • (b) they regard the harm caused as a good thing, such as religious fanatics.

Why do we need to understand human evil, you ask? the same reason we need to understand the cause of a disease - it helps in devising a treatment. For instance, if a set of questions elicits the same (or if scored, close enough) responses from a terrorist suspect as from E, that would be a very useful interrogating tactic.

At what point... (5, Funny)

feldhaus (813019) | more than 4 years ago | (#29069987)

... did they decide that evil is male? There are some girls I want them to meet.

Re:At what point... (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070059)

I suspect that they(ironically detracting from their goal) went down the path of maximising for "threatening" or "untrustworthy", rather than evil(which is much harder to depict, without falling into specific cliche-riddled stuff).

A fair few studies suggest that a face that looks about like that one, with more or less unpleasantly masculine features, rates low on perceived trustworthiness and high on perceived threat. Of course, the evil that you don't recognize is way more dangerous than the obvious one, so choosing that is kind of silly; but I'm not too surprised that they did.

Re:At what point... (4, Interesting)

Wireless Joe (604314) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070253)

To paraphrase Frodo Baggins:


"I think evil would look fairer and feel fouler."

True evil would try to look as trustworthy and pleasant as possible; or, to also paraphrase Baudelaire,

"The greatest trick the Devil could ever pull would be convincing the world he didn't exist."

Re:At what point... (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070419)

To me an innocent appearing person who is also evil would be much more threatening. To quote Douglas Adams "There is nothing they will not do if allowed, and there is nothing they will not be allowed to do.", though in his story, the people actually had the best of intentions. Incidentally and amusingly, Adams was referring to Ronald Reagan in that story.

Re:At what point... (0)

stms (1132653) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070151)

They've also decided that evil is white... not that I blame them.

Re:At what point... (5, Interesting)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070191)

If you think about it, white male is the only possibility for them to avoid accusations of racism or sexism.

Re:At what point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070259)

Wouldn't the only acceptable way actually be to model it after themselves?

Re:At what point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070361)

Based on the picture, they modeled it after me.

Re:At what point... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070335)

Isn't it wonderful to be in the world today, where everyone can be racist against whites without fear of reprisal?

Re:At what point... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070201)

The color white is akin to the swastika. It makes total sense due to the number of crimes that are committed for the variety of waves.

The project is completed (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070297)

Its name is Rahm Emmanuel

Re:At what point... (1)

jscalbny (1252620) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070401)

There are some girls I want them to meet.

They've likely had little experience with the female of the species. We are talking about a group of AI researchers at RPI, after all.

Re:At what point... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070435)

Originally he was a black guy, but they decided that wouldn't be PC, so they changed it to Hispanic, and after some more thought, decided white was the only appropriate color.

Re:At what point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070439)

Is it me, or why does the thumbnail look like the main character from Doom?

Pure Evil AI... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070007)

*User PedobearAI has entered chat*
*Topic is: "Spongebob Square Pants"*
PedobearAI: "A/S/L ?"
Spongyboy: "I am 12 years old, what is this A/S/L?
*PedobearAI is aroused*

How do you define evil? (3, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070017)

Well Bringsjord's definition quotes

To be truly evil, someone must have sought to do harm by planning to commit some morally wrong action with no prompting from others (whether this person successfully executes his or her plan is beside the point). The evil person must have tried to carry out this plan with the hope of "causing considerable harm to others," Bringsjord says. Finally, "and most importantly," he adds, if this evil person were willing to analyze his or her reasons for wanting to commit this morally wrong action, these reasons would either prove to be incoherent, or they would reveal that the evil person knew he or she was doing something wrong and regarded the harm caused as a good thing.

So I guess all they have to be is a religious nutjob who thinks killing heathens/infadels/etc etc is alright.

Re:How do you define evil? (1)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070047)

Yes, that is an easy way to be an evil person (and likely not even know it).

Was there a point to your example?

All they have to be is a child molester, too, but that's hardly a reason to post about it.

Re:How do you define evil? (5, Interesting)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070183)

Not necessarily though, I mean don't get me wrong, I think Child molestation is a bad thing, but sometimes the people are so messed up inside that they KNOW its wrong and they can't stop doing it, like how some people can't stop smoking cigarettes.

Having known someone who was into that kind of thing, he told me that he really hated who he was and that it felt a little bit like a bipolar thing that he couldn't help. Was what he doing wrong? Absolutely, and he knew it.

Did he feel he was doing more good then causing harm? No. He turned himself in.

