What would happen if we did? Would we nurture it, or abandon it, as Frankenstein did his creature? Would we have the right to "kill" it by switching it off? And if we create an AI accidentally (say through evolving web bots) could we coexist? Or is humanity's track record of coexistence with other members of its own species, let alone others, indicative of how it would respond?

__________________
There is a growing tendancy to think of Man as a rational, thinking being, which is absurd.- Marvin the Martian.

It's gotten to the point where careful investigation is needed just to tell parody from reality. I think that means reality is broken.- Noclevername.

For some reason, this thread reminds me of this: http://www.schlockmercenary.com/d/20000711.html

Well, judging by what I see around, we´re pretty bad when dealing with natural intelligence.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

I honestly think that no one can really say. It's a speculative guess based on a speculative being (we don't even know what AI would be/act like in the first place), so who knows?

Define responsible. Killing it might be the most responsible action.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Maybe ultimately, wiping out humanity would be the most responsible action.

Star Trek says yes.

But Star Trek is pure fiction.

I say no.

__________________
Ach, mein Sinn, wo willst du endlich hin, wo soll ich mich erquicken? Bleib' ich hier, oder wünsch' ich mir Berg und Hügel auf den Rücken?
Bei der Welt ist gar kein Rat, und im Herzen steh'n die Schmerzen meiner Missetat, weil der Knecht den Herrn verleugnet hat.

Yes, we are responsible enough.
Almost certainly both. Some people will nurture AIs. Others will discard them. Some will do both--nurturing some while discarding others.

It will be similar to the way we treat other people, or pets, or even our inanimate possessions.
Do we have the right to kill other people, or to kill animals? It depends, doesn't it?
Yes, and yes. Humanity's track record of coexistence is that we have the ability to coexist with others of our own species, as well as other species.

It's certainly possible to develop a implacably malevolent AI which is absolutely bent on the extermination of humanity. However, I would not expect such an AI to be created accidentally. An accidental AI would be something less than completely malevolent, and anything less than completely malevolent is something we could coexist with (on some level--it may be after a deadly "war" which kills most of the human race).

To create a sentient being, capable of suffering things like 'angst', fear, philosophical doubts, uncertainty... It seems cruel to me. I think we tend to take it too lightly. Intelligence is a serious thing.

I´ve already caught myself pondering that maybe I´d be happier if dumber.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

Life is cruel. To create more life is, ergo, to create more cruelty. But to have less cruelty, ergo, we'd have less life.

QED.

The above is an example of why we definitely should not create self-aware AI. The statement is perfectly logical and leaves an inescapable conclusion - if you want to ease suffering, kill as many people as possible.

__________________

I'm pretty sure a self-aware AI would be capable of understanding that I changed the definition of "life" mid-way in the post. It only fools gullible humans.

But hence, the problem with speculating about AI; so many have this idea of what AI must be like. They must be ultra-logical sorts incapable of parsing an argument outside of logic... even though we've accepted that they're self-aware and intelligent.

Maybe we should merge this thread with Ken G's latest thread on logic and truth.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

The point is that we don't put machines in charge of us , just like we don't put people that act like machines in charge of us. It's not good for people.

Best regards,

Dan

I have worked in AI for some time now and i have solved the equation for the Human Mind

We do not like being ruled over by other human beings, we only HAPPILY accept leadership when being lead by someone or something a good few rungs above us in the pecking order.

Its why young children follow their parents

Its why a horse follows its riders instructions

Its why we will submit to superior robotic intelligence

However there is a BUT...once an intelligent organism (people) has the capability to satisfy its own needs it tends to want to go its own way and just ask for help when it needs it

In this way i forsee a world run (and much the better for it) by super smart robots
they wont fekup the economy or start a war....they will feed their human peasants and keep them happy

We will let them rule over us WHEN beyond all reasonable doubt they can do the job better

I now use a computer to teach me chess...(it doesn't mind how many takes backs or what abuse i hurl at it)

I now use a computer to aid braking in emergency (anti lock brakes)(in normal driving it does not get in my way..but in emergency it can do better than me in 9 out of 10 situations...it also deploys an air bag which agin will help in 9 out of 10 situations

Argos. Agreed. pete

__________________
A third rate theory forbids.
A second rate theory explains after the fact.
A first rate theory predicts.
A. Lomonosov

Having solved the equation for super intelligence (and the human mind as part of that journey)

I can assure you we easily have the technical ability right now to build a robotic mind that would make Data out of startrek a socialy inept moron

Data is how we like to see our robots....significantly different from us...we want to reserve jokes and art for us humans....but let me tell you this ! an ultra smart robot
will have the capacity to tell jokes and create art at a level exceeding any human.

Not limited by psychological flaws or hindered by memory limits or dexterity of its limbs it will be the ultimate creator and connoisseur of culture

Yes, it is the burden of intellect to examine our feelings while we contemplate
reality. And there is hope. And tommorrow shall be a new day.

The Deep future of robots

Once they have established a solid reputation out there in the real world the next step is will be for them to setup up a Robot Nation

We will agree to let them have a chunk of planet earth ( but no weapons..this will be inspected..they will also have to comply with international law regarding things like genetically modified humans and other life forms)

This land of robots would also be inhabited by human beings who choose to live and work there. The reason for this is that we are very good at getting our hands dirty and doing stuff they will find difficult. After all have we the drop on them in terms of evolution and until advanced nanotechnology supercedes us we will be very useful indeed to them. I doubt that any earth bound organization whether that be an institution or nation can reach its full potential with the help of human hands.

As they help us we will help them...a symbiotic relationship will develop

there will come a time that humans will feel lost without their robot allies

Today we would feel lost...feel lacking in ability and potential without tools and technology...a torch, a spanner , a mobile phone and google earth are all our handy friends

In the final stages of robot evolution the sentient mind will find itself inahbiting a bewildering array of bodies.

