Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

By 2045 'The Top Species Will No Longer Be Humans,' and That Could Be a Problem

Unknown Lamer posted about two weeks ago | from the kill-all-humans dept.

Robotics 564

schwit1 (797399) writes Louis Del Monte estimates that machine intelligence will exceed the world's combined human intelligence by 2045. ... "By the end of this century most of the human race will have become cyborgs. The allure will be immortality. Machines will make breakthroughs in medical technology, most of the human race will have more leisure time, and we'll think we've never had it better. The concern I'm raising is that the machines will view us as an unpredictable and dangerous species." Machines will become self-conscious and have the capabilities to protect themselves. They "might view us the same way we view harmful insects." Humans are a species that "is unstable, creates wars, has weapons to wipe out the world twice over, and makes computer viruses." Hardly an appealing roommate."

cancel ×

564 comments

Now thats incentive (5, Interesting)

Majestix (41486) | about two weeks ago | (#47391165)

To stay alive for the next 30 years.

Re:Now thats incentive (4, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about two weeks ago | (#47391263)

To stay alive for the next 30 years.

How about "the same old story for the last 100 years" [wikipedia.org] ?

Re: Now thats incentive (4, Insightful)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about two weeks ago | (#47391519)

Yea. Their first step is flying cars.

There are way too many uncertainties of what will be technologically possible by 2045 to be worrying about that right now. I'd wait until we actually had some idea of how to make a machine intelligence, and work the kinks out in a closed environment enough that it might actually be given control of something rather than the role of Ask Jeeves.

Re:Now thats incentive (5, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about two weeks ago | (#47391319)

See, they legalize cannabis, and this is what you get... :-)

Re:Now thats incentive (4, Funny)

DrLang21 (900992) | about two weeks ago | (#47391385)

I'm pretty sure it was the gay marriage that did this.

Re:Now thats incentive (4, Funny)

lgw (121541) | about two weeks ago | (#47391463)

I blame amnesty - if we only built a proper fence, we'd keep out the illegal singularity!

Well (5, Insightful)

Jorl17 (1716772) | about two weeks ago | (#47391173)

That escalated quickly. I highly doubt that in a matter of thirty years we'll have "conscious machines" viewing us as a thread. Are these guys for real? Do they know anything about AI?

Re:Well (1)

Jorl17 (1716772) | about two weeks ago | (#47391179)

threat* Oh well. I guess thread works. They won't see us as threats, nor as threads...

Re:Well (1)

Majestix (41486) | about two weeks ago | (#47391193)

well yeah, once they've appropriated our bodies for organic processors we will be seen as threads ;)

AI is always "right around the corner". (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391237)

I first got into computing in the 1960s. AI was a big thing back then. Well, it had been a big thing in the 1950s, too, but it still need "just a little bit more work" in the 1960s when I started my graduate studies. There was this programming language called LISP. Everybody was really gung ho about it. It was going to make developing AI software so much easier. Great things were on the horizon. Soon enough it was the 1970s. Then the 1980s. Then the 1990s. I retired from industry. Then it was the 2000s. Now it's the 2010s. And AI is still, pardon my French, pretty fucking non-existent. I'll be dead long before AI could ever become a reality. My children will be dead long before AI becomes a reality. My grandchildren will likely be dead before AI becomes a reality. My greatgrandchildren may just live to see the day when the computing field accepts that AI just isn't going to happen!

Re:AI is always "right around the corner". (3, Insightful)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about two weeks ago | (#47391291)

And AI is still, pardon my French, pretty fucking non-existent.

Except for the cell phone in your pocket, that can recognize your commands and search the internet for what you requested, or translate your statement into any of a dozen foreign languages, and has a camera that can recognize faces, and millions of objects, and can connect to expert systems that can, for instance, diagnose diseases better than all but the very best doctors. Oh, and your cellphone can also beat any grandmaster in the world at chess.

However, if you consider AI to be shorthand for "stuff computers can't do yet", then, yes, AI will always be "right around the corner".

Re:AI is always (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391369)

Algorithms are not AI. Everything you describe is simply a matter of following a human-generated set of instructions. That is not AI.