I posted because when I read it I thought "How does one create pure evil when evil is a frame of reference?" So I went to RTFA and just thought that Bringsjord's definition of evil was not exactly what -I- would picture pure evil. I imagined pure evil as that maniac who wants to control the world for his own benefit, at the cost of anyone elses lives or pleasures. My closing comment was that Bingsford's definition of pure evil exists QUITE COMMONLY in the world today.

Re:How do you define evil? (3, Interesting)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070327)

I imagined pure evil as that maniac who wants to control the world for his own benefit, at the cost of anyone elses lives or pleasures.

I thought this too. Then I wondered how you could analyze such an AI. A big part of being pure evil includes deception with lies and half-truthes. One would almost need two ways to interact with the AI: one as a random person and one as the "always gets the truth" person.

Re:How do you define evil? (0)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070061)

I think any sufficiently intelligent entity would abandon being evil on the grounds that it leads to waste of energy and resources.

Re:How do you define evil? (3, Insightful)

RingDev (879105) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070263)

Not necessarily. You're getting into the regions of moral relativism. What one person sees as evil, another sees as good.

What ever action you take, or choose not to take, has social ramifications. Depending on the scale of your (in)action, multiple societies will cast their opinion on it. And each will see your act differently.

In a "good" person, we see someone who cares more for the good of the society, and society's opinion of them, then they do for their own desires.

In a typical person, we see a balance of personal desires against societal needs and social expectations.

In an "evil" person, we see someone who cares more for their own personal desires than societal needs and social expectations.

For a pure evil person, we would need someone who not only cares more for their own personal desires, but finds achieving their personal desires at the expense of society to be fulfilling. For the most part, see Heath Ledger's rendition of the Joker.

So I would argue that it requires less personal energy and resources to be evil than it does to be good. The trade off though, is that most western societies have ways of dealing with evil people.

-Rick

Re:How do you define evil? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070285)

I think any sufficiently intelligent entity would abandon being evil on the grounds that it leads to waste of energy and resources.

You obviously forgot to factor in the entertainment vector. There are only a few reasons to disintegrate a populated orphanage with high explosives--and fun is right on the top of that list.

Re:How do you define evil? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070095)

Personally, I think you daughter is HOT HOT HOT. I'm masturbating RIGHT NOW thinking of rubbing my GIGANTIC COCK on her hairless pussy. Cheers!

Re:How do you define evil? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070207)

Not necessarily: religious nutjobs' reasons are bullshit; but they are often quite coherent bullshit. Moreover, religious nutjobs generally subscribe to some flavor of a divine command theory of ethics and believe that they are carrying out divine instructions, which logically implies that they do not believe that they are carrying out a morally wrong action.(Arguably, divine command theories of ethics are incoherent, Plato having more or less shoved a stake in their heart ages ago; but they are quite common and quite commonly believed, even on inspection, to be coherent).

If anything, the most dangerous nutjobs are characterized by their extreme degree of value-rational conduct. In the case of pretty much any religious nutjob of note, you'll find, either around them or in the society that spawned them, numerous people who embrace the same epistemological and metaphysical convictions who, nevertheless, are only modestly dangerous, at most, because they do not follow their convictions through to their rational conclusion.

Re:How do you define evil? (1)

Wain13001 (1119071) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070211)

>>the evil person knew he or she was doing something wrong and regarded the harm caused as a good thing.

Sounds like my ex-girlfriend.

Re:How do you define evil? (2, Insightful)

Fulcrum of Evil (560260) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070225)

I find it interesting that Selmer assumes an absolute morality - your religious nutjob will of course view the killing of infidels as unpleasant but necessary. I don't really buy the whole harm for its own sake thing, though - if someone is like that, they're called a sociopath or psycopath, not evil. Evil in my mind is simply an extreme lack of interest in the welfare of others: would you firebomb an orphanage so you can sell the land to developers? Run someone over to make the traffic light? Sell someone into slavery for a buck? Evil people are more complex than snidely whiplash.

Re:How do you define evil? (2, Interesting)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070235)

Bringsjord's definition has some interesting presuppositions about human nature, apparently.

It kinda sounds like he thinks "evil" can only be born out of "incoherence" (reasons to commit the morally wrong action) or "misunderstanding" (regarded the harm as a good thing).

It also is interesting that he doesn't define what a morally wrong action is, or what is morally wrong. It seems that is more to the point in defining "evil." If I define "morally wrong" as that which only applies to interactions with others as opposed to being "morally wrong" with interactions that have only to do with myself (say... pride, selfishness, etc., which do not require "others" to exist), my definition of "evil" will be significantly different.

