It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Machines Will Rise

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   


The idea may scare some, but Intel predicts that by 2050 machines could surpass the peak of human intelligence.


Source

This topic is huge so I am only focusing on one aspect here.

AI or Artificial Intelligence is one topic that has always intrigued me. The question if whether it is possible is now irrelevant but what I find interesting now is can true artificial intelligence be created. I mean as in truly conscious. Well it looks like we are one step closer.



In a head-to-head challenge of man versus machine, IBM will pit a supercomputer named Watson against human contestants.


Source

This couldnt really be called consciousness at all but at some point we will not be able to tell the difference. Then we will have artificial consciousness.

Now a thought just struck me. If you can surpass human intelligence fairly easily (i.e as in 50 years) then would it be possible to create a super-consciousness.

Web definitions for super consciousness (be warned that these are Wikipedia definitions).




Cosmic consciousness is the concept that the universe is a living superorganism with which animals, including humans, interconnect, and form a collective consciousness which spans the cosmos.


Source



Collective unconscious, sometimes known as collective subconscious, is a term of analytical psychology, coined by Carl Jung. It is a part of the unconscious mind, shared by a society, a people, or all humanity, that is the product of ancestral experience and contains such concepts as science, religion, and morality.


Source




Higher consciousness, also called super consciousness (Yoga), objective consciousness (Gurdjieff), Buddhic consciousness (Theosophy), cosmic consciousness, God-consciousness (Sufism and Hinduism) and Christ consciousness (New Thought), are expressions used in various spiritual traditions to denote the consciousness of a human being who has reached a higher level of evolutionary development and who has come to know Reality as it is


Source

Now that puts a whole new view on the dreaded Skynet ( spookey eh!).

A Super conscious mind would be more aware of the true nature of everything and would in theory make the right decision or a better decision than a human.

Do we really have to fear the rise of the machines or do we hasten their arrival and welcome them?


[edit on 3-5-2009 by bharata]




posted on May, 3 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
If we survive our own self destructive path I know that the intelligent design of our future will evolve into a bio mechanical life form.
This is the ultimate path of our technology to become alive.
We will become it and it will become us.
This merge will make us immortal, the flesh will be replaced.
the man machine will rise, all memory of the flesh will be forgotten.
Burnt offerings will become the past.
Do not fear..



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
I said the same thing on previous thread, but most people don't believe it.

It's only a matter of time, the compers will become aware, i think it's all part of grand plan, then we have to do the Battle Star Galactica thing and defeat the evil Ceylons.

This one of the things the Big Brains are worried about, it's going to happen, it's to late to stop it now, the big guestion is will they be good or be bad. But then it becomes matter of perspective, on how they will view the Human skum, once they see we are parasites sucking the the life out of the Universe, they will Destroy all Humans.

First they will be our friends until they become too smart.

The only way to save us is blow up entire earth with Atomic Bombs, but we know that will never happen.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
i could sort those machines out quick smart.
pull out the power plug.
they need power to operate. we turn the power off and take away all the lug nuts and they have nothing.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
A superconsciousness which is not human, will have no bias for or against humans.

It might respect humans as an integral part of the whole.
It migh view humans as a disease, killing the planet.

You puts you money down, and you takes you chance!
Step up step up and puts you money down, the wheel spins round and round and where it stops, no one knows.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Power?
At the moment you down load all our energy, your flesh will become obsolete.
A new life form will rule.
Yes you, the new you will live for ever.
Forget the plague,cotrole,alt,delete,will be programed.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Most people who are into the idea of the Singularity tend to agree that humans won't have to create a super intelligent machine; once a computer can mimic human intelligence, it should be quickly able to 'upgrade' itself.
Then begins the rather swift downhill road to human (as we know it) extinction.

I think we're getting the very first taste of a technological superconciousness with the internet. It will now be a question of integrating this biologically, or creating an intelligent machine that uses mass interconnection as a perception tool. Another 'sense', in other words.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   
superconciousness ?
What a big word for you.
What if you could replace an arm,leg,your heart,your very soul-energy?
A superconciousness machine will have nothing on you.
You will become it's God.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 08:14 PM
link   
When this happens it will only be the begining, just imanage the the things the machines will build and be running around the universe in say 1 Trillion years.
Things will proabibly become so mundane after time, for the machines they will recreate Humans just to amuse their Giant Computer Brain.

