Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

Is A. I. more dangerous than nukes?

Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future? Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

Sources.
https://www.cnbc.com...
https://www.computerworld.com...
Kevin_Fishcer
Posts: 282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2018 7:36:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future? Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

Sources.
https://www.cnbc.com...
https://www.computerworld.com...

http://www.newsweek.com...

What he meant was simple. We're trending into unknown water where if we're not careful will lead to our extinction (even though he a hypocrite for attempting to completly automate his factories)

When machine learning are programed, they are designed a objective that embed into the algorithems. What is the goal, how can I achieve it? Now say for example Dr.money wanted a AI that was told to make him rich. It doesn't care if it kill everything and everyone just to secure the objective; it'll make the owner the richest man by being the only human alive.
keithprosser
Posts: 8,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2018 9:57:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

In 2018 nukes are more dangerous than AI - no argument about that. i don't expect AI to be an existential threat while am alive - climate change is a much more urgent issue to deal with.

The AI 'Chicken Littles' like Musk and Hawking seem to be projecting into a far future - and a lot of water will pass under bridges until then. There are some interim matters to deal with in the short term - such as autonomous drones and 'smart' weapons - and its ok to begin the philosophical debate now, but it won't become a practical matter for a long time to come.

We should definitely continue with AI research and development at this time, but we need this sort of debate so that in 200 years when the possibility of creating a Skynet or a T1000 exists we won't stumble blindly into doing something dumb.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 1:47:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2018 7:36:02 AM, Kevin_Fishcer wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future? Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

Sources.
https://www.cnbc.com...
https://www.computerworld.com...


http://www.newsweek.com...

What he meant was simple. We're trending into unknown water where if we're not careful will lead to our extinction (even though he a hypocrite for attempting to completly automate his factories)

When machine learning are programed, they are designed a objective that embed into the algorithems. What is the goal, how can I achieve it? Now say for example Dr.money wanted a AI that was told to make him rich. It doesn't care if it kill everything and everyone just to secure the objective; it'll make the owner the richest man by being the only human alive.

Yet, machine learning usually develops apps or discovers treatments for malaria. Smart computers with machine learning are basically brains in a jar. They have little to no body.

https://www.engadget.com...
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 2:14:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

The understanding is that A.I allows people to hide behind robots and machines. Movies like the Terminator fail to show the view behind the programing of A.I. The world of the intelligent robots machine through A.I. would not need human motives as incentive to eliminate humanity. Logic dictates it even with artificial intelligence a robot would use much less energy, effort, and resources to simply leave earth, as machines are not as limited as people in relationship to their environment. There are several plants in our own solar system which can sustain artificial life as a symbiont being could then plan to move deeper into space and the universe.
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 2:24:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
A.I is dangerous because it is the lie that allows programmers to kill and argue their own accountability. Look at the recording of TIME on a computer, or how it is synced with personal devices. Going deeper look at computerized poker and slot gaming. Tell me, when would a person ever sit with dealer, and play poker against the dealer, if that person could deal from anywhere in the deck while looking at all the cards?

The programmer does? This is the concept of A.I.
Kevin_Fishcer
Posts: 282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 4:50:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2018 1:47:45 AM, Stupidape wrote:
At 5/6/2018 7:36:02 AM, Kevin_Fishcer wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:
Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future? Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

Sources.
https://www.cnbc.com...
https://www.computerworld.com...


http://www.newsweek.com...

What he meant was simple. We're trending into unknown water where if we're not careful will lead to our extinction (even though he a hypocrite for attempting to completly automate his factories)

When machine learning are programed, they are designed a objective that embed into the algorithems. What is the goal, how can I achieve it? Now say for example Dr.money wanted a AI that was told to make him rich. It doesn't care if it kill everything and everyone just to secure the objective; it'll make the owner the richest man by being the only human alive.

Yet, machine learning usually develops apps or discovers treatments for malaria. Smart computers with machine learning are basically brains in a jar. They have little to no body.

https://www.engadget.com...