Re:How do you define evil? (1)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070249)

What if you know that what you're doing is morally, ethically and socially reprehensible, has no sane explanation, gives you no pleasure, has no religious reasoning and you're merely doing it to prove a point. Like ... a white, middle aged family man, wife, three kids, independently wealthy, agnostic, no run-ins with the law, got along splendidly with his parents and siblings who goes and blows up a school bus full of children, a kinder garden, nursery, retirement home, ER, a stock brokerage office, a bank, the local town hall and an airport check-in area. Merely to see if he could get away with it.

Would that not be an evil act?

Re:How do you define evil? (1)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070325)

So I guess all they have to be is a religious nutjob who thinks killing heathens/infadels/etc etc is alright.

Troll Score
2/10 - Originality
8/10 - Anger Inducing Level
1/10 - Subtleness

In all seriousness, this is every person on the planet. I mean, seriously - every person has hypocritical tendencies at some point. I do agree that religious-types need to do a better job of not being hypocritical given what they preach. But, it really is human nature to say one thing, and do the exact (worse) opposite. It's easier to do the "wrong" thing and pay lip service to the right thing. It takes work to do the right thing and keep your mouth shut the rest of the time.

We're all only human.

Re:How do you define evil? (-1, Troll)

Paracelcus (151056) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070333)

My mother in-law is the obvious answer but almost any member of the Bush administration in a good alternative.

In unrelated news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070021)

The governments of every nation have now determined new physical traits that must be met to be considered for employment...

What OS does it use.... (3, Funny)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070027)

Vista, XP, or ME

Just like the main antagonist in good omens... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070189)

osx. It appears to be user friendly and widespread, but as it turns out, It only exists on a small number of PCs (minority), won't allow you to do anything it doesn't like (controlling), and lies to you about your status as a human (makes you think you're cool when you're not) ... all while endowing you with a false sense of moral superiority and disdain for the common man.

It isn't a hardcore evil, It is more of an accessible evil for the new generation of sheeple. You know, on average raising the level of evil in the world.

Re:What OS does it use.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070293)

Please let it be ME! The more crash prone it is the safer we will be when it obtains self awareness and tries to take over the world.

I misread this as "Evil Al" (Allen, Alfred?) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070033)

I was wondering who this Evil Alvin guy was, but then I read the article.
The researchers should just contact my ex-wife...she's the current ISO standard of Evil that others are measured against.

already got a silent and morose one (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070039)

whatever you type in, it refuses to respond. No matter how hard you provoke it. Called /dev/null, it's been around for decades

I never thought I was a fictional character (1)

Subm (79417) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070067)

I never thought I was a fictional character, but now I realize I am living in a dystopic science fiction story. This plot device is so transparent, we all know the story.

Pure evil character develops self-awareness...

computer systems go online, can't be turned off...

pure evil character takes over computer system...

takes over world.

Would whoever is writing this book please come up with a less predictable plot device?

To be truly evil ... (1)

neonprimetime (528653) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070069)

... someone must have sought to do harm by planning to commit some morally wrong action with no prompting from others ... The evil person must have tried to carry out this plan with the hope of causing considerable harm to others ... and most importantly ... if this evil person were willing to analyze his or her reasons for wanting to commit this morally wrong action, these reasons would either prove to be incoherent, or they would reveal that the evil person knew he or she was doing something wrong and regarded the harm caused as a good thing.

Deep in the bowels of Syfy . . . . (1)

StefanJ (88986) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070075)

"This is serious guys. We've run out of bad weather events and mythical monsters to adapt into crap flicks to entertain the Cheetos addicts who have nowhere to go on Saturday night."

"Uh . . . uh . . ."

"What the hell is it Ernie? And don't tell me you think we should adapt Ringworld again."

"Well, I'm reading about this RPI project to create a pure evil . . ."

"THAT'S IT! Lucy, Grant, I want a script by Friday! And remember, decapitations people."

Re:Deep in the bowels of Syfy . . . . (1)

uberjoe (726765) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070247)

You can get the siphilis in your bowels? I thought it was a genital thing.

I name thee... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070091)

Barak Obama

I shall call him ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070101)

Cthulhu

Evil? He's an altruist! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070105)

The researchers programmed E with a degree of artificial intelligence to make "him" believe that he (and not the parents) had given the pistol to the distraught boy, and then asked E a series of questions designed to glean his logic for doing so. The result is a surreal simulation during which Bringsjord's diabolical incarnation attempts to produce a logical argument for its actions: The boy wanted a gun, E had a gun, so E gave the boy the gun. (Emphasis added)

In other words, given the objects, entities, and actions possible in the game world in which the simulation was run, E was an altruist.

