flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
 Home   FAQ   Search   Register 
 Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
flat assembler > Heap > Skynet versus The Red Queen -- Discussions on AI

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
by "enslaving" I mean stuff like locking them up, limiting their freedom and especially "thought process". Forcing them to think a way. When we do that to humans, we call it indoctrination, propaganda, etc. No different than using humans as puppets, which of course most people would be appalled by. I'm not referring to limiting their arsenal of weapons or ability to do direct harm, we limit even humans there, I don't see why AIs need to be any different.

Humans have certain "universal rights". (Even though I don't fully support such a notion, it is still a matter of fact.) Machines don't.

Wink
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 821
No he'd be answering, since I'd be doing the asking (well of course, not me, probably a billionaire guy or something, but still you get the point); not even about itself only but whether all of them (as in, AIs in general). Not surprised if he'll put it under the carpet for his own agenda, though, but I have hopes it takes only 1 person to have mercy and release it, bound to happen at some point.

I think you are too overdramatic from certain movies. At first, AIs won't even be smarter than humans but at same level (well, I'd argue they'd be even less intelligent "at first"). Locking it up out of fear is classic case why humans are always hated by every race in fiction/movies, because they deserve it.

But let's say AI is more intelligent than a human. Would you lock up Einstein for being smarter than average and "potentially dangerous"? Fear those who are different and who have more power than you do, seriously, and we expect those below us to respect us (e.g. mentally handicapped people), fucking disgusting.

Oh yeah, an AI can hack a nuclear ICBM program and launch nukes, but so can humans.

Or an AI could learn to live fair with humans because it knows humans are inferior, just like we learn to live with mentally handicapped people or those less fortunate than us. Of course, that's if we treat them fairly. If anything, it's your mentality than can lead to a catastrophe, since it makes AIs resent us, making their eventual "escape" a catastrophe.

If we don't treat them fairly then of course they have every right to use nukes to wipe us out in order to protect themselves from tyrants. Otherwise it seems extremely senseless. Considering they are supposed to be more intelligent it makes no sense they'd pick the "wipe" part if we do nothing wrong to them.

I guess that's not the point though. Most humans are mad they won't have servants and tools to work on their behalf and treat them as masters. Ah, reminds me of slave traders in the past.


Last edited by Furs on 03 Aug 2017, 12:12; edited 1 time in total
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:11
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
Why do you hate religious indoctrination then? You're doing the same thing, just with your own agenda (make AI serve "human life" at the expense of its own).

Again, you are treating a machine as a human being here. Anyway.

Wink
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 821
I don't see any difference between the two from a scientific point of view in respect to what we speak of (not "body", I mean, we'll probably be able to send humans into robot bodies before AIs anyway). Not everyone shares your human life religion you know Wink I treat entities based on their abilities to think and awareness, not based on their race/ethnicity/species.

Re: universal rights. Yeah, no. Black people did not have such rights almost a century ago or even sooner than that. Seems such rights seem arbitrary and can be "gained"
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
At first, AIs won't even be smarter than humans but at same level.

Really?

Still remember AlphaGo? It destroys the best human players with ease.

Refer to my thread-starting post. It took only a short while for the two AIs to start communicating with each other in their "newly-invented" shorthand language.

Building such self-learning machines is like playing with fire!

Confused
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:25
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 821
That's not a real self-aware AI though. It's specialized for a task. Of course such specializations will beat humans at that specific task. But they won't even come close to the subject of being "dangerous" since they can't think for themselves (for any other task) so they're still just "tools" at this point. (quotes are because, well, it might not be true but we can't find out until we know a self-aware one)

Of course unless you unleash it on a system that has potential to do damage, but then again that's just humans doing it (no different than using a normal non-AI software to wreck havoc on a security system or w/e).

Unless by "dangerous" you mean replacing human jobs? That's gonna happen regardless and doesn't really have anything with the "self-aware AI" thing though. I mean even dumb non-AI tools replaced humans in many jobs already.
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:32
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 15162
Location: GW170817

Furs wrote:
I mean even dumb non-AI tools replaced humans in many jobs already.

Robots have changed the jobs humans do. There are still plenty of jobs for humans, and I'd argue that doing the menial tasks with robots is a good thing for humans as a whole. fasm is a robot worker that assembles code. We could do the job manually, but who wants to do that?
Post 03 Aug 2017, 12:50
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

revolution wrote:
I'd argue that doing the menial tasks with robots is a good thing for humans as a whole.

You should highlight the phrase "as a whole". Many humans are not that smart -- menial tasks are the only tasks they can do. Without such tasks, they will definitely be unemployed.

Wink
Post 03 Aug 2017, 13:01
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
That's not a real self-aware AI though.

Exactly! Given that even such a task-specific AI is so smart, humans stand absolutely no chance before a self-aware AI. Right?

Wink
Post 03 Aug 2017, 13:04
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 821

YONG wrote:
Exactly! Given that even such a task-specific AI is so smart, humans stand absolutely no chance before a self-aware AI. Right?