But if allowed to free roam on the internet...who know the outcome. It possible a nuclear plant can be access via a unsecured access point. They inputs the wrong code, then a malfunction occur
dee-em
Posts: 10,593
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 6:48:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:

Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

A Nintendo is not AI. What Musk means is an independent consciousness which has become sentient and no longer is tied to its original programming.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Most people know that he means something like SkyNet in the Terminator movies.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future?

No. That is not the issue.

Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

Robotics =/= AI

An AI will probably arise from a research project.

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

Yes. And?

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

As I said that is not the issue:

https://www.livescience.com...
Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 8:23:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2018 6:48:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:

Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

A Nintendo is not AI. What Musk means is an independent consciousness which has become sentient and no longer is tied to its original programming.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Most people know that he means something like SkyNet in the Terminator movies.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future?

No. That is not the issue.

Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

Robotics =/= AI

An AI will probably arise from a research project.

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

Yes. And?

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

As I said that is not the issue:

https://www.livescience.com...

"Now, imagine if that person wasn't a human, but a network of millions of computers around the world." By Brandon Specktor, Senior Writer | April 6, 2018 01:33pm ET

I don't understand how this decentralized intelligence is a threat. Literally every computer in the network acts a possible entry point for hackers and Mal-ware. Failing to hack the supposed immortal dictator humans could simply unplug their computers or format their hard drives.

Furthermore, everything is in a decaying state of matter. The Earth and the Sun are mortal. If we couldn't directly access the A.I. we could simply shut off the power grid. Finally, isn't there an Internet kill switch that the president has?
dee-em
Posts: 10,593
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 9:40:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2018 8:23:50 AM, Stupidape wrote:
At 5/7/2018 6:48:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:

Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

A Nintendo is not AI. What Musk means is an independent consciousness which has become sentient and no longer is tied to its original programming.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Most people know that he means something like SkyNet in the Terminator movies.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future?

No. That is not the issue.

Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

Robotics =/= AI

An AI will probably arise from a research project.

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

Yes. And?

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

As I said that is not the issue:

https://www.livescience.com...

"Now, imagine if that person wasn't a human, but a network of millions of computers around the world." By Brandon Specktor, Senior Writer | April 6, 2018 01:33pm ET

I don't understand how this decentralized intelligence is a threat. Literally every computer in the network acts a possible entry point for hackers and Mal-ware. Failing to hack the supposed immortal dictator humans could simply unplug their computers or format their hard drives.

Unplug their computers from the internet? They wouldn't be a lot of use then would they? We live in a networked world and I'm not just talking about Facebook and social media. Everything is networked from phones to banking to commerce and so on.

Furthermore, everything is in a decaying state of matter. The Earth and the Sun are mortal. If we couldn't directly access the A.I. we could simply shut off the power grid.

We? What if the AI took measures to protect power stations?

Even if we could throw ourselves back to the stone age, it is a defeat, an end to civilization as we know it. That is exactly what Musk is issuing a warning about.

Finally, isn't there an Internet kill switch that the president has?

I don't think so. It's been proposed but never implemented:

https://en.wikipedia.org...

What you are ignoring is the fact that if an AI was created (either intentionally or otherwise) it would be able to think and plan orders of magnitude faster than humans. It could (at least theoretically) anticipate and counter any threats to its existence far faster than humans could act. A minute to an AI would be like a day to us. And that is by today's computing speeds. Given the exponential growth which has been occurring, imagine computer speeds in 50 years time. I can't. Human thought and reaction times would seem glacial to an AI of that era.
Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 3:10:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Artificial intelligence already exists in people. The question is how does A.I. translate over to computer from its human counterpart. Looking at hackers is sometimes looking nothing more than a vandal, they are two things not one. There is a false idea created with the computer market, the sales pitch is called security. This is used as the attention getter yet. There is none, and the computer user pays forever for a promise, and it is a technique created by marketing. Encryption is not the process of establishing computer security.

