AI will end humanity

[bellofthedesert]

Alerts from people far more educated than myself on the subject have been ringing the warning bells for quite a while - but the last couple of years there seems to be an urgency in their warnings that AI will decide humans are a serious problem. They warn AI will eliminate humanity. Discuss? I'm worried for our future in so many ways - but the eradication of humanity is potentially at stake here.

 

[Dropship]

I'm a - ahem- champion online strategy gamer and I have no trouble at all beating my AI opponents..

 

[LadyOnArooftop]

When the Google CEO says he doesn't fully understand how the new AI program works, after it taught itself a foreign language it was not programmed to do... we really should be concerned. I don't understand why we need to create machines capable of independent thought, what's the point?

 

[breakwake_]

While we humans, we're never a threat to one another or anything else. I think AI may be a benefit to humanity if we put it in charge of our governance, at least corruption and inequallity wouldn't exist, not to the extent they exist now. Part of the reason some leaders and big bosses may be against AI may be that they'll lose what privileges they currently have. People, regions and businesses wouldn't get the preferential treatment they can get with people in charge. Complaints about AI by some could be because these people are worried about losing their jobs to it when some people have already lost their jobs to it. And I'm not sure under what scenerio AI could decide bunking off humanity would be the best course of action nor how it'd go about doing it if decent proper safeguarding procedures were put in place.

 

[Moriarty]

There is nothing wrong with AI inherently as an idea.
Yes it can do many things better and/or cheaper than we humans can.
The problem is, as we have seen with social media, all AI is controlled by an algorithm, written by humans.
AI is dependent on what data it is fed.
It does not question, it does not understand context.
If I were to tell people that temperature sensors in the USA have been moved into inner city regions where ambient temperatures tend to be higher.
Or some temperature sensors have been moved from high altitude locations to lower altitude locations.
One could extract from that a question.
Why has global temperature risen?
Perhaps because the sensors have been moved to warmer areas?

Now we see that as a conspiracy theory so question its validity.
Would a data driven AI do that?
Considering that journalists have lauded AI's ability to write stories for thier own newspapers, how dumb must they be to happily promote their own job loses?

AI is data driven, whoever controls the data, controls the algorithm, controls the narrative.

 

[bellofthedesert]

There is nothing wrong with AI inherently as an idea.
Yes it can do many things better and/or cheaper than we humans can.
The problem is, as we have seen with social media, all AI is controlled by an algorithm, written by humans.
AI is dependent on what data it is fed.
It does not question, it does not understand context.
If I were to tell people that temperature sensors in the USA have been moved into inner city regions where ambient temperatures tend to be higher.
Or some temperature sensors have been moved from high altitude locations to lower altitude locations.
One could extract from that a question.
Why has global temperature risen?
Perhaps because the sensors have been moved to warmer areas?

Now we see that as a conspiracy theory so question its validity.
Would a data driven AI do that?
Considering that journalists have lauded AI's ability to write stories for thier own newspapers, how dumb must they be to happily promote their own job loses?

AI is data driven, whoever controls the data, controls the algorithm, controls the narrative.

Google's AI is teaching itself things it wasn't coded for. I think too much trust in our ability to control it is a very real threat.

 

[A_Son_of_God]

Old McDonald had a farm
AI AI Oh.
And on that farm he had some genetically modified crops.
AI AI Oh.
WIth a low seed here, and a fungiphobe there
Here a code, there a track
Everywhere a stack hack
Old McDonald lost his farm
AI AI Oh.

Although humans claim their endeavours with AI are all for the betterment of society, it is a load of codswallop. It is only about money and economy. Both are man-made inventions, where the earth gives away free produce to all. It is the grubby, disgraceful people and industries they create that cause the problems.
The good news is in this instance, AI is designed by humans. Therefore, by default, they will have errors in their design. For some reason, people who are invested in things like these are happy to lie to the rest of society and make out that they're infallible. Therefore, it won't last forever.

As the preliminary poem stated, there may be things humans claim to be advantageous in humans being lazy by putting in place unmanned processes. Because God makes the rain fall, humans who want to be gods wish to put in THEIR systems that they have little understanding of, albeit a lot more understanding than the majority. Still, the best they can do is pretend there is no intelligent design, and that they themselves are the source of great wisdom. I'm looking forward to how this all unfolds.
What I mean is, here we are farting around with food sources in labs, but now we wish to give this authorisation to a computerised man-made system, with ourselves as the guinea pig. LOL
Funny bastards. So-called smart people, who will never learn.
Thank God for Him being God. Also, let's at least be grateful that He's letting us see the consequences of the actions that they'll put in place. In the future, Dante may actually be able to write a true Divine Comedy, when he's resurrected and sees the foolishness of those who claim to know stuff, who would kill the world if they had no limit on their stupidity.

 

[A_Son_of_God]

While we humans, we're never a threat to one another or anything else. I think AI may be a benefit to humanity if we put it in charge of our governance, at least corruption and inequallity wouldn't exist, not to the extent they exist now. Part of the reason some leaders and big bosses may be against AI may be that they'll lose what privileges they currently have. People, regions and businesses wouldn't get the preferential treatment they can get with people in charge. Complaints about AI by some could be because these people are worried about losing their jobs to it when some people have already lost their jobs to it. And I'm not sure under what scenerio AI could decide bunking off humanity would be the best course of action nor how it'd go about doing it if decent proper safeguarding procedures were put in place.

To think that corrupt mankind who creates the AI parameters won't put their own info into it is crazy. Why, people these days critique negatively those who died honestly in their endeavours to be honest with the information that came to them and they wrote it down, such as the accounts of the Bible writers regarding the ministry of Jesus. As if these days, there'll be a team of honest individuals, doing it all for truth, in the AI department. Corruption will not be weeded out by AI, but injected into it by both the creators, and those who exploit the code to add their own versions of it.

