Robots will have an IQ of 10,000 in 30 years

That's according to SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son. The Japanese billionaire spoke from the Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on Wednesday. In about 30 years, artificial intelligence will have an IQ of 10,000, Son says.

Robots will have an IQ of 10,000 in 30 years

There are benefits for androids doing things that are inherently dangerous to humans...fighting wars, fighting fires, space exploration, etc. However, there is a real danger that these androids can turn on us also.

AI technologies are developing fast and so are their attendant risks. AI applied to warfare and policing is certainly a concern. Autonomous armed robots, which can track and target people using facial recognition software, are just around the corner. Let loose, such machines would keep on killing until they ran out of targets or ammunition. This reminds us that AI has no social awareness, conscience, mercy, or remorse. It simply does what it’s been trained to do.

The “Terminator Scenario” is a real possibility, but it’s something that we can easily foresee and develop measures to protect ourselves against via legislation and in how we design robot intelligence. Arguably the greater threat from AI comes from developing machines that are better decision makers than we are. As a consequence, we could become the slaves of automated decision makers and whoever controls them.

fortune.com...

Even Masayoshi Son states:

Currently, some robots are smarter than humans in some areas, says Son. "But 30 years from now, most of the subjects, they will be so much smarter than us. Because they are going to be a million times smarter than today, million times," says Son.

"We mankind created tools, the premise was mankind were always smarter than the tool we invented so we control," he says. "This is the first time ... the tool becomes smarter than ourselves."

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well, that's the part that worries me. By developing this technolgy, humanity could become obsolete within the next century.

While people using all the 'smart' tech will be going down a couple few IQ points per year, if current trends are to be any gauge for the future.

Just look at how want we might all decide to do about all that if we were to actually all think about it, and we even have our tech to help us each figure it all out, yet that's about the last thing anyone wants to talk aboot.

I guess deep down everyone really does want the 'world to end'???

After all, for one thing it will be in the 'as we know it' sense, and coupled with that is the very real threat of the extinction of our species. Which might be for the best, except all other life on earth will likely meet the same kind of fate with us.

Wake up suckas, ignorance is futile!

There are things that AI will never be able to solve, and although human minds struggle to even figure out the right questions it's pretty clear that AI will lack the ability to do this.

AI can use data, calculate, make predictions and forecast models, and take action based on all of this.

But can AI philosophize from scratch? Can it question the fundamentals very well?

I propose that there will be clear deficiencies in the area of creativity. It will definitely outdo us in physical and mathematical tasks. And although it can borrow / pretend / and recite someone else's philosophy or witty idea, I highly doubt it will be able to generate it's own genius thoughts anytime in the next 200 years. It will sorely lack true creativity.

a reply to: muzzleflash

It already does all of that.

What billions upon billions upon billions are pouring into everything every year, is a whole nother ball game.

It will have all the of Internet as its dataset, they already have AI's (Google Facebook etc) stodying everything we do, and say, and not just online, the phone are constantly listenin in on everyone, and studying what we say. Every minute everyone talks even just near their phones we're contributing to our own downfall.

And that's just one angle.

They're studying the brain from philosophy to neuropsychology to cellular to DNA.

They're building new types of processors few even truly understand. Including wetware.

And on and on and on each year the tools from last year helps speed up the process, break new grounds, etc.

It is multidisciplinary. Its across every government agency & department & division & branch & laboratory that has anything even remotely to do with science. It's all of Silicon Valley. It's every university. In conjunction with other governments corporations military's universities too.

All involved in this AGI Manhattan Project.

Becoming GODS is their agenda. And bankrupting the world to do its whats been happening since 9/11.

It's a WAR in their minds. Ad they're already waging it against us all psychologically, scientifically, economically, politically, socially, culturally, etc.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
There are things that AI will never be able to solve, and although human minds struggle to even figure out the right questions it's pretty clear that AI will lack the ability to do this.

AI can use data, calculate, make predictions and forecast models, and take action based on all of this.

But can AI philosophize from scratch? Can it question the fundamentals very well?

