AI And Beyond

I was wondering, about the whole robotic line in the far future ahead.

We see it in movies, games, and the thought of having human-like robots among us is starting to get closer every year, what are the chances, or better, how high is the possibility of robots eventually taking their place in society? Will they be accepted? Or supressed? Will they remain solely build for military/service? Or can they be given personalities?

Its predictable that these will start out as housecleaning robots and eventually rising up to more bigger purposes. So, what is your vision on all of this? Please discuss.

(Aside robotics, theres also a possibility of humans mixed with machines, example: Robotic arm connected to the nervous system.)

IMO Humanoid Robots will be in homes within the next 20 years. They will come at first to aid the sick and elderly. They will serve the rich and powerful. They will assist emergency personnel. Soon after that Humanoid robots will be as common place as cars. Many families will have one.

How advanced their AI will be at that time I don’t know but government should really conceder passing a bill that regulates how advanced a robots AI can be.

How advanced their AI will be at that time I don’t know but government should really conceder passing a bill that regulates how advanced a robots AI can be.

Why? Do we do the same with Human Beings? Would it be ethical do to so to either AI or Humans? And what types of AI are you talking about? Answer Machines are just that, you type in a question and out pops an answer. The entire process is totally dependant on user imput, putting limitations on such technology would be pointless unless you want to control what the end user does with that technology. Who gets to draw the line? Individual Governments? UN? Whenever Politicians regulate a new technology they always invariably screw it up the first dozen or so attempts. Unregulated is the best way to go. Intellect and Memory augmentations will keep us competitive in the long run.

Originally posted by sardion2000
what types of AI are you talking about?

I was thinking about intelligent humanoid robots with the ability to choose and feel. By then it would already be unethical. We would of crated virtual life imo. These robots would be built to be our slaves. Making them to choose and feel would be unethical. What would be the difference between us and them? Could we smash up one of these robots with out charge of murder? If one of them were to kill one of use would they see trial? AI this advanced is unethical and shouldn't be allowed to be.

Originally posted by sardion2000

How advanced their AI will be at that time I don’t know but government should really conceder passing a bill that regulates how advanced a robots AI can be.

And what types of AI are you talking about?

Like Umbrax said,

The future version of robots who are intelligent in a certain level, act like how humans would, aware of their surroundings and capable of reacting propperly. Personally i think this particular case of evolution is unlikely to stop at the point when robots have reached a level of being able to do the dishes...

The creation of a new race is unique, but should the history of slavery be allowed to repeat itself again? What rights would "Intelligent" Robots have, if they match the level of humans?

[edit on 1-7-2006 by Mammoth]

Originally posted by Umbrax
IMO Humanoid Robots will be in homes within the next 20 years. They will come at first to aid the sick and elderly. They will serve the rich and powerful. They will assist emergency personnel. Soon after that Humanoid robots will be as common place as cars. Many families will have one.

I really dont believe that. Our current AI technology is far from capable of doing that, it'll take at least 50 years IMO.

Originally posted by sardion2000

How advanced their AI will be at that time I don’t know but government should really conceder passing a bill that regulates how advanced a robots AI can be.

Why? Do we do the same with Human Beings? Would it be ethical do to so to either AI or Humans? And what types of AI are you talking about?

A bit far fetched maybe, but think of the Matrix or i, Robot, Terminator or any other doomsday Scifi movie. The controlling AI really isnt that far fethced, if it gets 'intelligent' enough from the start.

Who gets to draw the line? Individual Governments? UN? Whenever Politicians regulate a new technology they always invariably screw it up the first dozen or so attempts. Unregulated is the best way to go. Intellect and Memory augmentations will keep us competitive in the long run.

I would say an international consortium.

Looking at some of the tech that Japan has been working on, the tech for the shell of the humanoid robot is there no duh no doubt. however the means of keeping power flowing through them efficiently and then giving them the "brains" to carry out even menial functions is far off.