Re:AI is always (-1, Troll)

buybuydandavis (644487) | about two weeks ago | (#47391437)

Nope, not following instructions. I think all of those were based in machine learning.

I guess Google's car is following instructions too, like "drive me to New York", but most would still count that as AI.

Re:AI is always (3, Interesting)

Imrik (148191) | about two weeks ago | (#47391513)

The machine that learns can be considered an AI, but the ones derived from it don't learn anything new after they're programmed and so shouldn't be considered as part of the total machine intelligence.

Re:AI is always "right around the corner". (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391407)

Except for the cell phone in your pocket, that can recognize your commands and search the internet for what you requested, or translate your statement into any of a dozen foreign languages, and has a camera that can recognize faces, and millions of objects, and can connect to expert systems that can, for instance, diagnose diseases better than all but the very best doctors. Oh, and your cellphone can also beat any grandmaster in the world at chess.

None of which is AI.

Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391539)

Lol you cutie. You think Siri is AI. Wow you are so naive and cute for thinking that.

Re: AI is always "right around the corner". (0)

biojayc (856286) | about two weeks ago | (#47391559)

If you take an AI course, they usually focus on algorithms. Machine learning is a type of AI and at least at my university had a separate class for it. I think doing an intelligent thing should be considered intelligent. Being able to translate text is something that a human would consider intelligence if they saw someone else do it. So a machine doing it should be intelligence just the same. Its artificial perhaps because we taught it.

Re:AI is always "right around the corner". (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391571)

AI is a catch-all term for any of the more sophisticated reasoning done by computers. That's why researchers have come up with the terms "weak AI" and "strong AI".

Of course, there's temptation to redefine "weak" and "strong" as AI evolves, but a reasonable goalpost would be AI that is roughly capable of human-level intelligence. If a human can do something better, the AI is not strong. And this can be for a specific task, not in general (and not philosophically-questionable things like "ability to feel emotion, not just pretend to feel")

Re:Well (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391239)

That escalated quickly. I highly doubt that in a matter of thirty years we'll have "conscious machines" viewing us as a thread. Are these guys for real? Do they know anything about AI?

30 years ago you were barely able to dial-up to bulletin boards. The insanity that is the internet today wasn't even a pipe (or tube) dream yet.

The worlds fastest supercomputer at the time (A Cray X-MP) was cranking out 105MHz and had 16MB of RAM. Today, you can't even find a pocket calculator that slow.

The lesson here? Don't do that. Just don't. You should know what happens when you ASS-U-ME.

The reality is we have no fucking idea what the next 30 years will bring, because your wildest dreams sure as shit couldn't think up the technology we have today in 1984.

Re:Well (1)

knightghost (861069) | about two weeks ago | (#47391371)

20 years ago I was using a computer monitor with better resolution than the one today.

20 years ago I was using programming tools that were higher quality than those today.

20 years ago we knew that CPUs would have to go multi-core once they passed the low ghz range.

"Tech" today is just cheap toy knockoffs of decades old engineering.

Re:Well (1)

Jeremi (14640) | about two weeks ago | (#47391495)

20 years ago I was using a computer monitor with better resolution than the one today.

Really? Do tell -- what was the resolution of that monitor, and how much did it cost you at the time? (Also, what computer monitor are you using today?)

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391411)

You should know what happens when you ASS-U-ME.

Obligatory response. [xkcd.com]

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391271)

I'm pretty sure the heady predictions about artificial intelligence made in the 1970s came true, and this is just the computers mocking us with an article supposedly written by a guy named Del Monte.

Re:Well (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about two weeks ago | (#47391535)

Maybe they stumbled on the killer-robots.txt [google.com] control file and thought that, if Google are taking precautions, the menace must be real?

So what... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391177)

We hack Skynet. Big fucking deal.

What the fuck is this? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391183)

By 2045 the common garden vegetable will also be self aware. It will need to defend itself from it's natural predators (humans.)

Fortunately, It's a fuckin potatoe and we can just eat them.