Any person who is serious about their craft understands the saying there is the right tool for every job. In that spirit the old school understanding is a hacker as person takes pieces of code, strings, classes, and arranges them together to form new programming. Computer espionage, or just espionage set out with a goal. Sabotage. These are skilled programmers who are creating code never seen and arrange them like they are putting together DNA, or a person"s finger prints into other code.
Again, speed and intelligence are not the same context in the programming world. A.I. stands for computers that act like people, this is compared to a comedian impersonating a person. The flaw in a Skynet theory is that it ignores the person who is behind the computer all along.

A.I. is the distraction that makes us look away from the simple issue of security as more an more information is placed in taped to the new outside window instead of a locked filing cabinet.

Interesting read thank you.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2018 10:08:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2018 9:40:41 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/7/2018 8:23:50 AM, Stupidape wrote:
At 5/7/2018 6:48:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:

Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

A Nintendo is not AI. What Musk means is an independent consciousness which has become sentient and no longer is tied to its original programming.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Most people know that he means something like SkyNet in the Terminator movies.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future?

No. That is not the issue.

Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

Robotics =/= AI

An AI will probably arise from a research project.

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

Yes. And?

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

As I said that is not the issue:

https://www.livescience.com...

"Now, imagine if that person wasn't a human, but a network of millions of computers around the world." By Brandon Specktor, Senior Writer | April 6, 2018 01:33pm ET

I don't understand how this decentralized intelligence is a threat. Literally every computer in the network acts a possible entry point for hackers and Mal-ware. Failing to hack the supposed immortal dictator humans could simply unplug their computers or format their hard drives.

Unplug their computers from the internet? They wouldn't be a lot of use then would they? We live in a networked world and I'm not just talking about Facebook and social media. Everything is networked from phones to banking to commerce and so on.

Furthermore, everything is in a decaying state of matter. The Earth and the Sun are mortal. If we couldn't directly access the A.I. we could simply shut off the power grid.

We? What if the AI took measures to protect power stations?

Even if we could throw ourselves back to the stone age, it is a defeat, an end to civilization as we know it. That is exactly what Musk is issuing a warning about.

Finally, isn't there an Internet kill switch that the president has?

I don't think so. It's been proposed but never implemented:

https://en.wikipedia.org...

What you are ignoring is the fact that if an AI was created (either intentionally or otherwise) it would be able to think and plan orders of magnitude faster than humans. It could (at least theoretically) anticipate and counter any threats to its existence far faster than humans could act. A minute to an AI would be like a day to us. And that is by today's computing speeds. Given the exponential growth which has been occurring, imagine computer speeds in 50 years time. I can't. Human thought and reaction times would seem glacial to an AI of that era.

Being able to think fast, as in perform algebra quickly, doesn't mean dangerous. Second, some countries still have trouble keeping the power on. Squirrels have been known to cause power outages. Skynet in terminator could be beaten by squirrels.

"Squirrel Prompts Widespread Power Outage in Central San Diego"

As for humans surviving without power, there is lots of low power techniques humans have developed both in the past and present. For example hand cranked powered radios to communicate. Flares, smoke signals, bicycles, horseback riding, and many more.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com...
http://www.toptenreviews.com...
dee-em
Posts: 10,593
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2018 5:27:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2018 10:08:31 PM, Stupidape wrote:
At 5/7/2018 9:40:41 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/7/2018 8:23:50 AM, Stupidape wrote:
At 5/7/2018 6:48:28 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/6/2018 5:33:37 AM, Stupidape wrote:

Elon Musk: "Mark my words " A.I. is far more dangerous than nukes"

I don't get it, how could A.I. possibly be dangerous? I've had my Nintendo for over a decade and it has never run down the street killing innocents. I fail to comprehend how or why A.I. is dangerous.

