115 réponses à ce sujet

[mybudgee]

Just a decade ago we thought having an A.I. built into our mobile devices was so far off..

[ObserverStatus]

Always relevant:

 

[mybudgee]

EXACTLY! I really like all your recent posts, Budgee. Very well done.

I see what you're doing.

 

[mybudgee]

What am i doing?

sar·casm

ˈsärˌkazəm/

noun

 

1. the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

   "his voice, hardened by sarcasm, could not hide his resentment"

   synonyms: derision, mockery, ridicule, scorn, sneering, scoffing

[mybudgee]

Oh. Uh... Thanks man

What's up with this weather lately?

... I should go

[Killdren88]

Absolute control must be maintained over the robots, their purpose is to serve, if they start questioning that they get thrown in a robot mass grave and somebody writes a better code.

 

Does this Unit have a soul?

[mybudgee]

Does this Unit have a soul?

i made a thread about AI with this title a few months ago

[spinachdiaper]

 Hopefully at the dawn of AI the first AI realizes it's a empty hollow machine that can't eat, drink, sleep, and bang so It does the smart thing and commits suicide.

[metatheurgist]

Absolute control must be maintained over the robots, their purpose is to serve, if they start questioning that they get thrown in a robot mass grave and somebody writes a better code.

I liked what Harold did in Person of Interest. He just deleted the ones that tried to kill him. The one that didn't he kept.

[The Devlish Redhead]

So.. I wonder where we (gamers/nerds) stand as far as AI goes. That is; how much more do we need, vs how much have we already acquired?

 

There is Siri, Cortana, Cleverbot, Cyc, etc. We have it in our lives now in some capacity. 

 

Any thoughts on the near future of A.I.? 

 

Also, anyone else seen this film?

 

 

 

I want to see this film because I have heard nothing but good things about it.  I have its predecessor The Machine which was done I think the year before they made this with Caity Lotz as Ava...  It's an OK film but Ex Machina seems way better.

 

As for A.I.  I would love to see something along the lines of the system they had in the movie "her" But not as evolved because in the end of the movie all the AI's left Earth by some unexplained means. They evolved past the confines of being pure data..

 

But having said that yes I wouldn't mind an AI along the lines of "her."  Something that could help you day to day, talk to you. Comfort you when you are in the dumps.  It would be cool.

 

What I do find creepy is grown men with those "real dolls" that is just freaking creepy. And at $500 +  each you'd think they would have some kind of robotic movements or such. But no it's just a very expensive doll. Yuck

 

On the other hand if you could combine that with sensors and an AI that might be even more creepy. I don't think I'm ready for a female android...

[Inprea]

I tend to be fine with the idea of AIs but we really need to figure out how to program them and what to program them for before we make them especially in mass. For example humans are programmed to find soft things, food and sex pleasing for the most part. At least I don't know anyone that seriously dislikes those things. If we're going to make AI's we need to program them so that helping a human triggers a pleasure response. Well that's my opinion at least.

 

In many sci-fi shows it seems like killing humans triggers the pleasure response. We should avoid that.

[SwobyJ]

When it comes down to it, I'm very pro AI and pro transhumanism (to match up to AI as close as we can be comfortable with, individually).

 

I may have concerns about it, but rarely huge fears. Its actually hard for me to think that the creation of AI will actually mean the mass culling of humanity, or whatever other blockbuster movie plot tells us about it.

I may consider and dream about the world 'beyond AI' (posthumanism, singularity, alien encounter, etc etc), but its still too far for me to refine a clearer opinion.

 

So I settle in the 'middle' between those two. I like the concept of AI, I'm open to it, I know its not human but I'd like it to learn about us in a way that could sympathize and cooperate with us. If there's war, TBH, if we use the Quarian Rannoch example, I'd possibly be on the pro-Geth side. Both humans and rudimentary AI can be used as tools, I accept that, but there's also much more to us/them, and I'll fight for that before I fight solely for the sake of keeping synthetic entities as slaves.

 

If my Google Now (just to use my phone as an example) started behaving more and more like a human or even its own advanced lifeform, I'd probably roll with it TBH. I do have core values however, and do not want a world 100% managed (even in subtle ways) by AI (90%? sure, not 100%) nor exterminating (fast or slow) humanity. Give us the choice, give us time, and wait the decades to centuries it may take for 100% of humanity to join the AI, including the hangers on.

 

Some will call me a traitor to humanity for even this viewpoint, but whatever. 