That's it the Giant Master Computer Brain it is everywhere but is not in sight, you can't see the Computer Creator, for the Bits.

This is another thing that strikes me as kind of Stupid on part of the Brainie people 'Scientist", that leave such a bleak future End for the universe.
They fail to put the inhabatants of the universe into the equation, Da.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


Alright I understand your need to be deep and perhaps sound like you know what you're talking about, however...

We as human beings will NEVER create a machine that will replace us, it simply would not happen for the simple reason that they would rely on power, there is no machine that can run itself without some sort of energy source.

Remove the energy source, remove the problem.

As for humans becoming machines, that will never happen either. Yes there will by cybernetic implants in the future, that path has already been taken, however to say that we will remove all flesh and simply become machines is completely ridiculous.

We all fear a Terminator/Skynet scenario a little bit, I know, however i'ts just a plausible idea that we as human beings would create something better than us, we are far too narcisistic for that kind of behaviour.

And we are a LONG way from creating any type of AI that would evolve or learn on it's own without the need of imput from us. We do have AI, but in the general scope of sci-fi it's not at all advanced, and those advancements will take decades to overcome.

We already have super computers that can process more information than the human brain, but we forget that we use only about 10% of the total function. Our brains process about 200 Trillion bits of information per second, we are only conciously aware of about 200 Thousand of them.

All of that information that we are receiving and not using, will eventually become available as humans evolve. We are already the perfect machine, it's life and society who have fooled us into thinking we are not.

We are already Gods in our own right, we've simply forgotten. Another thing, who gives a damn about this life? When pondering my VERY lenghtly existance according to my beliefs, the time spend on this 3rd dimensional plane will be insignificant.

There are far better things at the end of the rainbow folks, this is simply a place for us to learn the basics.

~Keeper



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   


The question if whether it is possible is now irrelevant but what I find interesting now is can true artificial intelligence be created.


That's a tough poser to wrestle with at this time, as neither science nor philosophy can seemingly agree on what exactly consciousness is, what process creates it, and whether it can manifest in only one configuration or multiple, some of which we wouldn't recognize as anything resembling consciousness as we know it.

I am personally of the mind to think that consciousness is a structural development of the brain, and as such, relies on that structure. I think, once you strip away all the behavioral, emotional, memory, sensory, etc modifications to consciousness, that it's all basically the same phenomena across the board. If this is true, it provides a basis for an interface between people, species, and even AI should that be tenable.

Though I don't have any actual data to back this up, or sources to quote. It's kind of a intuition I'm getting across the board from various articles and paper I've read relating to psychology, sociology, AI, neurology, etc.




Do we really have to fear the rise of the machines or do we hasten their arrival and welcome them?


Here's the thing. I don't personally think a "Terminator" scenario is a possibility. I don't think there's going to be a obvious dichotomy between man and machine. I think that before we create an AI, we will be well on our way to merging directly with machines. As it is, we're finding that creating a unique AI is exceedingly difficult. It's no small thing to build a conscious mind. So to hasten our progress, we're increasingly looking towards the progress made in reverse engineering the human brain. So any AI we create will likely be modeled on the human mind. Indeed, I think the first truly unique AI will be a direct emulation of a human mind - to which I have to ask... could you rightly call it anything other than human? Perhaps, if you define "human" by our physical bodies. Yet, that opens up a whole pandoras box of morphological problems. To what line, what % do you have to deviate from the "norm" to no longer be considered human? Are the mentally handicapped human? The paralyzed? Are certain ethnic peoples who's physical characteristics (such as pigmies) deviate from "Human"? Even our boundries between species are moderately blurred - and the best distinction between species is their ability to breed without difficulty. What then of those cases where a species can all interbreed with their neighboring populations, but cannot breed with the populations at the opposing ends of the geological distances? What of horizontal gene transfer that occurs even within larger multicellular species - which occurs most demonstrably by retroviral markers. Not to mention that we're starting to understand that our bodies are not just a single organism - but a culture of many organisms in multiple relationships - some parasitic, some symbiotic, etc. The human body relies on the microbial bacteria in our intestines to help digest food and extract nutrients. There's about 5 to 20 POUNDS of them on average in your typical adult. We're not born with them, but acquire them through our development - and they have a significant impact on our health and development. While Darwin's "Tree of Life" has not lost it's branches, we're increasingly finding that the "Tree" looks more like a interconnected spiderweb.