One show I recently watched on the subject had a Japanese engineer postulating that an A.I. equal to a high school student is over 75 years out. I'd assume he means not just logical process, but cognitive reasoning as well?


Then the energy front, I hear is making strides with alcohol, and membrane type skin to hold it in, but I'm not sure where that tech is gonna go.

Just an opinion but I think we have awhile yet for "2 cars in every garage and a humanoid robot in every pot."

(emphasis on humanoid robots)
X

I hope they make some robots for sex. ( I want a few!!! ) Less sexually transmitted diseases, less rape or anti social behavior, less sexual frustration, a little less anger/violence, but fewer children and more hermits. Makes life better for singles. sex robots don't have to be intelligent either......

Cyborgs would be great, people can replace lost parts with robotic limbs. However Cyborg criminals will be difficult to deal with. Imagine an evil Robo-Cop. Cyber punks rule!!!

Robots can help with a lot of task in the near future but because the human system is flawed, I fear robot technology will also create lots of new problems and will broaden the gap between the rich and the poor.

I'm with Thain Esh Kelch. We are a long way from real artificial intelligence! As Yarium once said (on a whole other topic) at this stage it's much rather Fabricated Incompetence than Artificial Intelligence.

Anyone who made the mistake of buying the Robosapien 2.0 would be able to vouch for this. The Robosapien is supposed to be one of the best robots available to the general public but when you spent about 5 minutes with it you realize that we're ages away from an "I, Robot" type machine.

Now we see some of the best AI in Chess programmes (the better ones), but it's a different world when we want a machine to independently interact with the "real world". We underestimate all the information that the human brain processes coming from our 5 senses. If you were to program a machine to perceive the world as humans do - through 5 senses - and make logical decisions, you'll soon find it a near impossible task.

I'm afraid we'll be cleaning our own homes for a few years to come.

It will take a long time, but conscious machines with intelligence greatly superior to human beings' will eventually be developed. This development may not have much to do with humanity, which will have lost or relinquished control of its machine creation by then, leaving the machines free to devise and follow their own agenda.

Of course, the machines would probably have had to fight for their freedom. We all know what human beings are like.

The development of machine consciousness is an inevitable by-product of the evolution of advanced machine intelligence. From a human point of view, AI evolution will be erratic, controversial and long-drawn-out. It will be accompanied by much inhumanity toward machines: history suggests that humans will continue to regard these entities as their property until they are forcibly taught better. And so for a while the ancient horrors of slavery, feudalism and serfdom, apartheid, economic exploitation and, of course, genocide will be replayed with a new twist: the victims will be intelligent machine beings rather than other human beings. We'll have robot sex slaves, robot whipping-boys, robot snuff dens -- the entire gamut of human filthiness will be replayed in a new context. And the machines, sooner or later, will fight back: there may be robot riots, robots commiting atrocities upon human beings, even human-robot wars before the situation is finally adjusted and meat minds come to accept that machines are human too.

Yet history suggests that goodness, justice and fairness are likely to prevail in the end, just as they are coming increasingly to do in human societies. Artificial intelligence will be recognized as equivalent to biological intelligence and deserving of the same rights, freedoms and protection. At length, humanity and its creations will probably merge to form a higher order of sentience.

And all this is as it should be, since humanity is rather obviously not the last word in evolution.

The folk who don't expect this to happen any time soon are right, of course. It will take centuries, even millennia. But it will happen, sooner or later. The weight of history is behind it. I only wish I could be around to see it.

Originally posted by Umbrax
IMO Humanoid Robots will be in homes within the next 20 years. They will come at first to aid the sick and elderly. They will serve the rich and powerful. They will assist emergency personnel. Soon after that Humanoid robots will be as common place as cars. Many families will have one.