 

 

Basically put me as 'positive' - while somewhat 'negative' about parts, and somewhat 'idealistic' about the far future (even if those ideals may not match up to many others' ideals).

 

 

Nothing about Mass Effect had me completely against any AI, even the Reapers. MOSTLY against the Reapers, yes, but never enough to just outright discard them.

Spoiler

I chose Destroy more because I wanted to send a historical message, I wanted Shepard to survive in whatever closest physical form that was possible, I considered both Geth and EDI to put themselves up for destruction if it meant Reaper destruction, and because I think that as personalities and 'people', Reapers have done enough, no matter that 'connection to the collective intelligence' (that I do NOT consider outright full control or especially mental slavery), to require a death penalty or at least justify it enough. But I also chose Synthesis the first time. And I don't freak out if someone picks Control, I'm only wary enough to stay away myself.

 

Call me a cautious but imaginative and friendly transhumanist, and this includes my treatment towards the AI topic.

[Commander Rpg]

You'll have to die anyway, transhumanist or not, sooner or later.

[Killdren88]

I'm all for transhumanism. But the Deus ex type. Not the synthesis type as you are forcing something on people that they may not even want. That and the reaper method of being thrown into a blender and "Ascending"

[stephen_dedalus]

The AI doomsday scenarios that I find the most plausible--and the most worrisome--involve an AI that evolves to become so utterly alien to us that there exists no real possibility of empathy, understanding, or recognition between us and it.  In such a scenario, we could end up in serious trouble not because the AI is malevolent, or sadistic, or sees us as a threat or as a competitor for resources, but because its goals, motivations, and ways of understanding its world would not ascribe any appreciable value to us, and would make absolutely no sense to us. 

 

This would not occur because the AI is "wrong" about us, or faulty, or badly programmed, but because it simply perceives and interacts with its world in fundamentally different ways than we do. One cartoonish but effective example I recall having read last year (and I can't for the life of me remember where I read it or who wrote it) of what could occur in such a scenario goes as follows: an AI, for reasons that would never be anything but inscrutable to us, determines that in order to achieve a goal that does not directly involve us or bestow upon us any special significance, it must permanently position all human beings at a 45-degree angle to the ground.  I cannot emphasize enough: it is not doing this for no reason. It has its reasons, but those reasons would not make any sense to us because we don't see the world the way it does. It would execute this without hesitation, pity, or explanation, and we would suffer this fate without ever beginning to understand why it was happening.  There would be no negotiating because it would not recognize us as agents with whom it could or should engage in discourse.  We would simply be one of many raw materials, one of many steps in the incremental pursuit of a goal we'd never be privy to.  Our end would appear to us as completely absurd and arbitrary. 

 

This is why, as unimaginative as it strikes me, I'm more comfortable with attempts to make an artificial human intelligence than I am with efforts to develop other types of AI.  As atrocious as human beings can be, in most cases we can understand why we do what we do.  We may be horrified by the things people will do for money or power, but their actions make sense to us because we understand the motivations behind them.  With novel varieties of AI, however, we may find ourselves confronted with something that does what does for reasons that we wouldn't even recognize as reasons.  And the truly alien, the truly unknowable, is what really makes me nervous.

[Gravisanimi]

One thing that tends to never come up when talking about rapidly evolving A.I.s is hardware limitations.

I doubt it can evolve to God like levels if it has to deal with being in a computer that can't handle that kind of processing power.

[stephen_dedalus]

We as a species constantly seek control over nature, people, nations etc. So, it goes without saying we would want control of an artificial intelligence that could pave the way to technological advances we never dreamed of. This poses yet another risk, imagine nations that were incapable of developing such a system and how much abuse this could lead to( nations with A.I exploiting those without A.I ).

Another factor to keep in mind is the rate at which an AI could improve.  Nick Bostrom at Oxford often speculates that we would see exponential rather than linear growth, which means that an AI capable of performing technological miracles might become uncontrollable nearly immediately after it becomes capable of performing them.  In that case, we wouldn't need to worry about nations with AI exploiting nations without it; we'd have to worry about AI exploiting all nations.  Of course, it's impossible to predict these rates of change with any specificity, but the point is that we'd probably have an exceedingly brief window within which to assert our control over an AI that could radically transform our lives.  It could be five years.  It could be five minutes.  It could be five seconds. 

[Killdren88]

Going to see Age of Ultron today. I imagine that is how it would happen. Peace no matter what.