The perspex box as seen in Blakes seven will house one type of mind

An android will be a 4 way mix of biology, mechanical engineering and nanotechnology and silicone chips

Other robots will become spaceships, trains and airplanes...even buildings

The biomorphs will look like living creatures from science fiction...they will swim in the seas, fly in the air,walk & live down our streets.

you will be friends with many of these sentient beings & perhaps even marry one !

With an open mind i could easily see myself cohabiting with a sentient being and developing an equitable relation ship ( not quite sure about the bedroom area though !)

what you have to get your head around is that these beings will be every bit as real as the stuff seen in science fiction films....the laws of physics does not stop us from creating such beings

we are only limited by our imagination, our ethics and technical limitations of the day

the first generation of androids will be a little clunky and have psychological flaws like us...the body and mind will be refined with great rapidity...once common sense iq reaches 150 we will start doubling their social & intellectual abilities every 18 months like Moors Law of computing power

expect Godlike intelligence within decades of the show kicking off

Humanity hasn't seen the benefits of super sentient's....its why people like me cant get the funding to build a mind like Data from star trek.
(to assemble technology together is not even difficult anymore just hard !...thanks to advances in computing power and sensors)

this level artificial intelligence is just a decade at most away from the right size funding check ( of course u actually need the right build philosophy...something most research groups lack )

Honda is the only company teetering on the right approach with Asimos's Brain
It's truly painful for me to watch the corporation that has winning motorsports teams struggle to build their first steam engine in terms of AI

Will an AI necessarily have self awareness? I think that with self awareness comes the instinct for survival, if so will the 3 laws of robotics prevent the crazed Hal 9000 scenario? It seems credible that a sentinent intelligence would use any tools at its disposal to defend itself to include lying. Whether we are responsible enough or not I think that this test of humanity will come to pass. My guess is that we will find a way to manage.

__________________
"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

Alexander Pope, 1709

The problem is, a machine doesn't have biological evolution behind it. So our assumptions as to how an AI will or will not act based on what makes sense for evolution-based life is ultimately flawed.

In fact, as I said earlier, this is all just speculation based in a speculative future, about a speculative life form. Might as well discuss how we'll react when we meet an alien life form, and how that alien life form would react towards us.

" Don't send a machine to do a man's job." Flash Gordon or somebody like him .



Dan

The notion of a robot nation is absurd. What use would any robot or AI (because those two things would often not be the same thing) have for a nation?

If we were to create an AI it would be difficult to think of how it would behave. An AI would have very different needs to us. The is no physical issue preventing humanity and AI(s) from co-existing. Whether humanity would be willing to is a different question altogether. I imagine many people would want an AI to continue existing and interact with it, and there would probably be just as many who were afraid of it and feel threatened by non-human intelligence. Many of these issues would be similar to intelligent alien life with the exception of the responsibility humanity would have for any AI that it created.

What's funny is, almost every occupation relies quite a bit on technology.

The military is starting to use UAVs more and more, people in everyday jobs need to know how to use computers, and computers regulate quite a bit (including the internal mechanics of your automobile).

It would be nice if real life worked like your comic books, and I suppose you'd think it nice if the luddites or neo-luddites could win. But the reality is, there's a lot to be gained through technology and machines. Personally, I'd rather have my computers and automobiles than go back to when we were farmers without adequate health care, with total lack of fast transportation, forced to stick to our own strip of land and being unable to explore the rest of the world.

Machinery has been embraced because it's effective, much like any other technology is often embraced. In the comic books, it's not that way, but those are comic books; about "humanistic" heroes that you have to celebrate because they're The Hero, and the universe revolves around them.

Didn't we have this discussion recently?

Machine intelligence: will they rebel and should they be kept dumb?

__________________
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.

"Half of what I say is meaningless, but I say it so that the other half may reach you."

I would disagree with that. I think that humanity's base reaction when it encounters an alien culture is hostility, followed by attempted extermination, followed by attempted assimilation. And you just have to look at the current state of the inhabitants of the ocean to see how well we regard other species.

__________________
There is a growing tendancy to think of Man as a rational, thinking being, which is absurd.- Marvin the Martian.

It's gotten to the point where careful investigation is needed just to tell parody from reality. I think that means reality is broken.- Noclevername.

In order to answer the OP one would need to define responsible use of AI. I suspect there would be a lot of debate just on that issue. I would venture that it be responsible to use an AI for handling navigation on a ship or aircraft, but it would be irresponsible to use an AI for triage of medical patients for example. Whether humans would feel threatned by an AI is dependent on the application. In some instances the relief of responsibility in a task would be beneficial, in other instances it would appear cold and inhumane.

__________________
"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

Alexander Pope, 1709

Hi, I agree. And I certainly don't want to compete via pick and shovel...
with an earth mover ie buldozer or backhoe. That would not be good.
We have an even bigger problem right now going into the future....
It's called 'good jobs'. Our exectutives and lawyers are pretty good at
shipping the 'jobs of the future' overseas as it is.

Best regards,
Dan

Depends how you went about it. Not having it to begin with is one thing but losing it while remembering that at one time you were smarter is a hideous sensation. I have brain damage and at one time had to take some of the most effed up medications you could imagine.

I've had meds that made me illiterate. Couldn't translate symbology. That is a really odd sensation, not being able to read, since normally if you are literate you can't *not* read something.

__________________
In your rush to call everyone "entrenched" or closed-minded or "limited" you fail to note that the "limit" here has a very natural boundary: that point at which the evidence stops. - JayUtah

Science fiction was never meant to be an educational tool. - Editor Amazing Tales

I just want to say that I'd rather be closer to Carl Sagan than mentally handicapped/lower IQ.