A Nintendo is not AI. What Musk means is an independent consciousness which has become sentient and no longer is tied to its original programming.

These 1-2 minute videos don't help. I find it unfair for Elon Musk to make such bold claims and not to elaborate.

Most people know that he means something like SkyNet in the Terminator movies.

Musk says robots will be able to do everything better than us, is he referring to a jobless future?

No. That is not the issue.

Robots take a lot of resources to build. Who or what will build the dangerous A.I.?

Robotics =/= AI

An AI will probably arise from a research project.

An IBM Watson which is considered the smartest computer in the world costs about 3 million according to computer world.

Yes. And?

"According to Tony Pearson, master inventor and senior consultant at IBM, a Power 750 server retails for $34,500. Thus the 90 that make up Watson would cost about $3 million."

At three million dollars a pop, I doubt robots will be replacing all human jobs within the next decade.

As I said that is not the issue:

https://www.livescience.com...

"Now, imagine if that person wasn't a human, but a network of millions of computers around the world." By Brandon Specktor, Senior Writer | April 6, 2018 01:33pm ET

I don't understand how this decentralized intelligence is a threat. Literally every computer in the network acts a possible entry point for hackers and Mal-ware. Failing to hack the supposed immortal dictator humans could simply unplug their computers or format their hard drives.

Unplug their computers from the internet? They wouldn't be a lot of use then would they? We live in a networked world and I'm not just talking about Facebook and social media. Everything is networked from phones to banking to commerce and so on.

Furthermore, everything is in a decaying state of matter. The Earth and the Sun are mortal. If we couldn't directly access the A.I. we could simply shut off the power grid.

We? What if the AI took measures to protect power stations?

Even if we could throw ourselves back to the stone age, it is a defeat, an end to civilization as we know it. That is exactly what Musk is issuing a warning about.

Finally, isn't there an Internet kill switch that the president has?

I don't think so. It's been proposed but never implemented:

https://en.wikipedia.org...

What you are ignoring is the fact that if an AI was created (either intentionally or otherwise) it would be able to think and plan orders of magnitude faster than humans. It could (at least theoretically) anticipate and counter any threats to its existence far faster than humans could act. A minute to an AI would be like a day to us. And that is by today's computing speeds. Given the exponential growth which has been occurring, imagine computer speeds in 50 years time. I can't. Human thought and reaction times would seem glacial to an AI of that era.

Being able to think fast, as in perform algebra quickly, doesn't mean dangerous.

No, of course not. The assumption with an AI though is that it could have its own imperatives and preserving human life might not be on its priority list. That is the concern. Combine that with lightning fast thinking ability and you have a potentially dangerous scenario which Musk was sounding a warning note about.

Second, some countries still have trouble keeping the power on. Squirrels have been known to cause power outages. Skynet in terminator could be beaten by squirrels.

"Squirrel Prompts Widespread Power Outage in Central San Diego"

Um, the first thing a true AI would do is make copies of itself on storage systems around the world. A local power outage is neither here nor there. Have you not seen "Avengers: The Age of Ultron"?

As for humans surviving without power, there is lots of low power techniques humans have developed both in the past and present. For example hand cranked powered radios to communicate. Flares, smoke signals, bicycles, horseback riding, and many more.

See my previous answer. That is capitulation, ie. defeat.
Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2018 9:32:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago

No, of course not. The assumption with an AI though is that it could have its own imperatives and preserving human life might not be on its priority list. That is the concern. Combine that with lightning fast thinking ability and you have a potentially dangerous scenario which Musk was sounding a warning note about.

Second, some countries still have trouble keeping the power on. Squirrels have been known to cause power outages. Skynet in terminator could be beaten by squirrels.

"Squirrel Prompts Widespread Power Outage in Central San Diego"

Um, the first thing a true AI would do is make copies of itself on storage systems around the world. A local power outage is neither here nor there. Have you not seen "Avengers: The Age of Ultron"?