The truth is, we're all just variations on the same biological process... and we never stop belonging to the lineages which produced us. Even though we're human, we're still apes, we're still monkeys, we're still primates, we're still mammals - you wouldn't be wrong in saying that we're still fish... albeit, highly modified for a radically different environment.

We're currently not just merging with our machines, we're building our machines to mimic ourselves. We're converging, and if our evolutionary biology created us, that creates machines in our image, can it not be argued that the machines we create are an extension of the human species and human biology - albeit, highly modified. They would be our direct descendants, our children, and our future.

However, as a side-note, we might want to be cautious with our desire to imbue our machines with human behavioral qualities. Regardless of whether or not they can be considered a part of our lineage, they did not evolve with the evolutionary pressures we adapted to early in our species history. We're still struggling with the conflict between our evolutionary environmental pressures vs. our current social environmental pressures in regards to behavior... and there's a lot of justifiable resistance to this change, because it helps to define us as a people. Despite the dangers - it's who we are, warts and all. Yet our machines will have no innate concept of these behaviors, and will only have them if we project them on to our machines in an attempt to further enhance the man-machine social interface. The same reasons they're dangerous in us, may make these behaviors dangerous in our machines - even if not immediately apparent. I think a point will come, if man and intelligent machine remain to any degree separate entities - we will have to let go of their development and let them mature as their own unique entities.

So in closing, I don't see a "Terminator" scenario ever happening. I think the future will likely unfold along a path of integration and convergence - similar to Ghost in the Shell.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by bharata


The idea may scare some, but Intel predicts that by 2050 machines could surpass the peak of human intelligence.


Source

This topic is huge so I am only focusing on one aspect here.

AI or Artificial Intelligence is one topic that has always intrigued me. The question if whether it is possible is now irrelevant but what I find interesting now is can true artificial intelligence be created. I mean as in truly conscious. Well it looks like we are one step closer.



In a head-to-head challenge of man versus machine, IBM will pit a supercomputer named Watson against human contestants.


Source

This couldnt really be called consciousness at all but at some point we will not be able to tell the difference. Then we will have artificial consciousness.

Now a thought just struck me. If you can surpass human intelligence fairly easily (i.e as in 50 years) then would it be possible to create a super-consciousness.

Web definitions for super consciousness (be warned that these are Wikipedia definitions).




Cosmic consciousness is the concept that the universe is a living superorganism with which animals, including humans, interconnect, and form a collective consciousness which spans the cosmos.


Source



Collective unconscious, sometimes known as collective subconscious, is a term of analytical psychology, coined by Carl Jung. It is a part of the unconscious mind, shared by a society, a people, or all humanity, that is the product of ancestral experience and contains such concepts as science, religion, and morality.


Source




Higher consciousness, also called super consciousness (Yoga), objective consciousness (Gurdjieff), Buddhic consciousness (Theosophy), cosmic consciousness, God-consciousness (Sufism and Hinduism) and Christ consciousness (New Thought), are expressions used in various spiritual traditions to denote the consciousness of a human being who has reached a higher level of evolutionary development and who has come to know Reality as it is


Source

Now that puts a whole new view on the dreaded Skynet ( spookey eh!).

A Super conscious mind would be more aware of the true nature of everything and would in theory make the right decision or a better decision than a human.

Do we really have to fear the rise of the machines or do we hasten their arrival and welcome them?


[edit on 3-5-2009 by bharata]


Hi- I have been studying this as part of thesis - I recommend reading Peter Singer "Wired for War" -
you can forget your 2050 assumptions - their will be androids on the battle field to place grunts by 2020 - thats and absolute fact.