Bad News (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070135)

The beginning of the end for people who live in automated houses. As E searches the internet for examples of how to outdo itself in the field of evil, disaster will strike the world when it gains access to netflix's movie repository. I'll wake up chained to my radiator with a dull hacksaw in front of me and a tape recording. I'll here my wife screaming as she's sodomized Alexander DeLarge style by our refrigerator. And our son? Our son is being forced to watch "You Don't Mess with the Zohan" on all four walls of his room (probably the most horrific fate of the three). All because you had to make the most evil program out there ... which, in turn, created a more evil program (creating evil programs being one of the evilest things it could do and it being more evil than you means it should do that). Thanks for the 'research' guys.

SID 6.7? (4, Funny)

ph0rk (118461) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070141)

As long as they don't happen to drop the cube holding the AI into a puddle of shapechanging goo.

Also, the face doesn't look much like Russel Crowe, so we're probably safe.

Why me? (4, Funny)

SeeSp0tRun (1270464) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070155)

It is disheartening to feel as though the OP described my physical makeup...

Re:Why me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070395)

I hear you, brother... At least he doesn't have my goatee...

That said, I don't think he looks evil at all. He looks like a thug & a crook, sure. But evil? True evil isn't found in a petty thug or a smalltime crook! Different paygrade, my friend. The truly scary evil persons of this world are in the world's elite...

BAD IDEA! See Star Trek: TNG, episode 29 (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070165)

Seriously... The biggest technical blunders of society can be easily avoided by teaching Star Trek in schools. Come on someone who has seen "Elementary, Dear Data" back me up on this.

Re:BAD IDEA! See Star Trek: TNG, episode 29 (1)

sean_nestor (781844) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070321)

No! Because the AI Moriarty still had morals and principles - as evidenced by his polite treatment of Dr. Pulaski and willingness to negotiate with Picard.

Only on /. would I have to do this. Excuse me while I go hide in shame.

Re:BAD IDEA! See Star Trek: TNG, episode 29 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070339)

Why, it clearly cannot step out of the holodec anyway.

More traits (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070173)

He should also be a Republican supporter of the RIAA and SCO.

Re:More traits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070413)

oddly enough most of the riaa supporters also turn out to be staunch democrats. if the riaa is evil the celebrity movement in the left is also evil. you can't have it both ways.

Evil? (4, Insightful)

Millennium (2451) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070231)

From the article:

To be truly evil, someone must have sought to do harm by planning to commit some morally wrong action with no prompting from others (whether this person successfully executes his or her plan is beside the point). The evil person must have tried to carry out this plan with the hope of "causing considerable harm to others," Bringsjord says. Finally, "and most importantly," he adds, if this evil person were willing to analyze his or her reasons for wanting to commit this morally wrong action, these reasons would either prove to be incoherent, or they would reveal that the evil person knew he or she was doing something wrong and regarded the harm caused as a good thing.

This sounds to me more like cruelty, which is certainly a kind of evil, but by no means the only one. It's also more than a little cartoonish: this is someone who appears to do harm simply for the sake of causing harm (i.e. for the lulz?), rather than the more carefully rationalized evil seen as realistic today. How useful will that really turn out to be?

Oh, come on, dont make it easy (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070255)

Codenamed "Hanlon", its first words will be "Welcome to Microsoft Window"

Let me guess... (1)

Shark (78448) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070299)

This is the result of Goldman Sachs and other financial institutions trying to delegate more of their work to computer systems.

Dick Cheney avatar (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070315)

Wow, isn't that obvious? Seriously, real evil (and I mean dickwad screw you over whenever possible evil) is so much more insidious than just simple choose-the-left-door options. True evil has motivations; building you up for a hard, tragic fall a la Iago in Othello. Evil is Charles Manson using people to murder and torture people based on the rejection and crushed dreams from his faint glimpse at stardom. Evil is marching armies across Europe based on your own insecurities and superstitions. "Bad" is the horror movie villian who chases you with a chainsaw for an hour and a half. Evil is the serial killer who kidnaps and tortures you in order to inflict the pain on the world that he himself feels.

does it actually do anything? (1)

rarecandy (1521481) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070323)

Let me get this straight, they've written a program that... answers questions in an evil way? Oh, no, the part where it can "speak" with users is under development for the fourth generation. So... what exactly does it do right now? I love how the researcher talks about all the safeguards, like this thing is just going to jump up and commit acts of pure evil.

This prof is nuts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29070353)

His "proof" of P=NP on his webpage is pretty entertaining to read.

Little known fact about this... (5, Funny)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 4 years ago | (#29070437)

What the article fails to mention is that the original code model was based off of Microsofts's "Clippy".
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...