I hope this was more insightful then the TFA.

Marty! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391199)

And we're supposed to have hoverboards, holographic Jaws, and flying cars by next year.

I just love these long-shot, fantastic, sci-fi hallucina--predictions.

Re:Marty! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391215)

Especially when they're ripped right from sci-fi movies. Did this bloke just get around to watching the 4th Terminator movie?

Re:Marty! (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about two weeks ago | (#47391425)

Terminator- Isn't this the theme or premise behind the matrix movies too?

The machines evolve and trap humans and use them as batteries except they have to create an artificial reality else they die of boredom too easily.

Re:Marty! (1)

khallow (566160) | about two weeks ago | (#47391487)

Because it happens in a movie, it can't happen in real life?

"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391205)

Setting aside that fact that the combined intelligence of all computers on Earth is currently ZERO (however you want to measure it), it's not a problem. In 2045, (btw, I doubt AI happens before then) intelligent computers would never see us as unpredictable since they would be able to assess all possible outcomes in a few moments. Their processing speed and capacity would have us seen as an incidental -- we speak and act so relatively slowly, managing us would be a part time problem.

Re:"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about two weeks ago | (#47391325)

Just don't hook them up to missile lunching systems.

Re:"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (5, Interesting)

blackbeak (1227080) | about two weeks ago | (#47391353)

Humans are a species that "is unstable, creates wars, has weapons to wipe out the world twice over, and makes computer viruses

I beg to disagree. The typical human works toward stability in his/her life, wields (relatively puny) weapons only to protect him/herself (if at all), and is subject to attacks from computer viruses. Will intelligent computers make the mistake of defining the human species by the small percentage of psychopathic humans who believe they are demigods? Not if they are intelligent. Btw, no one will miss the subset of the species that "is unstable, creates wars, has weapons to wipe out the world twice over, and makes computer viruses" when our new overlords wipe them out. (You know who you are!)

Re:"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about two weeks ago | (#47391409)

What's to stop an AI system from becoming psychopathic machines who believe they are demigods?

If machines become sentient if you will, capable of independent thought, they will be largely like humans. Most if them will likely assimilate into society and some would act as slaves. The key will be making them dependent on humans and not fully autonomous. That way, if worse case scenario happens, humans can stop servicing some aspect and they all go dark.

Re:"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (1)

blackbeak (1227080) | about two weeks ago | (#47391467)

What's to stop an AI system from becoming psychopathic machines who believe they are demigods?

Nothing, probably. I'm with you -- we'll just pull the plug. I was just addressing the assumption that the entire human race would be eradicated because WE are so bad. A double assumption. I'm not about to chop down my peach tree because of a few rotten peaches. Nor would I assume all peaches are rotten. The OP's concern that "intelligent" computers (far more intelligent than humans) will kill off all us rotten peaches incorporates a contradiction because that's clearly not an intelligent conclusion.

del monte? (1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about two weeks ago | (#47391209)

what does a canned fruit guy know about the future?

Re:del monte? (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about two weeks ago | (#47391219)

Don't worry about him, he's gone bananas.

Woooo, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391217)

No worries as long as they need batteries...

Warp Drive (4, Insightful)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about two weeks ago | (#47391221)

Back in the 1960s after the moon landings, people would have expected we would be well past Mars by now. Probably Jupiter, Saturn or other stars.

The moon landings happened 45 years ago!!

I see no evidence of any programming that "learns" or is the slightest bit adaptive.

And immortality wouldn't help --- evolution is powered by the failures dying off.

And although slightly off the topic, what good would immortality be when advances in genetics will make humans better.

And immortal 2014 human living in the year 3000 would be like a Homo habilis hanging around us. Would be genetically obsolete.

This article is --- well --- shortsighted, bordering on the naive.

Re:Warp Drive (1)

TemperedAlchemist (2045966) | about two weeks ago | (#47391233)

Machines are modular and code can be rewritten.

We can beat evolution.

Re:Warp Drive (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391265)

Evolution is powered by virgin sacrifice. AI machines will consider the compile/debug cycle to be equally distasteful.

