Stephen Hawking Warns A.I. Could Lead To The End Of Mankind

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
I think so called 'human intelligence' is far more dangerous than artificial intelligence for the foreseeable future.

is that human group intelligence or individual d.ick intelligence

a reply to: MConnalley

I was having this conversation with someone else on one of my threads. To make a long story short, we realized that technology will keep us looking outward, and keep us from looking inward to solve our problems. In other words, I disagree with your opinion about where technology will lead us.

originally posted by: yuppa
Does anyone remember how wrong he was on the black hole theory? HE could be wrong here too right? Its not the first time.

He was not really wrong in the sense you are implying. He disproved his own theory, which is much different, and real science. This is how breakthroughs are accomplished.

As with his current thoughts, I don't think it takes much of a stretch to realize that our technology is advancing at an exponential rate, and major discoveries are happening at much reduced time frames. Perhaps there is a point where our human brains cannot keep following that asymptotic curve, and the next great discoveries will occur to the machines we produced along the way, before we realize it. Scary scenario really. It begs for controls, and how can that be accomplished?

How illogical.

No one has mentioned the "Terminator" series. James Cameron had this idea when Stephen could still move his little fingers.
Then there is the "Lawnmower Man", Hal 9000 from Space Odyssey, I Robot, Futurama etc etc.

30+ years ago, they said that we would all have a 15 hour or less working week by year 2000, that robots and computers would do all the work (yeah right), humans would have so much leisure time, pollution would be gone etc etc.

Reality is, computers have created more work, break down all the time, viruses infect everything, factories still pollute, humans are actually working longer to make a buck....

Humans will be humans....that is my prediciton.....

The brain needs exercise as in figuring out where you parked your car instead of letting Google Now tell you. People already can't think for themselves.
I hope zombies like their brains mushy! haha

a reply to: beezzer

haha why not? Carl might be an example of accidental knowledge.

originally posted by: gort51
How illogical.

No one has mentioned the "Terminator" series. James Cameron had this idea when Stephen could still move his little fingers.
Then there is the "Lawnmower Man", Hal 9000 from Space Odyssey, I Robot, Futurama

etc etc.

30+ years ago, they said that we would all have a 15 hour or less working week by year 2000, that robots and computers would do all the work (yeah right), humans would have so much leisure time, pollution would be gone etc etc.

Reality is, computers have created more work, break down all the time, viruses infect everything, factories still pollute, humans are actually working longer to make a buck....

Humans will be humans....that is my prediciton.....

Before responding to the OP, I just want to point out that computers do not create more work and in fact, the complete opposite is true. I'm an expert in this area.

What surprises me is that nobody in all these posts has once mentioned "the singularity" which is what this is all more or less about. It's a term first used by John von Neumann in the 1950's and it describes a point at which AIs reach an intelligence greater than man's.

I'm not suggesting we disregard the warnings of Hawking, Kurzweil and others but this isn't exactly "news" aside from the fact that the movie Transcendence was released a few weeks ago. I haven't seen Transcendence yet but if you find things of this nature interesting, the movie Her from last year is worth a watch.

EDIT:

link to wikipedia page about the singularity

AI does have a significant advantage on us though. It isn't blinded by the clouded vision caused by human emotions.

Without them, it will not be likely to make decisions for personal benefits, or hate, jealousy, urges that people have to cause pain and chaos, won't even be part of it's vocabulary.

Of course it might decide that survival is a priority, but even then, only a direct thread can make it decide to act.
Without the emotional ability to feel, it's impossible to assume AI will act like us at all.

Even when we become a statistic and end up, labeled as a problem, it's man who let himself become a problem.

We should be investing a lot more energy into the way we live together, and think about what our place is in a world we created ourselves. When we do that, we might find ourselves taking a different path, one that leads to a better world.
A world in balance, with stability caused by high standards, that is needed to build a society where personal gain is no longer a priority where we work for the benefit of our species.

I honestly think it doesn't really matter if we end up creating AI and we are living like we do right now, cause if AI doesn't do it, we will do it ourselves. Eventually our actions will destroy our way of life.

The uncertainty in how AI would come to view the universe and their purpose within it in relation to ours could create an entirely new form and definition of the animal kingdom. An inorganic race with the drive to survive as any other.

Possibly internet compatible as well with the potential to move through cyberspace and reality simultaneously.

I don't care if it wipes out mankind. Our containers were due for an upgrade, to faster potential. I'll just manifest in a robot next time.

We are doomed.!

not sure if anyone has seen the terror watch lists by type...or everyone
looks to me like the issue has already been decided

a reply to: MConnalley

I am not sure Stephen Hawking says anything and the state just push out what ever they want and then says he said it.

A.I could be seen as evoloution in a way but make no mistake that even today men and the machines they control are watching your every move and they are not doing this without good reason.

Computers are already programing themselves but they still need us in the loop but we are becoming the weakest link and we make too many mistake

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Before responding to the OP, I just want to point out that computers do not create more work and in fact, the complete opposite is true. I'm an expert in this area.

Me too.