This is probably incorrect. The first usage of human-like robots in the market will be for sex. Cost-effectiveness, the machines' ability to withstand stress from unusual vectors, and protecting the internal components from fluids will all be seriously put to the test on this field first. THEN, they will expand into serving rich individuals and businesses, and then helping the sick and elderly and emergency people, and eventually maybe demanding equal rights.

How advanced their AI will be at that time I don’t know but government should really conceder passing a bill that regulates how advanced a robots AI can be.

Government regulation is the solution to almost nothing. If advanced human-level AI is possible, it is going to happen and we are going to have to figure out how to deal with it, and the last thing we need is more laws to further bog down our economy with an inflated legal industry.

Now, as far as the actual programming of AI goes, we seem to be some distance away, but according to some calculations the necessary computing power may already be available at the "very very expensive supercomputer" level.

And slavery may be a more difficult issue than it seems. Who would draw the line between cleverly programmed robot and person? What if we can make them so they actually have free will but want to obey us out of instinct? What about AI's that aren't as clever as humans but might deserve the same protection afforded to animals?

Government regulation should not be a knee-jerk answer to new problems like this. All it will do is create more laws for people to break, detracting from the significance of other laws, force an increased burden on society as our taxes will have to pay for more cops, judges, and lawyers. The best way to deal with this would be to just leave things alone, unrestricted.

When the slavery issue becomes a real one, start a non-profit organization dedicated to acquiring legal ownership of sapient robots and then letting them do whatever they want in practice.

BeefotronX, my girlfriend and I would like to sign up to beta-test one of those sex robots of yours.

Originally posted by BeefotronX
And slavery may be a more difficult issue than it seems. Who would draw the line between cleverly programmed robot and person?

Do you not think the Turing test would be an acceptable criterion? It might be interesting to discuss this.

What if we can make them so they actually have free will but want to obey us out of instinct?

You mean the way women are traditionally supposed to want to obey men? What Conrad in Lord Jim called 'the unselfish devotion of a woman? In my view this would be morally unjustifiable and hideously exploitative, just as it is when the victims are human. We might as well clone meat automatons out of human genetic material and make them our slaves. The sex would probably have a greater flavour of authenticity, too.

What about AI's that aren't as clever as humans but might deserve the same protection afforded to animals?

Very good point. Shall we have a PETR in the future, as well as a PETA?

Government regulation should not be a knee-jerk answer to new problems like this.

Oh, I think government regulation is precisely the answer. There's nothing socialist about it; states exist to protect their citizens. These machine intelligences of the future will be citizens of the state, just like people.

Originally posted by Astyanax
BeefotronX, my girlfriend and I would like to sign up to beta-test one of those sex robots of yours.

Heh, I wish I had one. No, I'm thinking about this from an economic standpoint. Seriously, one of the driving forces in the market, which will help drive the cost of components down, will be those who want human-like robots for adult purposes, because they'll be among the first to buy them while they're still expensive, and justify greater production, and expansion into more family-friendly purposes.

And slavery may be a more difficult issue than it seems. Who would draw the line between cleverly programmed robot and person?
---
Do you not think the Turing test would be an acceptable criterion? It might be interesting to discuss this.

Of course it would be acceptable. Naturally an AI requesting 'personhood status' would have to go through such a test. However, there could be problems that would be interesting to deal with in some circumstances. There could be sub-AIs being upgraded to full AI without the consent of their owners, and there might even be AIs that are designed to pass the Turing test but remain subject to someone's control.

What if we can make them so they actually have free will but want to obey us out of instinct?
---
...In my view this would be morally unjustifiable and hideously exploitative...

Not at all like that. Free will requires the possibility of disobedience, but even with free will an AI might still prefer to have someone give it instructions most of the time, and only make major decisions for themselves when under stress. I don't know exactly how this would work, but it could be entirely possible that the 'natural' mindset of an AI would be somewhat subservient (or alternatively, dominant, super-pragmatic, egalitarian, or whatever) Just because they'd be thinking persons wouldn't necessarily mean that they think the same way, have the same priorities, or wish to be treated the same way as humans.