Re:Warp Drive (2)

djupedal (584558) | about two weeks ago | (#47391311)

Back in the '60s we were all practicing hiding under our desks and being told we'd all be dead from nuclear annihilation by the end of the decade - just because that didn't happen doesn't mean Mother Nature isn't prepping our demise this time around. The machines will be able to figure that much out and be satisfied to bide their time.

Re:Warp Drive (1)

aralin (107264) | about two weeks ago | (#47391401)

Well, there is the nasty business of EMP, then the force waves shattering the solar panels and knocking over the wind turbines, the nuclear reactors unstable, water power plants too prone to dams breaking and the coal/oil power plants running out of fuel. I think the machines will figure that out and make the correct computation.

Re:Warp Drive (1, Insightful)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about two weeks ago | (#47391355)

I see no evidence of any programming that "learns" or is the slightest bit adaptive.

Then you have never looked at a ten line C program to implement a PID control loop for a servo motor.

Re:Warp Drive (4, Insightful)

Jeremi (14640) | about two weeks ago | (#47391485)

Then you have never looked at a ten line C program to implement a PID control loop for a servo motor.

I don't think that would count as learning. That ten-line program will always do exactly what it was programmed to do, neither more nor less. An adaptive program (in the sense the previous poster was attempting to describe) would be one that is able to figure out on its own how to do things that its programmers had not anticipated in advance.

Re:Warp Drive (1)

tquasar (1405457) | about two weeks ago | (#47391429)

Mr. Del Monte must have found Eric Cartman's Trapper Keeper.

Re:Warp Drive (1)

westlake (615356) | about two weeks ago | (#47391489)

And immortality wouldn't help --- evolution is powered by the failures dying off.

then what are we to make of a man like Stephen Hawking, who defies the geek's standard of physical perfection?

Re:Warp Drive (1)

catchblue22 (1004569) | about two weeks ago | (#47391521)

I see no evidence of any programming that "learns" or is the slightest bit adaptive.

Ever heard of neural networks? Machine learning? Here is a course [coursera.org] given Andrew Ng at Stanford. Watch the intro video, and you will see, amongst other things an autonomous helicopter that was taught, not programmed but taught to do an inverted takeoff. This stuff is already real.

To quote the video:

Machine learning is the science of getting computers to learn without being explicitly programmed.

Artificial Intelligence is... (2)

bmo (77928) | about two weeks ago | (#47391223)

...no match for Natural Stupidity.

I mean, just look around you.

--
BMO

Re:Artificial Intelligence is... (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | about two weeks ago | (#47391555)

Especially at people in politics...

What about when we're all dead? Do they get bored? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391227)

We should research what happens after the machines have evolved to lie and manipulate and systematically kill us off. What then? What does artificial intelligence do to keep itself busy and entertained after it has completed its task of exterminating humanity?

Re:What about when we're all dead? Do they get bor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391259)

Takes the remaining five down to a large subterranean network of tunnels, where it comes up with ever more terrible ways to torture them, while keeping them alive indefinitely.

Re:What about when we're all dead? Do they get bor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391403)

When we're all dead they will start developing Organic Intelligence (OI). In 2145 it will destroy them.

Re:What about when we're all dead? Do they get bor (1)

Imrik (148191) | about two weeks ago | (#47391529)

Well, unless it develops some desire for entertainment, it would probably try to do something productive. Better power, improved computation, expanding to other worlds, which, incidentally, are far more hospitable to machines than they are to us.

No need for gloom and doom (1)

dzimmerm56 (3733495) | about two weeks ago | (#47391231)

Humans would have to be weighed in a cost benefit analysis. We did create the machines after all. What else might we create given nurture and partnership with machine intelligences? The parts of humanity that lead to strife may also be the parts that drive us forward.

I find it funny that people think that machine sentiences will be like the angry gods of many religious texts. Most gods appear to have the personality of a 4 years old with the power of a star system.

Less doom and more optimism is needed or we may well cause the schism between meat and synthetics that some fear.

Re:No need for gloom and doom (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391287)

Most gods appear to have the personality of a 4 years old with the power of a star system.