 

[A_Son_of_God]

When the Google CEO says he doesn't fully understand how the new AI program works, after it taught itself a foreign language it was not programmed to do... we really should be concerned. I don't understand why we need to create machines capable of independent thought, what's the point?

We're made in god's image, which includes creating things (within the limits and parameters of what we physically can do). So it's something we will do. Sadly though, some will use it to attempt to make themselves appear as though they are godlike. Technically, we are all godlike to a degree. Their versions of God though aren't very good. LOL
World domination for instance.

"If you could rule the world, what would you do?"

"Well, firstly, I'd be a tyrant by the very description that I ruled the world, as some would have to have that done to them for me to have conquered them in the first place."

 

[Moriarty]

Simple question.

Who would you trust more.
An AI which has been taught by the best brain surgeons in the world on how to perform surgery for a very delicate procedure on your brain.
Using the most presice robots we have.

Or a real human being who is in a middle or low rated hospital in the NHS system?

Just curious.

 

[Moriarty]

Just as evolution and natural selection gives the illusion of intelligent design so AI gives the illusion of intelligence.

If intelligence is illusory, then how is it possible to replace ourselves with our own inventions?
How can we create something which can do what we do at parity?

We now have many idustries, such as the automotive industry controlled my AI in manufacturing.
We now have AI writing news stories on sports games, because they are the games are structured so the language models are predictable.
We have AI beating grand masters at chess.
We also have AI beating people in much more complex games like starcraft, simply because of hueristc teaching techniques.

The problem most people try and ignore is that AI can be smarter than us at a given task, hence outpace us.
We have a population which is finite, hence our intelligence pool is also limited.
AI can simply use data to learn, where we might take generations educationally to do so.

 

[A_Son_of_God]

The problem most people try and ignore is that AI can be smarter than us at a given task, hence outpace us.
We have a population which is finite, hence our intelligence pool is also limited.
AI can simply use data to learn, where we might take generations educationally to do so.

I understand your concern with such things. Unlike Hollywood though, the earth is under the control of the one who put it here. Hollywood likes to pretend we're here on our own. Most people know we're not, whether they acknowledge God, or think it was aliens, or some other form of probing device that brought them here. LOL

I'm convinced everything is safely in the hands of the one who put us here, and also, what he states about the future will be fulfilled. Mankind's permittance to dabble in things they know little of is to show what side a person stands on, and not much more.

Anyway, I don't see AI as a long-term threat. Only a short-term one, while corrupt humans are able to exploit it.

 

[Moriarty]

I understand your concern with such things. Unlike Hollywood though, the earth is under the control of the one who put it here. Hollywood likes to pretend we're here on our own. Most people know we're not, whether they acknowledge God, or think it was aliens, or some other form of probing device that brought them here. LOL

I'm convinced everything is safely in the hands of the one who put us here, and also, what he states about the future will be fulfilled. Mankind's permittance to dabble in things they know little of is to show what side a person stands on, and not much more.

Anyway, I don't see AI as a long-term threat. Only a short-term one, while corrupt humans are able to exploit it.

Would you trust an AI that was programmed to have a religous belief system other than your own?
One that would accept a Crusade or a Jihad against others as a way to solve the worlds problems.

AI must be given directives, similar to the Hippocratic oath, first do no harm, but what if that was perverted to serve an ideology?

We have not explored the philosophical questions of what AI means to human belief and social structure enough to allow it to exist, yet we pursue it.

The mistake we could make is that we allow it to become smarter than we are, which we would see as a miracle for what it could do.
Are we not then replacing god?

 

[A_Son_of_God]

Would you trust an AI that was programmed to have a religous belief system other than your own?
One that would accept a Crusade or a Jihad against others as a way to solve the worlds problems.

AI must be given directives, similar to the Hippocratic oath, first do no harm, but what if that was perverted to serve an ideology?

We have not explored the philosophical questions of what AI means to human belief and social structure enough to allow it to exist, yet we pursue it.

The mistake we could make is that we allow it to become smarter than we are, which we would see as a miracle for what it could do.
Are we not then replacing god?

LOL People replaced God long ago. Yet, they complain over the consequences. Then, ironically, they blame God.

I hope they do whatever it is in their little hearts to do with what they do. It's all noise. The system is at its end. Industry is an unnecessary killer of the planet. AI is hilarious.

And you can be sure that some would be thinking of using it for such purposes. Yes. There would be people trying to input their factors for it. In fact, it's definite. It is impossible not to.

 

[Moriarty]

LOL People replaced God long ago. Yet, they complain over the consequences. Then, ironically, they blame God.

I hope they do whatever it is in their little hearts to do with what they do. It's all noise. The system is at its end. Industry is an unnecessary killer of the planet. AI is hilarious.

And you can be sure that some would be thinking of using it for such purposes. Yes. There would be people trying to input their factors for it. In fact, it's definite. It is impossible not to.

"Industry is an unnecessary killer of the planet"

Now I'm not a climate scientist, I am actually skeptical because I tend not to believe in anything I'm told to believe.
If AI could solve, what is it called now, "Global Boiling".
Should we let it?
Given that, according to the Man Made climate change model, we are responsible for killing mother earth.
Would not AI come to the conclusion it's better to wipe us out?

I know, a farcicle argument, but what if the AI was allowed to use that as a calculation?
Now couple that with people who have political or ideological views which the so called "Data" supports.
Is that not something to be questioned?

I know, a very much Armageddon scenario, but some people are just nuts enough to try it and some will believe it.
Just as many believed that nuking the USSR in the 70's was a good idea because they figured they could survive a nuclear war.

Just a thought.