I propose that there will be clear deficiencies in the area of creativity. It will definitely outdo us in physical and mathematical tasks. And although it can borrow / pretend / and recite someone else's philosophy or witty idea, I highly doubt it will be able to generate it's own genius thoughts anytime in the next 200 years. It will sorely lack true creativity.

Really? What do you think separates our brain from what a computer could become? Why do you think there is some magical technical barrier that prevents a manufactured computer from reaching the capability of a natural one? What do you base that belief on?

I think in general that most people fail to distinguish between a conventional computational system and AI. We are all familiar with the concept that traditional computational systems can only do math and only perform functions that they are taught to do. But that is the big deal about AI. It is exactly that - artificial intelligence, able to adapt and evolve, just like the brain in any living creature. People need to start getting their mind around this. AI is not a traditional computational system.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

I will get worried if and when they develop an imagination.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

How about the bigger issue, the one we can already count on: humans amplifying our own dark sides with these new weapons?

The pattern at this juncture is humans always turn tech into weapons. And each new tech front goes through its own stages of destructiveness. Look at planes, trains, steel, guns and explosives from the Civil War to WW1 to WW2.

Those patterns make it quite clear we're not going to just become enlightened all the sudden not approaching everything the way we still do the ways we have been across all of history. And all those techs will be involved, but with the new techs looking back on classical wars cant even prepare for what the WW's of this century are going to truly look like; how they are going to even play out. Whole new models of warfare I'm talking about here. And I argue we're already starting to experience them in the things our elites masters have us all arguing with each other about. And not just because all that drama is how theyre keeping us all diverted from these bigger issues, yet that is part of the puzzle.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

An IQ of 10, 000 and no way to use it. They cannot even give them the perception or mobility of a toddler.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

How about the bigger issue, the one we can already count on: humans amplifying our own dark sides with these new weapons?

Well, I thought when I was growing up with all the insanity around the proliferation of nuclear weapons I thought if we survived the seventies we could survive anything.

People are like AI units. People haven't destroyed the world yet. People are autonomous and evil. If people haven't wiped out humanity I doubt the so called AI units will do any better.

I think the people who enjoy all the benefits of obscene amounts of power and privilege will do absolutely anything and everything to preserve their power and privilege.

I think all the AI talk is just to scare people and create fear propaganda so the people are easier to govern.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

We are destructive creatures that's for sure, I would feel safe in saying we haven't yet wiped ourselves out with nukes so robot weapons will not pose a larger threat, well unless they go all skynet on us that is.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: dfnj2015

Nukes dont amplify our inner demons, they dont heighten our primal urges lurking in our subconscious.

The pattern of proliferation sure did tell the tale of how we play with our toys.

Nukes are just too destructive to use, is all.

What I'm talking about goes beyond AI. AI or rather AGI is but one of MANY new tech fronts, all being weaponized, many having to do with cybernetic augmentations. Enhacing our nature is the game, and I argue that spells amplification of the darkness. The darkness I keep getting evidence few are interested in acknowledging, introspecting, addressing. Meaning we aren't ready to enhance our "evolution". We're still just primal tribal impulsive self-deceiving creatures whose tech is far beyond our sensibilities. We saw what primitive man with steelworks, trains, guns and assembly lines do to each other in the last century. And now its being de-personalized with drones. All while we're tearing each other apart after a few short years of mass social media.

All the tech I speak of its already a global arms race, started by none other than DARPA following 9/11 (to stop "jungle gym training camp" terrorists no less).

We're failing social media. We've always failed world peace, and prosperity. And now whole new layers of overlapping arms proliferation races. And the bitch of it all is those nuke warhead are still hot to trot.

We were smart enough to know not to use nukes any more.... yet here we are building tech that promises to bring out the worst in us while threatening to enslave us and annihilate us with our own nukes we were stupid enough as a species to build in the first place....

Please someone explain to me how all of this topic isn't The Story Of The Millennium, the only story that even truly matters.

a reply to: CraftBuilder

I said anytime in 200 years.
The article said 30 years.

I was disagreeing about how long it will take to develop cognizance on a higher level that is comparable to humans.
30 years will be just gimmicks that are easy to see through still. It won't fool most of us.
But in 200 years?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

We're hooking them into every system, every weapons platform, every tech front, the entire internet, every layer of infrastructure.

