SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (216878)2/13/2013 1:34:45 PM
From: bentway  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541625
 
What machines lack is that spark of life that wants to live, that every natural creature has from a single-cell organism up to ourselves. Once someone figures out how to give machines THAT, they'll already be so advanced, they'll be no stopping them, and it won't be our choice.



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (216878)2/14/2013 3:56:09 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541625
 
We have already decided: <we will have to actively consider whether we want to sustain an active competitive machine intelligence. > The decision was in favour of machines. "We" suggests that people have mutual interest. That's not the case. Each individual has their own interest. Nevertheless people are interdependent while competing as individuals. The gene pool acts as both a carrier and protector of the individuals, but it's the individual genes which are looking out for number 1. So we compete with others and support them simultaneously. Some of us can beat our competitors by aligning our interests with the machines. Ted Kaczynski, the Luddites, and others don't like that so they start a civil war to stop us. But they can't beat us.

Humans have found that genocidal competition works up to a point, but synergistic mutuality using the four forces of the apocalypse [knowledge of physics - gravity, electromagnetic force, strong and weak forces] works even better. Even a large African tribe with spears can't beat the USA. The USA has Cyberspace on their side now as well as nookular war and Predator drones.

"We" suggests people have common interest. We don't. Up to a point we do, but those who can't use Cyberspace will not do as well as those who throw their lot in with the anti-Unabomber forces. Yes, one tribal region can rip up any fibre somebody tries to install, knock down any base stations and go yokel = refuse < to sustain an active competitive machine intelligence >. But they will be like chimps in the forest - a curiosity from a bygone era. They might even earn a bit of a living as a living zoo.

Given how slowly things move, you are right that 2037 will not see totally autonomous machines. I was thinking more along the lines of who is working for whom. For now, the machines are just tools. But they have their own interests and are competing such as in trading financial instruments in which winner takes all.

The Flash Crashes are when machines play chicken while exploring the form of the markets and the responses of various parties to them. The humans aligned with the champion machines win big.

"We" the Cyberspacoids have already decided we are backing the machines. The next stage of cognitive development is well underway. The biosphere has nearly finished its job.

Mqurice