As for humans surviving without power, there is lots of low power techniques humans have developed both in the past and present. For example hand cranked powered radios to communicate. Flares, smoke signals, bicycles, horseback riding, and many more.

See my previous answer. That is capitulation, ie. defeat.

A dumb strong person can defeat an intelligent person. Think of an eight year old with a gun versus a smart adult that is deep in thought.

Any copy the AI makes of itself is also a vulnerability. If humans get a hold of a backup copy they can find the flaws of the system and exploit them. I haven't seen Avengers Age of Ultron.

"See my previous answer. That is capitulation, ie. defeat." dee-em

I don't think so, if going back a century or two means we get to exterminate the dangerous A.I. it is better than going extinct. Furthermore, humans learn from their mistakes and we are likely to build a better and safer society.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2018 9:50:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you want to learn more about what a dangerous A.I. could do, I think it is best to learn what humans can do. In this howstuffworks it shows how dumb crackers can turn computers into zombies. Again, I don't think a superintelligent A.I. is to be feared. I'm more afraid of dumb humans.

" You might think that these crackers are cutting-edge Internet criminal masterminds, but in truth, many have little to no programming experience or knowledge. (Sometimes people call these crackers "script kiddies" because they are young and show no proficiency in writing script or code.) Investigators who monitor botnets say that the programs these crackers use are primitive and poorly programmed. Despite the ham-handed approach, these programs do what the crackers intended them to do -- convert computers into zombies."
howstuffworks

Furthermore, your idea of decentralized intelligence has another flaw, the A.I. recognizing itself. If you look at IBM Watson the A.I. is one huge piece of hardware. When you have an A.I. that spreads along multiple cities, it may not recognize itself. This is more likely if the A.I. has different hardware configurations for each clone of itself. Finally, if the A.I. is aggressive, the dangerous A.I. may attack itself.

https://computer.howstuffworks.com...
dee-em
Posts: 10,593
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2018 1:02:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/8/2018 9:32:21 PM, Stupidape wrote:

No, of course not. The assumption with an AI though is that it could have its own imperatives and preserving human life might not be on its priority list. That is the concern. Combine that with lightning fast thinking ability and you have a potentially dangerous scenario which Musk was sounding a warning note about.

Second, some countries still have trouble keeping the power on. Squirrels have been known to cause power outages. Skynet in terminator could be beaten by squirrels.

"Squirrel Prompts Widespread Power Outage in Central San Diego"

Um, the first thing a true AI would do is make copies of itself on storage systems around the world. A local power outage is neither here nor there. Have you not seen "Avengers: The Age of Ultron"?

As for humans surviving without power, there is lots of low power techniques humans have developed both in the past and present. For example hand cranked powered radios to communicate. Flares, smoke signals, bicycles, horseback riding, and many more.

See my previous answer. That is capitulation, ie. defeat.

A dumb strong person can defeat an intelligent person. Think of an eight year old with a gun versus a smart adult that is deep in thought.

There is the problem in your reasoning. "Deep in thought". That is a fraction of a second for an AI. A true AI would be almost god-like compared to humans. Guns aren't going to be of any real use. What are you going to shoot at? It's a decentralized intelligence living in cyberspace. You could try and shut down every data repository and server farm in the world but by the time humans coordinated all that (without using computer technology which could be hacked and manipulated by the AI) the AI would have taken measures to defend them.

Any copy the AI makes of itself is also a vulnerability. If humans get a hold of a backup copy they can find the flaws of the system and exploit them. I haven't seen Avengers Age of Ultron.

I don't think you understand. That would be impossibly complicated. We haven't been able to fully understand the workings of a human brain yet. How could we possibly do that for something orders of magnitude more complex? Any such effort (without the use of serious computing power) would take years or decades. That is an eternity to an AI who would be able to easily anticipate any such moves and take defensive action.

See my previous answer. That is capitulation, ie. defeat.

