Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Maximum Spin]

I mean, they COULD go skynet, if someone programmed them horribly horribly wrong, so wrong in fact, that you would have to intentionally program them to do that...

I guess it depends on what you consider "going skynet".
You could program them so horribly wrong that they start killing people, sure, but they wouldn't be doing it "on purpose", you know what I mean?

[smjjames]

*pokes maximum spin* You forgot Trueans request to not directly quote them.

An EMP designed to fry everything in it's vincinity instead of killing whatever it's inside sounds like way overkill of a kill switch. Also, wouldn't an AI that went 'skynet' be able to figure out how to turn off it's own killswitch?

What's more likely than an AI intentionally going 'KILL ALL HUMANS." is an AI following what it's rules say, but theres a problem with the rules or the way the logic is done. We are so far from AIs being able to do the kind of critical thinking that could prevent an AI from blindly doing that.

[Maximum Spin]

An EMP designed to fry everything in it's vincinity instead of killing whatever it's inside sounds like way overkill of a kill switch. Also, wouldn't an AI that went 'skynet' be able to figure out how to turn off it's own killswitch?

Yes, there's also that, of course. EMPs are much easier to defend against than the typical popular-culture depiction, and an AI that can get access to (potentially, compromise) a remote device can just back itself up.

[Tiruin]

Hey Max, respect other forum goers please. You're blatantly going against this at this point (...by quoting that one guy and snipping everything other than one line? You can't miss that).

[bloop_bleep]

Maximum Spin, you're forgetting the fact that self-driving cars (especially ones connected to the Internet of Things) can be hacked. In such a case manual override would be extremely useful.

[milo christiansen]

I have to say, the stuff Max quoted is so ridiculous I wouldn't want anyone to quote me as saying that either.

[Tiruin]

I have to say, the stuff Max quoted is so ridiculous I wouldn't want anyone to quote me as saying that either.

It is baffling if you don't bother communicating with the other person to ask their ideas; instead arguing against them to force their ideas when a simple question is better said overall? I can understand why she wrote it as that, without any ridicule even in thought--and even then, it needn't have to be argued anyway when anyone can just inquire "What do you mean?"
Yknow, instead of being baselessly argumentative for no reason in your tone. Like this sentence prior.

So yeah. It's not because she said stuff that's ridiculous is the reason she writes 'please don't quote me'. And it doesn't even have to become a conversation when you can personally ask (because really, just remove that in your post, other than deliberately ignoring other people's requests).

[smjjames]

Hey Max, respect other forum goers please. You're blatantly going against this at this point (...by quoting that one guy and snipping everything other than one line? You can't miss that).

Yeah, I tried to remind you on it Maximum Spin. I can get forgetting the don't quote me thing (though you obviously removed the 'don't quote me' bits) in a moment of passion over the subject, but as Tiruin said, we still should respect Trueans request.

[Truean]

Please do not... is decency something the internet or humanity wants anymore...?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ah, AI: Replacing humanity, eliminating control/preference, ad homineming any opposition. "Res ipsa loquitur" Latin for "the thing speaks for itself."

Considering another side to an argument? Overcoming fears, doubts disagreements? Does not compute?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[smjjames]

Mentioning Bill Gates would cause a flame war? Maybe on a Mac forum....

Also, narratives about AI going wrong is a common subject in science fiction, Issac Asimov is among the best known for exploring AI in science fiction.

Even Star Trek (TOS and TNG) had a few episodes centering around rogue (sometimes alien) AIs. They generally tended to have good or neutral endings though because TV.

[Baffler]

I have to agree with Truean on this one. To borrow a popular metaphor, only an idiot would create a hammer that might not want to hit nails, and making a hammer that does actively want to hit nails is just a waste of the intelligence required. I don't expect an artificial intelligence deciding on its own to go rogue (mostly because I don't think it's technically realistic for one to exist in the first place at the omniscient AI Jesus level people imagine it but if that turns out to be possible then I'm even more with Truean on that one) but I trust the people who'd end up in charge of artificial intelligence to go rogue for a bit less time than it takes a photon to travel one planck length. That's why I don't want an AI manager directing me at work, and I certainly don't want autonomous police or military robots. We'd all end up like the these folks in pretty fucking short order.

[Rolan7]

Bemoaning the death of decency in all *humanity* because an internet stranger refuses a request unexplained, misguided, inconvenient demand...  The lack of self-awareness still gets me.
I've never been so tempted to hide someone's posts.  What's the point in reading that latest wall of text, particularly, if it can't be addressed point by point?  But it's easier to concede.

I have no idea why Uber would be at fault, anyway (in the auto accident being discussed by a certain forumite who wishes to remain anonymous).  The driver was there to prevent such accidents, and should probably be charged with being distracted.  But watching the video, that's Russian insurance scam levels of jumping in front of the vehicle.  Could have happened to any normal driver.

I'm very skeptical about automated cars handling the intricacies of real life on the road, but I'm not at all surprised that they're doing better than humans.  Humans are awful drivers.

[smjjames]

Which is why it's more likely that a rogue AI will be 'rogue' in the sense that it's carrying out the orders in the way it was told to, except that it's come to a conclusion that we don't want, most likely because we didn't tell it precisely what we wanted it to do or the neural learning network or whatever took it there.

Which is also why Alexa and similar devices are doing the wierd stuff they do. They aren't doing it on purpose, they aren't even self aware programs (though it can seem like it sometimes I guess), they're doing what their algorithm gets to.

We aren't going to see scenarios like that scifi movie back in the 90's (it may have been older though) where a bunch of machines (big rig trucks in particular, don't ask me why) were trying to kill a group of people and they eventually get rescued by a helicopter, which ironically was ALSO AI controlled (or maybe remotely controlled, it wasn't entirely clear I don't think) and friendly to the people. At least I think it was friendly to the people, the movie ended in a bit of a cliffhanger with the people in the helicopter and finding out that theres no human pilot.

Bemoaning the death of decency in all *humanity* because an internet stranger refuses a request unexplained, misguided, inconvenient demand...  The lack of self-awareness still gets me.
I've never been so tempted to hide someone's posts.  What's the point in reading that latest wall of text, particularly, if it can't be addressed point by point?  But it's easier to concede.

I have no idea why Uber would be at fault, anyway (in the auto accident being discussed by a certain forumite who wishes to remain anonymous).  The driver was there to prevent such accidents, and should probably be charged with being distracted.  But watching the video, that's Russian insurance scam levels of jumping in front of the vehicle.  Could have happened to any normal driver.

I'm very skeptical about automated cars handling the intricacies of real life on the road, but I'm not at all surprised that they're doing better than humans.  Humans are awful drivers.

I think it'd be okay to quote if you leave out the author and date tag, you'd have to ask Truean. And yes, I agree that doing big posts makes it too tempting to address it point by point.

[AzyWng]

A friend of mine on Discord just posted this in her server...

Any idea what it is?

[Baffler]

Truthfully I was expecting a jumpscare, but it seems to just kinda end. Kinda disappointing tbh, lotta buildup for nothing. Unless 00_Soon_You_Shall_See isn't the end and I'm just not finding the way forward.

Edit: Nevermind, found a way forward looking at the page source. I have consumed the Truth.