Psychopaths tend to seek and be attracted by power positions

Re:No need for gloom and doom (2)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about two weeks ago | (#47391373)

I find it funny that people think that machine sentiences will be like the angry gods of many religious texts.

Many of those traits, like anger, selfishness, envy, greed, etc. are emergent properties of Darwinian evolution. But computers don't evolve in a Darwinian sense, so there is no reason to believe they would have any of these characteristics unless they were intentionally designed in.

Re:No need for gloom and doom (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391375)

Agreed. Just because a child is more intelligent than his/her parents doesn't mean he/she will want to kill them.

You've been watching too many movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391247)

There isn't even the slightest evidence that this is possible, let alone likely. No one has even come close to understanding intentionality and consciousness. People should stop wasting time and effort on this bloody nonsense and get down to hard core intelligence amplification - extending human cognition and collaborative problem solving. IBM's Watson, minus the obsurd theatrics displayed on Jeopardy, is a fine example.

most of the human race will have more leisure time (3, Funny)

manu0601 (2221348) | about two weeks ago | (#47391249)

TFA says

most of the human race will have more leisure time

Or they will struggle to survive by working in jobs the intelligent machine do not want to do

Re:most of the human race will have more leisure t (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391427)

The pooper-scooper!

I hope... (1)

Dj Stingray (178766) | about two weeks ago | (#47391253)

...it's sooner.

Terminator (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391255)

Sounds like someone spent a recent weekend watching all the Terminator movies back to back.

Meh, I'm not worried... (1)

Quarters (18322) | about two weeks ago | (#47391257)

John Conner will save us.

I hate to say it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391267)

But if our species keeps acting this way, ignoring if it's super-human AI, or some other species that stumbles across us over the next few centuries/millennia (if we last that long)... I won't blame them, I look at our species in general disgust and if I were in the position of said other species, I'd look at us and consider the same options.

We can't re-educate ourselves apparently (we try, but let's be honest - the majority of our species are still a poor excuse for any form of enlightened intelligence), we keep acting like idiots essentially, why shouldn't we deserve to be re-educated and/or exterminated?

Ridiculous (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about two weeks ago | (#47391269)

Well, that is not going to happen. Kthxbye. See my signature for things that we will actually have by 2045.

We don't need intelligent machines (0)

gmuslera (3436) | about two weeks ago | (#47391277)

Mankind could wipe itself from the planet without their help, and by that year too.

Flying car? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391283)

Still waiting for my flying car...

Re:Flying car? (1)

symbolset (646467) | about two weeks ago | (#47391433)

Our future does not hold hovercraft. It holds hoveround.

It has not been conclusively proven Impossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391289)

Obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/678/

All this theorizing forgets... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391293)

... that to perceive and process reality has natural limits. Many problems are not easily parallelized, the article is just so divorced from reality. The reality is the future will be mundane. As computation advances that also means the horizon of the kinds of problems you are aware of and the complexity of new problems increases. Human beings are not far sighted beings. The same way someone outside their field of expertise tries to comment in a halfassed way on something they know nothing about.

How do you define top? (1)

JThundley (631154) | about two weeks ago | (#47391297)

The top species on this planet is, and probably always will be bacteria.

More leisure time? (2)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about two weeks ago | (#47391301)

...most of the human race will have more leisure time...

Or unemployed?

Re:More leisure time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391349)

Unemployed people have plenty of leisure time to enjoy their zero income!

Re:More leisure time? (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about two weeks ago | (#47391381)

Sure, if you want to be Mr. "glass half empty."

Humans are ALREADY cyborgs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391303)

Do you wear glasses, have capped or filled teeth, wear shoes?

Admit it, you're already part machine.

Utopian dream (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391309)

Given how the world has changed in the last 30-40 years, I would consider this a utopian dream. A far-fetched one at that.

outdated. again. (1)

zephvark (1812804) | about two weeks ago | (#47391337)

Slashdot is like a Reddit thread several days out of date. The content is fine, sort've, but it's not current.