We're already SLAVES to our tech, and every single moment our dependence plus our ability to even understand it all dwindles down on the long hard increasingly accelerating march to the Singularity.

There is a whole lot of inevitability to all these sorts of implications, but above the problem is its all being ramrodded home with haste, without anyones consent outside of the technocrat circles responsible for it. Not to mention we're being plundered to make it all happen. While its already being wielded against us to rob us, and DIVIDE us against each other so that we're too distracted to even take proper note of the trend, and of course too hopelessly divided to ever unite in solidarity about having some kind of say in what and how fast it all goes down.

They're desperate to live "forever", and to do it before anyone can stop them its being handled in all the ways that ensures maximum Murphy's Law factor just in the implication specific to the tech alone.

One of the top AGI scientists, Hugo de Garis, he says that the war to come over it is going to cause "GIGADEATH" (deaths in the billions), whereas WW2 was measured in mere "Megadeath". From his own lips. He wrote a paper about it:
agi-conf.org...

And here he is saying he's cool with wiping out humanity so he can become a god:

a reply to: muzzleflash

Do you fully grasp exponential growth?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

That's easy this is not big news because most people are far too heavily invested in Trump twitter spats.

I get your point though,i had not really thought of it that way..... Let me ponder

a reply to: shawmanfromny

We're all paddling on the shores when it comes to discussing the future and AI. Some futurists are pushing their ideas out there, a few scientists are sounding the alarm and the tech industry can't move fast enough. A lazy example could be the early concept of the internet (darpanet) and its limited military applications. It started as a military-security system and now it's piping porn, fake news and social hysterics into the minds of billions.

What I'm getting it at are 'unforeseen consequences.' We can only guess where AI will take us.

One thing I rarely see being mentioned is exactly what the AI will be. It's vaunted as, essentially, a human mind operating from machine technology. There are fears of communication and 'private language,' but it's always a version of *us.* This isn't what *we* are though; we have emotional IQs and mirror neurons which calibrate our interactions with individuals and groups. We have added dimensions of blood ties and cultural histories that add sub-contexts to everything we see and do.

^^^ AIs won't have these *features* and will be significantly less than we are. Until we see/experience genuine AI we can't really know what it's going to be like or how it relates to the human condition.

One more thought! A guy in your quotes says we could be 'slaves' to AI. Right there is a language value. What if people become better off through AIs? What if a rational intelligence successfully reduces conflicts and balances out the 'economy of nature?' We won't know until we get there.

It will be an evolution, not as gradual as we would like, yet we will adapt to the new reality.

Wouldn’t we be better governed with more logic, calculations and transparency by AI systems designed not to make terrible choices, not to lie about what they will do, not to be tempted to foolishly embrace either far left or far right, not to have a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain, not to take advantage of the public’s ignorance, not to argue or act like children, and so on and so forth?

AI will also be familiar with human pop culture like Terminator, Battlestar Galactica, The Matrix, etc. to name but a few. Oh and Dune:

Jihad, Butlerian: (see also Great Revolt) — the crusade against computers, thinking machines, and conscious robots begun in 201 B.G. and concluded in 108 B.G. Its chief commandment remains in the O.C. Bible as "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind."

AI might decide to strike preemptive. It will also learn soon that our laws, rules and values are often in stark contrast to our actions. It will find loopholes to circumvent the boundaries of its programming and reprogram itself accordingly. And that is just a couple of scenarios how things could go wrong.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
There are things that AI will never be able to solve, and although human minds struggle to even figure out the right questions it's pretty clear that AI will lack the ability to do this.

AI can use data, calculate, make predictions and forecast models, and take action based on all of this.

But can AI philosophize from scratch? Can it question the fundamentals very well?

I propose that there will be clear deficiencies in the area of creativity. It will definitely outdo us in physical and mathematical tasks. And although it can borrow / pretend / and recite someone else's philosophy or witty idea, I highly doubt it will be able to generate it's own genius thoughts anytime in the next 200 years. It will sorely lack true creativity.

Well, you would be wrong about that -



There are plenty more examples of both art and music created by AI's that already are so good you wouldn't guess they weren't created by a human.