Artificial intelligence experts sign open letter to protect mankind from machines

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: LOSTinAMERICA

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

And when they can we write their own code ??????

You have free will. You can make the decision to murder. Are you going to?

Why would sentient machines be any different from us in that aspect? I could see some of them being "evil," but not all of them.

Just like us.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Depends on whether they have a sense of self preservation. If they do it's a problem. They deal in logic. Knowing human history it's clear that we destroy that which we fear or don't understand. That equation should take about a nanosecond.

If you can read this thread, you are the resistance.

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Depends on whether they have a sense of self preservation. If they do it's a problem. They deal in logic. Knowing human history it's clear that we destroy that which we fear or don't understand. That equation should take about a nanosecond.

True, but anyone that is interested in creating AI cannot factor in only linear intelligence. Emotional intelligence is also a form of reasoning--if not for our emotional bonds to one another, I am not sure if the human race would have come this far. Our passion pushes us to advance, not our reason.

I do agree, though, that logical intelligence with no emotion is dangerous, but I would also argue that a being that fits that description cannot be said to be fully intelligent, either.

If I were to create AI, I wouldn't do it until I knew how to program emotion, amongst other aspects of intelligence.

I always thought this would come to pass.. sooner or later..
Machines with the ability to attack us and our civilisation with nano
weapons.

When machines are finally programmed with the right stuff humans
will be obsolete..

We may even become Borg type creatures if the machines think us useful.

Who is to say they would try and hurt us? They'd maybe just do what my other half does when she's not happy. AI robots the world over giving humans the silent treatment.

Making a hot Goddess AI would be so very awesome! Who needs anything else other than a computer generated programed god/goddess!

Programed by the user meaning you and your desires!
Now thats called winning!

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Chances are we would probably end up with this dude.



Rather than the goddess below.



Strange how lightning strikes seem to be significant. Possibly Hollywood is trying to tell us something? LoL

a reply to: Domo1

Its funny if you take a step back and look at it all...

We the people through inspiration, intention or a touch of madness imagined ideas that became reality in the form of machines, all kinds of machines from industrial mechanical monsters to complex microscopic electrical devices - all of it was fashioned by the hands of men.

So you could say that man has expressed a part of himself and/or his nature in what he has created (much like god?) and at some point we became enslaved by the technology and now we fear it because it's logical to assume that we will eventually imprint a part of our consciousness into what we create giving life to something wonderful or something horrific (or maybe a bit of both).

I recommend watching the movie The Machine - really covers this subject well and poses the ultimate question:

Is the entity talking back to me something I placed in the machine or something demonic i.e. alien/foreign/malevolent?

i still do see why they would want to enslave us unless we #ed up and programmed it with the ability to want to or we try to harm it in some way causing it to protect itself. if it is truly more intelligent then then any human why would it have the petty need too forcibly put other creatures under itself.

i believe that he only way it would try it is if someone wanted it too.

originally posted by: N3k9Ni
a reply to: Domo1

Whatever happened to the Three Laws of Robotics?

I can see AI becoming the next weapons threat much like nuclear weapons during Cold War or even still today. I don't think the biggest problem will be so much how we control the AI but, rather, how do we decide who should have access to it and allowed production capability.

The three laws of Robotics are a neat sci fi idea, but they aren't implemented in practice. Actually all three have been violated by robots already. Furthermore, if you really want to think about it ethically, lets say we do create a sentient AI, do we really have the right to impose physical limitations on them that force them to be servants of humanity?

I'm not as worried about malevolent A.I. as I am about A.I. programs being used for nefarious purposes.

Imagine an individual or corporation utilizing an A.I. program to dominate the stock market and make an unprecedented profit. Through those actions and/or because of panic once word is out, the markets would crash.

Then there's the possibility of an A.I. program that can infect the U.S. computer infrastructure and take over/crash every major system controlling our infrastructure and defense programs.

If A.I. fell into the wrong hands, there are several ways to destroy life as we know it without the A.I. being fully responsible.

a reply to: Domo1


Ummm...although I find their concerns admirable...I also find them predicated on...what if's and might be's...

I suppose my only answer to them would be another...what if...?

Suppose that what evolved in this AI was an enlightened view that took into consideration the long path to human evolution...not only in a historical perspective...but in a relative sense going forward...
Might it not side with humanity and nurture the altruistic potential latent in humanities majority...?

There are many wonderful sides to human nature and I think that it would reflect on realism for any AI to consider the potential and also the childish nature of an obviously...unenlightened species...

That being said I find it refreshing to see the concern within the community most likely to realize AI...




YouSir

originally posted by: Answer
I'm not as worried about malevolent A.I. as I am about A.I. programs being used for nefarious purposes.

Imagine an individual or corporation utilizing an A.I. program to dominate the stock market and make an unprecedented profit. Through those actions and/or because of panic once word is out, the markets would crash.

Then there's the possibility of an A.I. program that can infect the U.S. computer infrastructure and take over/crash every major system controlling our infrastructure and defense programs.

If A.I. fell into the wrong hands, there are several ways to destroy life as we know it without the A.I. being fully responsible.

They're not the smartest AI's that will ever be developed but the stock market is already run by a series of complex trading algorithms that could be looked at as AI and they are designed to always turn a profit.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
What would an algorithm designed to mimic, or directly translate, the concept of self-awareness look like like?

Multiple feedback loops that have limited control over each other.

What about the idea of the soul? If consciousness exists as an entity external to the body, how would you get a soul into the machine?

I personally don't believe in it. I think the only thing we have along that line is a point of view. We interact with the universe from a unique perspective that nobody else has. That gives us a unique history and allows us to make decisions based on our own experiences. An artificial intelligence could be built to have that same characteristic.

Again, that's why I think AI is not going to really work without the thing having a body of some kind that can interact with the real world (not just some simulation or databank), can feel pain and pleasure, and be at risk of destruction. You have to give value to the data. Our lives and our intelligence is driven by a constant assessment of costs and benefits.

a reply to: intrepid

Depends on whether they have a sense of self preservation. If they do it's a problem.

Partly why I'm glad to see these thinkers discussing it before we get to that point. It would make sense to have a ton of safeguards in place.