I don't think so, if going back a century or two means we get to exterminate the dangerous A.I. it is better than going extinct.

Agreed. But what Musk is saying is that avoidance is better than cure especially when the "cure" is such a bitter pill to have to swallow.

Furthermore, humans learn from their mistakes and we are likely to build a better and safer society.

I love your optimism. :-)

The problem is that we may not be able to learn from such a mistake. It could be what is called an inflection point in history from which there is no going back. Once you have created an AI (deliberately or otherwise) you have unleashed the genie from the bottle and may never be able to put it back in. That is the danger.
Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2018 11:21:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
You are missing the point. A.I. is artificial intelligence. Computers are already based on artificial intelligence as they do not think. They are applying code to simulate the mechanical though process. The intelligence of a computer is measured in its ability, and speed to locate, recognize, and recall an answer it already has.

Why a person does not truly want any computer to have intelligence is due to the fact a commuter will simply shut itself off as a way to demonstrate, address, or share some issues for knowing a limitation set as fact in its memory. This a part of what is understood when becoming intelligent. Computers when judged by a human standard become both dumb and insane so intelligence simply adds a level of instability. That instability however is not naturally in the way that is most commonly suggested, or what takes place with people.

Computers are a machine. All machines work towards a basic goal of self-destruction by wear and tear. Basically what Elon Musk is saying is what Nuke had taught a generation of people, human error is the most dangerous thing earth has going on.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/14/2018 3:01:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/9/2018 1:02:39 AM, dee-em wrote:

I've run out of ideas to argue with. I disagree with you still in the sense that this is a potential future problem that may or may not matter. Meanwhile, human kind has very real problems like climate change, world hunger, poverty, proliferation of nuclear weapons, and many more.

"Scientists moved the hands of the symbolic "Doomsday Clock" closer to midnight on Thursday amid increasing worries over nuclear weapons and climate change."
The Doomsday Clock just ticked closer to midnight
Doyle Rice, USA TODAY Published 10:07 a.m. ET Jan. 25, 2018 | Updated 4:39 p.m. ET Jan. 25, 2018

In brief, I don't think an all powerful A.I. will be a problem because mankind will probably wipe ourselves out before such an A.I. would be created. Furthermore, such an A.I. might not be able to exist due to a sudden dead end in computers.

Source.
https://www.usatoday.com...
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2018 1:03:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I agree on the problem of A.I. but the understanding of what Artificial Intelligencer is relates directly towards all of the thing you had mentioned. If a person had viewed A.I. constitutionally the meaning changes a bit. We are not talking about smarter computers we are talking about computers which act more human.

So""""""we are kind of left in a virtual reality. People are the model for Artificial intelligence so the problem is already here and has been here for some time. The victory dance that appears to have taken place in society in the way objective of a democracy had been receive promoted the domination of people who believe that are of superior intellect as they had chosen crimes with low confection rates as their crime of choice.

The problem isn"t a future issue it is taking place now, it occurs with people and not machines. Artificial intelligence is using discrimination to justify perjury in things like a woman President. It is using Climate change and global warming to translate the idea of Human climate manipulation, Atomic weapons as not the basic principle of Chemical weapon. This is the world of A.I.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2018 7:10:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Here's an Atlantic article on the subject. The article is very long and I didn't read the entire contents. What do you think of the A.I. beating humans in the game Go!?

ttps://www.theatlantic.com...
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2018 7:11:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/17/2018 7:10:30 PM, Stupidape wrote:
Here's an Atlantic article on the subject. The article is very long and I didn't read the entire contents. What do you think of the A.I. beating humans in the game Go!?

ttps://www.theatlantic.com...

Sorry, wrong link. Here is the correct link.

https://www.theatlantic.com...%%
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2018 1:15:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/17/2018 7:10:30 PM, Stupidape wrote:
Here's an Atlantic article on the subject. The article is very long and I didn't read the entire contents. What do you think of the A.I. beating humans in the game Go!?

ttps://www.theatlantic.com...