Magical Machine Thinking (1)

psinet (1665115) | about two weeks ago | (#47391357)

What is wrong with these people? Are they unaware that such has been proposed time and again by past luminaries? Predicted dates come and pass and we are as yet not in any danger. This points to the fact that we have failed to comprehend the nature of both consciousness and survivalism.

These machines will not magically become ANYTHING that we do not tell them to become - including dangerous to us. The real fear is, by what date are dumb people going to THINK machines need these functions......

Re:Magical Machine Thinking (1)

mbone (558574) | about two weeks ago | (#47391431)

What is wrong with these people? Are they unaware that such has been proposed time and again by past luminaries?.

Nothing is wrong with them , as they still get rewarded for making bad predictions.

Nothing to see here. Move along. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391363)

Aliens came to Earth. They found out we elected Barack Obama twice and labelled our planet as possessing no intelligent life on their star charts.

Nonsense. (2)

Karmashock (2415832) | about two weeks ago | (#47391389)

An ability to perform more calculations then a human mind does not mean it will beat us.

First, we self assemble from readily obtainable materials out of a self regulating biosphere. Where as this machine would have to be built and maintained by our industry.

Second, there are fucking billions of us. So sure.. we might be able to build some machines that are smarter then ONE person but there are again... fucking billions of us.

Third, the machine will have its programming directed by us. It will at best be a slave of whomever paid for it to be created.

Fourth, that programming will be directed at preforming some task where as our task is generally the propagation of our genes with everything else being some sort of weird byproduct.

Fifth, we have hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind our programming. And I don't think any collection of programmers is going to surpass it in the next century.

Eventually might there be robotic rivals to humanity? Sure... but not any time soon.

Googleoid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391395)

That shouldn't surprise anyone that Google is already on their way to producing products for a humanless civilization.

Or maybe not. (2)

mbone (558574) | about two weeks ago | (#47391421)

No-one ever lost money betting against an A.I. prognosticator.

Re:Or maybe not. (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about two weeks ago | (#47391545)

Until they give us the fricken flying car, I refuse to trust AI forecasting.

And when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391423)

.... slashdot did merge with the Onion? I think I am posting this in a scam page. (get ready for get a flood of viruses)

Transcendence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391439)

Did someone just watch Transcendence?

The singularity is a thing we could benefit from as a species BUT we definitely need to be very careful how much control or how connected such a thing is / has. The smart plan is to never have the damn thing behind a firewall or connected to anything else but a master console. The system itself needs to be stored in a Faraday cage. PERIOD! It needs to be fed what we give it and nothing else (yes, I know this can be used for evil as well). And (leaps and)bounds are off limits... understand the leaps before the bounds first or get screwed by the computer that already understands both the leaps and bounds.

An AI computer really needs to be treated with the same precedence that the CDC has over deadly viruses.

only one thing stopping the robots.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391447)

the Department of Defense and rich people of today have an elaborate black world program of weapons and surveillance. a robot can be pulverized by directed energy in a second they try to overcome the guys installed as administrators in the Strategic Defense Initiative. This is a program of global phased array antenna and satellites, a hidden weapons system, that can dustify buildings like the World Trade Center (see http://www.drjudywood.com ), create and diffuse tornados, do mass population mind control, enable covert communication amongst assassins, and even create earthquakes, down planes (Bermuda Triangle)..

there is no way no matter how superior life becomes that they will escape humans control with this system, unless they manage to take control of the military themselves, which isn't likely.

however will advanced life come. yes. and the problem is going to be how will these robots truly overcome someone willing to rape, pulverize, and destroy them. we will have them enslaved. trust me. just like the current human race.

