should self learning robots be created
Debate Rounds (4)
Since con has only given a brief explanation of what he is going to argue I will do the same.
Self learning robots would likely be of immense usefulness to mankind. They could focus on learning tedious things humans aren't interested in. This would leave humans to more important and interesting intellectual pursuits.
Self learning robots will likely never become whats known as a super AI. An artificial intelligence which would make Einstein look stupid. If robots/computers can get to that level of intelligence there is likely nothing we can do short of destroying all the technological progress we've made to stop this trend.
The best bet would be to brace ourselves for this inevitable emergence of a super AI and do whatever we can to ensure that it is a friendly AI.
I anxiously await for the elaborated version of my opponents arguments.
i started this debate because we humans are trying to create robots and humanoids that can imitae humans imitate thier emotions and learn from humans now when robots will learn from humans and perfect all thier mistakes who would control them they will have control on themselves their was a case when a robot in a country comitted self suicide as it was maybe kind of tired as report sugests of doing the same work. secondly when robots can think by themselves then why will the scientist take the effort to think they will leave it on them all the work will be assigned to robots because of thier efficiency and make humans lazy
For those of you that don't know, my opponent is referring to a Roomba (cleaning robot). I honestly doubt the thing turned itself on. Even it did the, owners are probably only using that as an excuse for their own negligence. They left a hot pot on a stove and left the Roomba on the counter. The owners forgot to turn it off or there was a malfunction. The thing set their apartment on fire when it drove itself onto the hot plate that was left on.
Benefits of self learning robots,
Recommender systems are self learning AI that is being used to make a lot of our entertainment experiences better. Netflix, You Tube, Pandora and many other companies centered around entertainment use self learning software for our convenience.
Search engines, libraries and many other things use self learning software to make data retrieval easier and more convenient.
Brain computer interface,
Brain computer interface helps people with prosthetics control them and it's also something that helps Stephen Hawking be able to communicate.
Summary of benefits,
As more computers, machines, and robots become self learning, more applications for the technoly will become available. This technology has the potential to do some great things.
By developing AI we could run the risk of developing a super AI that would find humans no longer necessary and eliminate us. For more information on unfriendly super AIs click on my source.
Robots if they gain sentience are most likely going to do it through cloud computing (internet or network) with a central intelligence controlling them all. An example of this can be seen in the movie I-robot. This is the most likely scenario I can think of for a self learning robot to be a danger for society.
Now that I've shown a glimpse o how self learning software can be useful inside and outside of robots and have discussed the most likely risk, let me go on to explain why such a risk is unlikely to develop.
Why computers won't gain sentience,
1. Just because a singularity (the level bots need to reach to be dangerous) is conceivable doesn't mean its probable.
2. Before the technology becomes available to achieve a singularity, most jobs will be automated and the negative economic impact will destroy incentives to create more intelligent machines.
3. The rate of technological process is slowing and may prevent is from ever creating a singularity.
4. There are several people working to make sure the seed AI for the super AI is friendly in nature.
To win this debate my opponent needs to put up a strong argument showing that a super AI is likely (or at least an AI that can rival a smarter then average human), and that there is a reasonable chance of that super AI being a danger to mankind. I anxiously await my opponents arguments.
1) supposing you are not home and your robot catches fire then what who is responsible like in above case
2)As more computers, machines, and robots become self learning, more applications for the technology will become available. This technology has the potential to do some great things can you please tell me what is the great thing if all this will be done by robots then why there will be need of humans to think so no need of scientist as you suggests
3)robots can be very dangerous in surgery following link supports my argument
4) i strongly believe robots can cause unemployment by reading the following article
5)suppose a drone is made to kill a terrorist by recognizing its certain features and that drone finds it in a crowded place what will it do think of other people around or execute its order, it is highly dangerous to make such robots in human life and i think they should not be allowed to be made as self intelligent
"well well in the suicide case of robot the owner said that he would never buy a robot again what does that really mean? it means that the robot created a fear among the humans if such robots are used at wide range wont it be harmful"
No, most likely Roomba's won't cause widespread panic as a result of a few malfunctions. The accident that caused the owner's home to be heavily damaged was a result of the owner's negligence. A pot should not be left burning on a stove while the owner isn't home. The owner is scapegoating a machine instead of accepting responsibility.
"2)As more computers, machines, and robots become self learning, more applications for the technology will become available. This technology has the potential to do some great things can you please tell me what is the great thing if all this will be done by robots then why there will be need of humans to think so no need of scientist as you suggests"
At this stage and in any stage of robot evolution proved likely to happen (based on previous arguments) machines will help free up the minds of great thinkers to focus on less tedious things. Machines are good at specializing, while human minds are capable of creativity, looking at several different things and jumping from one field of study to another. These strengths are likely to compliment each other.
"3)robots can be very dangerous in surgery following link supports my argument"
These surgery robots aren't really robots. They don't think and they have no autonomous function. The robot is completely controlled by a human. These surgeries are actually safer in the hands of a well trained surgeon. The key is to make sure the surgeons are more competent before allowing them to use this technology. It would be much better to create some sort of certification process then eliminate this type of surgery altogether.
The information in source 2 may be accessed easier here http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
"4) i strongly believe robots can cause unemployment by reading the following article"
These people are making predictions about the world in the year 2100. These "experts" can't know what new industries will exist, what old ones will be replaced. These educated guesses are still likely to be way off the mark.
Here is a few predictions made in 1950 about the year 2000 by "experts".
1. Women will mostly be 6ft tall, muscular, wear size 11 shoes and will compete with men in most proffesional sports.
2. Technology will make a 25 hour work week standard.
3. Combination automobile planes will be perfected.
4. Radio broadcasting will have disappeared.
As you can see predictions about the future aren't reliable.
"5)suppose a drone is made to kill a terrorist by recognizing its certain features and that drone finds it in a crowded place what will it do think of other people around or execute its order, it is highly dangerous to make such robots in human life and i think they should not be allowed to be made as self intelligent"
If it's not advanced enough to make that discernment then it won't be used without giving humans a direct over-ride. This is actually an argument for self learning robots. If they can be put in danger rather then humans, then countless lives will be saved.
My arguments have for the most part gone unrefuted. I urge my opponent to show the dangers of self learning robots specifically and to address my arguments.
I know the last round is traditionally not for new arguments. I urge my opponent to ignore this tradition and to give his strongest arguments showing the dangers of self learning robots in no way is justified by the benefits.
rajbirsingh forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by black_squirrel 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for PRO, because CON forfeited a round. S&G for PRO, because CON has no capitalization/punctuation. Arguments for PRO as well, as I found PRO's arguments more convincing, and the suicide Robot is not the kind of intelligent robots were are talking about since they have very limited intelligence.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.