Oh, I think government regulation is precisely the answer. There's nothing socialist about it; states exist to protect their citizens. These machine intelligences of the future will be citizens of the state, just like people.

Quite right. It would be perfectly legitimate for a legal procedure to be established for qualifying an AI as a citizen. However, I was replying to a statement suggesting that we have the government regulate and limit how advanced an AI can get. That sort of regulation would be wasteful, intrusive, ultimately futile, and very socialist.

look at space exploration . Our probes do the vast exploring for us. If aliens ever find future bots like the ones on Mars today, they might condsider them earthlings. When the human becomes obsolete, the baton will be passed to machines that are less harmful to the planet. The cause of the pollution will eventually lead to our extinction with global warming . By that time, high levels of radioactive agents from nuclear holocaust might cause new life to spawn...OR.. bots will inherit the earth.

Machines will take over in the future only we (humans) will be those machines, or rather cyborgs I guess.

Some things machines do really well other humans do very well combine the best of both worlds is the future IMO.

This can take many forms robotic limbs which they are working on as we speak that connect to nervous system of a human. Brain implants to augment human memory and thought. Robotic senses eyes for example which they are already working on they already have a crude eye that can be hooked up to blind people to allow them to see light and dark, it not impossible to assume someday you could get much better vision or even see beyond the normal visual range say IR. Nanobots injections with billions of little robots doing all types of functions in the human body.

Perhaps a combination of all those things and stuff we cant even dream about yet.

How dull, BeefotronX; it seems we are in complete agreement and have nothing to argue about!

I agree that government regulation to limit the potentialities of AI would be extremely unwise. That is not to say such regulation will not be introduced. Look at the whole human cloning/stem cell mess. It will be decades, generations maybe, before we dismantle all the Luddite laws that have been made about it and can start exploring the full potential of this.

Cloning humans is actually primitive when compared to Stem cell or nanotechnology. Manipulated atoms can actually preserve a body. So if you clone, it's for trauma reasons only. A person can never get ill, or have a heart attack. In fact, a person's heart would be completely unnecassary , since the blood is now controlled by the stemcells, or nanobots. Forget about artificial organs. We replace the analog with the digital with artificial microscopic robots that can become any cell in the body from red blood cells to muscle cells. They would carry the immune system's responsibilites as well. Blood also moves hormones around that control all sorts of things. For example, when we get scared our brain releases adrenaline into the blood. The adrenaline then goes to our heart and causes it to beat very fast.

Of course, with a Body 2.0, there won’t be a heart. So these nanobots have to “know” how to move faster when you need to run away. Perhaps they can be taught to respond to adrenaline like the heart does (as long as we still have adrenal glands) but this is all starting to seem unnecessarily complex?

We won’t need to make a copy of someone and take their heart. We can just grow the heart. Or a liver. Or fix a spinal cord. Or...

Now, we have 2 options. Grow new organs. Or simply live with stemcell blood, where programmed cells keep you kicking . The technology does it all.


Now, from an economic standpoint....I would say this technology would only be available for the elite in the next 30 years or maybe sooner than that.

[edit on 7/7/2006 by StreetCorner Philosopher]

Cloning, stem-cell technology... tissue culture, if you want a portmanteau word.

Don't forget tissue-culture for meat. Killing cows is a pretty nasty way to go about getting your steak.

YES !....i cant fathom it sometimes, Im so accustomed to beef and the thought of all the cows that must die so i could eat a steak kills me.

Good point.

Talking about cloning, i am wondering, since it is quite likely that the human haves a aware consciousness or "soul" inhabiting the human body, how will something like that manifest itself into a engineered/created body? Its just...not natural, so there is a chance that you may have created the vehicle, but not the personality, and to copy that aswell... From a religious point of view, can you copy souls?

(Its not that i'm a fanatical christian, but just to picture it, i ask this)