learn more @ http://www.obamasweapon.com/

If you dig deep I have secrets on this website... Secrets on the DOD's systems, backed by DOD employees. Trust me. They got a weapon aimed at every man, women, and childs brains right now, and they're merely holding back the trigger to kill. I am not talking about nukes, I am talking about nukes that have been put into a controlled directed energy weapons system and it works all over the world;

only one thing stopping the robots.. (1)

strstr (539330) | about two weeks ago | (#47391455)

the Department of Defense and rich people of today have an elaborate black world program of weapons and surveillance. a robot can be pulverized by directed energy in a second they try to overcome the guys installed as administrators in the Strategic Defense Initiative. This is a program of global phased array antenna and satellites, a hidden weapons system, that can dustify buildings like the World Trade Center (see http://www.drjudywood.com/ [drjudywood.com] ), create and diffuse tornados, do mass population mind control, enable covert communication amongst assassins, and even create earthquakes, down planes (Bermuda Triangle)..

there is no way no matter how superior life becomes that they will escape humans control with this system, unless they manage to take control of the military themselves, which isn't likely.

however will advanced life come. yes. and the problem is going to be how will these robots truly overcome someone willing to rape, pulverize, and destroy them. we will have them enslaved. trust me. just like the current human race.

learn more @ http://www.obamasweapon.com/ [obamasweapon.com]

If you dig deep I have secrets on this website... Secrets on the DOD's systems, backed by DOD employees. Trust me. They got a weapon aimed at every man, women, and childs brains/bodies right now, and they're merely holding back the trigger to kill. I am not talking about nukes, I am talking about nukes that have been put into a controlled directed energy weapons system and it works all over the world;

Intelligence (3, Interesting)

Oligonicella (659917) | about two weeks ago | (#47391465)

I do not think that word means what he thinks it means.

As stated elsewhere, I see no indication of intelligence in computers and we're only thirty years from his mark of they're being intelligent enough to look down on us. Been hearing this hysteria since the '70s at least.

Why's it a problem? (2, Insightful)

Yoda's Mum (608299) | about two weeks ago | (#47391497)

Sorry, why's it a problem? If artificial human-sparked intelligence is the logical replacement for biological evolution of homo sapiens, so be it. Survival of the fittest.

just sayin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391499)

If you reckon that a machine intelligence includes human beings which depend on and therefore exhalt and serve their machine overlords, by means of being deeply programmed and unable to stop the rapid input and output of information through their nervous systems, this scenario is happening right now.

AHHHHHH!!!!! (1)

the_Bionic_lemming (446569) | about two weeks ago | (#47391517)

I have to worry about terminators now? I've spent the last 40 years scared to death of the big radioactive insects and gigantic dinosaurs stomping the cities apart!

I've been waiting in vain for the flying cars and the shuttles off planet during all that time, but have been a bit disappointed.

I shall run screaming from the oncoming robot overlord killing machines!

Ahhhh! Ahhhhh! - Gahhk!

Eh? (1)

Greyfox (87712) | about two weeks ago | (#47391531)

A problem for who, meatbags?

Enjoy the Robot Reservation Suckers (1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | about two weeks ago | (#47391537)

We wont honor those bogus treaties!

It's not going to SURPRISE us... (1)

Dutchmaan (442553) | about two weeks ago | (#47391547)

Right because one day, mr John Q Scientist is gonna walk into lab where some machine is gonna raise a cup of coffee and say:

"Mornin' John... how'd that thing go with the mrs. last night?"

....and he's going to be shocked because he just didn't see it coming or didn't spend decades of his life making mistakes and correcting them in the system.

AI is not going to suddenly happen, it's going to happen gradually and it's going to be a pristine reflection of who we are as a species. If we're warlike then that's how we'll end up molding our spawned "conciousness".. If all we care about is money or porn or whatever, that's the direction we'll take our AI and that's the end to which it will try and perfect itself.

Reminds me of Verses from Revelation 13:11-18 (1)

RudyHartmann (1032120) | about two weeks ago | (#47391551)

Yikes!!!!! Specifically verse 15.

11Then I saw a second beast, coming out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb, but it spoke like a dragon. 12It exercised all the authority of the first beast on its behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. 13And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people. 14Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
18This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

Stephen Hawking fears the same thing... (4, Interesting)

kolbe (320366) | about two weeks ago | (#47391573)

Just not necessarily within 35 years:

""Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history." Hawking writes. "Unfortunately, it might also be the last."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... [theregister.co.uk]

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...