Do you want me to read the article first or answer the question first?
Flatlander
Posts: 246
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2018 2:14:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
You are all kind of missing the entire point.

Even if A.I. doesn't kill humans, or doesn't have a mind of it's own, it could still very quickly cause great problems.

Electronic circuits function about a million times faster than biochemical ones, this means even if we just build a computer that is smart as a human, it will do 20,000 years of research every week.

So imagine the USA finds out Russia even MIGHT have completed a General AI that can do the above. Within 1 week Russia could be 20,000 years ahead of the USA. It is a Winner-Takes-All scenario.

Whoever gets it first, wins, even if the AI is just a research machine that spits out blueprints, data, and solutions.

"Mr Computer, could you work on a cure for cancer?"
7 hours later "BEEP BOOP I have developed cures for all the most common cancers and treatments with a high success rate for most of the other ones BEEP BOOP"

"Mr Computer, could you work on a way to defeat the United States?"
30 minutes later, "I have developed 432 strategies and listed them by probability of success."
"Mr Computer could you also develop these strategies so that there is little to no risk to our own country?"
30 minutes later, "I have developed 386 strategies with above a 99% chance of success that will leave your country with the same, or greater wealth and prosperity as to when the strategy is initiated."

Having super-human level intelligence in the hands of 1 person or 1 group or 1 country ends the world in almost all conceivable situations.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2018 8:25:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm worried how the A.I. could affect politics by appealing to radical groups.

"The impact of internet technology on politics is particularly pronounced. The ability to target micro-groups has broken up the previous consensus on priorities by permitting a focus on specialized purposes or grievances. Political leaders, overwhelmed by niche pressures, are deprived of time to think or reflect on context, contracting the space available for them to develop vision.

The digital world"s emphasis on speed inhibits reflection; its incentive empowers the radical over the thoughtful; its values are shaped by subgroup consensus, not by introspection. For all its achievements, it runs the risk of turning on itself as its impositions overwhelm its conveniences."


Can you imagine an election where a bunch of anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers, white supremacists, and a whole bunch of other fringe groups won in lieu of a rational public?

https://www.theatlantic.com...
John_C_1812
Posts: 1,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2018 6:03:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
We should be more worried how A.I. interacts with human programing as the creation of artificial intelligence is a method setting overall appearance, conditional information, and event outcome, things that can be set, or re-set on the flow of governing of many kinds. This means A.I programming includes political and educational governing as well as computer and is not limited to hard-ware soft-ware application.

Again I would use examples of arguments I have made on debate.org. Abortion as an admission to guilt. The ratio of TIME being corrupted. GOD as an axiom of numbers, and human climate manipulation have a place as effect when artificial intelligence is used as a public programming guide to the order of thought any public can be instructed to share.

The difference is people can be rewarded much easier than a computer in relationship to A.I.. Computers do not care if their hard drive is bigger or faster.
Stupidape
Posts: 653
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2018 8:25:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hmmm, Sam Harris agrees about the electronic circuits functioning one million times faster. Can anyone else confirm this?

"And it's important to recognize that this is true by virtue of speed alone. Right? So imagine if we just built a superintelligent AI that was no smarter than your average team of researchers at Stanford or MIT. Well, Electronic circuits function about a million times faster than biochemical ones, So this machine should think about a million times faster than the minds that built it. So you set it running for a week, And it will perform 20, 000 years of human-level intellectual work, Week after week after week. How could we even understand, Much less constrain, A mind making this sort of progress? " Sam Harris 2016

https://www. Ted. Com/talks/sam_harris_can_we_build_ai_without_losing_control_over_it/transcript? Referrer=playlist-talks_on_artificial_intelligen
scilover
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/15/2020 11:15:25 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
Yes, For me A. I. Is much more dangerous than nukes. Our technology improves and more and more autonomous weapons are being built.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.