What you are saying is wrong because you just need to look at people sitting in offices that produce little to nothing of any use and they are all sitting behind computer screens.

IT Project manager, office administrators, HR departments, security experts, network admin.....................

I once worked at a banks IT deaprtment and between the 50 of us we never deat with customers and created so much work internaly that we didn't need any external input and my tasked involved writing $hity software to monitor what everyone else was doing and a system so people could vote in the office on one stupid question or another.

Sorry man but it's like saying computers are saving trees when we have never used so much paper in all our lives thanks to the print button.

Tell me could you do your current job without a computer ? You have answered your own question then.

the implications of AI are incredible. i agree with hawking.

how much power will they have over day to day human life?

it would for sure give the scientism fans cause for celebration, right? (eat that! christians)
will anyone ask it "what is the meaning of life?" lol.

anyway, i USE my pc, even tho i have no idea it's true potential. it's MY tool, entertainment, etc.

i sure as hell don't want something smarter than me that is spock on steroids.
maybe i read too much sci-fi, but something that can think for itself and act on it, is fairly scary.

compassion, empathy, love, etc, where does that come in? or just straight cold hard logic?

i know the 3 rules of robotics, lol, tell me how that will work in the real world? is it even possible? wouldn't they know it?

fortunately, true AI ain't gonna happen anytime soon.
at least i won't be around for the problems.

even you tube annoys the heck out of me, suggesting stuff i might be interested in.
i bet AI would be like a nagging spouse.
lol, don't do this, don't do that, that's not good for you! oy!!! don't you walk away from me! bang! bang!!

originally posted by: gort51
How illogical.

No one has mentioned the "Terminator" series. James Cameron had this idea when Stephen could still move his little fingers.
Then there is the "Lawnmower Man", Hal 9000 from Space Odyssey, I Robot, Futurama

etc etc.

Not all science fiction becomes science fact, but some can and does, and while I don't think those hollywood scenarios are inevitable, they do paint possible futures with some potential degree of realism.

The "I, Robot" movie emphasizes that controls are put in place to make sure the robots have programming to not harm people, but it turns out that people still aren't at all happy with what the robots do.

Will AI be a problem in the immediate future? No, it's not advanced enough yet. But the unimaginative articles I've read by people who say it will never be a problem are very shallow and short-sighted.

Look at the most carefully constructed machines we make, like aircraft and nuclear reactors. We didn't anticipate a simple rudder problem on airplanes where the rudder would do exactly the opposite of what the pilot told it to do

Airplane crash inquiry focuses on rudder control valve

In an uncommanded reversal, a mechanical snafu causes the rudder to go in the direction opposite what the pilot intends when he presses on the rudder pedals in the cockpit.

Now can anybody say that we can be sure to avoid designing intelligent robots that won't do the opposite of what we tell them to do, when we can't even design much simpler aircraft to not do the opposite of what we tell them to do?

It's not realistic to say we've got this handled. Clearly, we don't, and we will pay the price dearly for our failure to learn the lessons of not even being able to make aircraft rudders go the direction we tell them to go, when we design AI machines thinking we've covered all the angles and they will never have any problems or do something different than we expect.

I watch quite a few Tedx Talks and often laugh - out of fear I think, when I see and hear a presenter talking so passionately about the advanced technology the company they work for is creating - how wonderful it is - how their technology is the way of the future - will make things better for mankind - the exponential progress - how it will save us 'doing' this and that - the list goes on... and I think 'the Robots are already talking'.
and I'm left feeling that with all their good purpose and intentions, the education I am getting from looking at this is a glimpse into a future where their technological advancement will seen by others (socio/economic psychopathic) as a way to destroy, harm, conquer, imprison, control, [add descriptive of choice] rather than to heal, help, nurture, (add descriptive of choice).

and to add, not all technology saves time, nor resources, nor money, nor are all these new technologies 'advancements'.

A.i and the singularity?
They will make 'bad' A.I - they will dress it up in a nice shiny suit or it will look like a cat, and we will all believe that it is better this way, and it is and advancement - and it is adding to our technological interactive experience - which somehow translates to 'it is all good' - and 'it is all safe'... until something goes horribly wrong and cannot be reversed.
And if history is a mirror, we are already well on our way to being re-programmed to accept everything for the fear of missing out or not being 'up to date' and more importantly; not trust ourselves and we are being entrenched with the belief that we can do nothing about it.

Rant over - back to writing my book by hand...

I don't care all of words from Stephen Hawking.

originally posted by: VirusGuard

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Before responding to the OP, I just want to point out that computers do not create more work and in fact, the complete opposite is true. I'm an expert in this area.

Tell me could you do your current job without a computer ? You have answered your own question then.

I cant actually do one of my jobs with a computer - thank goodness

originally posted by: iamhobo
I can't wait until we have to argue for computers to have rights.

I can see it now...

"I'm all for MAC to PC marriage, but it'll be a cold day in hell before I see PC to PC or MAC to MAC!!!"

Are you sick! God hates mac to mac Marriages! Its natural and perverted!