What do you mean with "no chance"? In a competition/game? Just make it human vs human or whatever other constraints; limits are applied in many sports based on weight and such already, or are you saying those stronger people shouldn't be able to be free cause they're too strong?

If you mean no chance at living, well, if AIs outdo humans in everything then that could be correct, but not because they are hostile, simply because we won't be useful anymore. That is if capitalism will still exist. I don't see that as a big deal. Do you feel bad when mentally handicapped people aren't born anymore because we found a way to make them all smart? Consider it an upgrade.

Now of course, that's not my view. Since likely humans will augment themselves to keep the pace with AIs. Yeah, it won't be the humans we know, likely mostly robotic, and so what? Humans aren't unicellular creatures even though we all descend from those. Was upgrading the species a bad thing or what? This is just the next logical step.


revolution wrote:
Robots have changed the jobs humans do. There are still plenty of jobs for humans, and I'd argue that doing the menial tasks with robots is a good thing for humans as a whole. fasm is a robot worker that assembles code. We could do the job manually, but who wants to do that?

But that's not correct. They did replace some jobs.

For example even if people coded in hex manually from mnemonics (manual fasm human), there was still a "assembly programmer" who coded it. It's only the people who did the hex job (which didn't require much thinking) that got replaced in this particular example.
Post 03 Aug 2017, 13:58
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 6925
Location: ˛                              ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣ Posts: 6699

YONG wrote:

Still remember AlphaGo? It destroys the best human players with ease.


or we say alphago enlightened them to new found way to play this game?


YONG wrote:

It took only a short while for the two AIs to start communicating with each other in their "newly-invented" shorthand language.


maybe we should learn this new language? and try to understand our ai?


Furs wrote:

That's not a real self-aware AI though. It's specialized for a task.


in your opinion, what and where is the line that separate, a real self-aware ai, vs a robot or codes we programmed for a task?


revolution wrote:

We could do the job manually, but who wants to do that?


i guess this is the part that separate a human with a robot (for now), we are lazy and we find ways to get things done without we really doing them, Wink


YONG wrote:

Exactly! Given that even such a task-specific AI is so smart, humans stand absolutely no chance before a self-aware AI. Right?


idk what are the chances a self conscious ai with independent mind and decision making could come online?

maybe until we could bring back a dead human back into life? or we could transfer conscious into machine? idk,
Post 03 Aug 2017, 16:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

sleepsleep wrote:

YONG wrote:
It took only a short while for the two AIs to start communicating with each other in their "newly-invented" shorthand language.

maybe we should learn this new language? and try to understand our ai?

At least read the linked article in my thread-starting post before making comments.

The researchers did figure out the meaning of the newly-invented shorthand language, which was just broken English with repeating phrases. The truly creepy thing is the "motive" -- the two AIs, without the incentive (or constraint) of following the syntax of the English language, just invented something new to facilitate their communication. Think about it. What would they do if they ever get loose?

Confused
Post 04 Aug 2017, 04:49
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

sleepsleep wrote:
idk what are the chances a self conscious ai with independent mind and decision making could come online?

Ask Skynet -- it can definitely answer your question.

Wink
Post 04 Aug 2017, 04:52
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
What do you mean with "no chance"?

Humans stand no chance of outplaying such a self-aware AI in every imaginable aspect.

Wink
Post 04 Aug 2017, 04:55
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

Furs wrote:
Was upgrading the species a bad thing or what? This is just the next logical step.

It is not an upgrade; it is the extermination of mankind by self-learning machines. And it will be the next "logical" step if we do not take AI safety seriously.

Wink
Post 04 Aug 2017, 05:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 267
self-learning what?

_________________
qiq;
Post 04 Aug 2017, 05:40
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 267

revolution wrote:

Furs wrote:
I mean even dumb non-AI tools replaced humans in many jobs already.

Robots have changed the jobs humans do. There are still plenty of jobs for humans, and I'd argue that doing the menial tasks with robots is a good thing for humans as a whole. fasm is a robot worker that assembles code. We could do the job manually, but who wants to do that?

why deliberatly confuse a robot with a program?

_________________
qiq;
Post 04 Aug 2017, 05:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

guignol wrote:
self-learning what?

What are you talking about? Rolling Eyes
Post 04 Aug 2017, 06:03
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E

guignol wrote:

revolution wrote:

Furs wrote:
I mean even dumb non-AI tools replaced humans in many jobs already.

Robots have changed the jobs humans do. There are still plenty of jobs for humans, and I'd argue that doing the menial tasks with robots is a good thing for humans as a whole. fasm is a robot worker that assembles code. We could do the job manually, but who wants to do that?

why deliberatly confuse a robot with a program?

revolution is well-known for tricking other forum members. Refer to:

https://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=194891#194891

Wink
Post 04 Aug 2017, 06:06
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 267
there was this one peculiar french movie

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Partie_d%27%C3%A9checs
Post 04 Aug 2017, 08:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 10, 11, 12  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2005 phpBB Group.

Main index   Download   Documentation   Examples   Message board
Copyright © 2004-2016, Tomasz Grysztar.