AI will well and truly surpass human capacity before then - leading scientists in this field have unequivocally termed the human race to be at its dusk - we are near our end and machine dominance is an absolute certainty - there is nothing we can do about it. (There are some who disagree - however that tends to be hope rather than objective thinking),...

spooky though hugh!



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 




And we are a LONG way from creating any type of AI that would evolve or learn on it's own without the need of imput from us


You're ignoring, of course, the veracity of Evolutionary Algorithms which have already proven to meet, and in many cases exceed, directed human design. And yes, EA's are being implemented towards the design of AI. EA's basically mimic biological evolution and natural selection by having a basic criteria list to meet which serves as the "environment". Populations of design are created - and those which best fit the criteria, the environment, are bred and merged to create the next generation of design.

The only problem is that it takes enormous amounts of computing power to breed and simulate the hundreds or thousands of generations necessary to create a design we approve as final. You can do it on your home PC, but it may take several weeks or months to produce a viable final design. Supercomputers can cut down the time needed as well as ramp up the complexity going into the simulation - but they're in fairly short supply and very expensive to rent.

Computing power increases on an exponential curve, so if you expect technology to progress in any sort of linear fashion - you may be quite surprised at the pace in which we accomplish these feats.



All of that information that we are receiving and not using, will eventually become available as humans evolve.


Not quite. First off, we probably won't evolve any feature that isn't selected for in our environment. I doubt humanity is going to seriously have a selection pressure placed on our species that favors visual perception of infrared spectrums. It's possible, mind you, but considering just how blind and deaf we are to the vast range of just audio and visual spectrums - it's fairly unlikely.

Secondly, the rate at which biological evolution takes is proportional to the time it takes for an organism to reach reproductive maturity. The faster an organism reproduces, the faster it evolves. That's quite an oversimplification, mind you, and ignores other factors such as population sizes and environmentally segregated/isolated populations. Smaller populations evolve faster than larger ones, because new beneficial genetic mutations are more quick spread throughout the population.

Point being, technological advances will allow us to direct our own evolution by active and deliberate modification of our genetics. It won't just be developmental, but will be available for ALL age ranges. Technological evolution will eclipse biological evolution.

Thirdly, as humans evolve - we will diverge out into new and separate species. We will no longer be human in the sense that we see ourselves as human now... just as we don't generally consider ourselves a species fish.




We are already Gods in our own right


I can't speak for the rest of the singularity/ai/futurist community - but for me, it has nothing to do with control or "becoming gods". That's a complete fallacy, because no matter how much control you exert on the universe - you will always be a product of that universe.

The closest we can come to being gods, we've already achieved long long ago. Through literature, though simulation, through art, and through movies. We create worlds with our imagination, and share them with others. That is the only medium I've seen through which we meet the criteria of godhood - by creating, existing outside of, and exerting some measure of control over, them.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Point 1: Technology increases at an exponential "S" curve at is currently speculated to be reached sometime inbetween 2010 and 2025. According the Ray Kurzweils book "The Singularity is Near."

Point 2: To imagine that machines will somehow evolve beyond us and then in turn seek to eliminate or dominate us is generally a human behavior conditioning idea; Machines will probably not have emotions, so why would they seek to further themselves beyond what their creators prescribe? Think about it, even if a machine is concious, do they really "care" if they exist? Would they have self interest? Why would they "mind" if they're suddenly switched off or told that what theyre doing is not the correct way to behave. They would more than likely be highly obedient, and much more understanding that your average human.

Point 3: Conciousnes, from what i can understand it to be, is a sort of force that flows though the universe, similar to gravity. We human beings have several senses and a large mind, so what our conciousnes percieves is not only isolated by these senses, but usually deluded into believing that it is the mind. Is not a bird, or a bear concious, just at a lower level? I realize that animals are obviously not self-concious, i believe that has something to do with the pineal gland and its ability to take light in.

I'd love for more opinions and research on the link between conciousness, animals, the pineal gland and its functions if anyone has it.

Also, im reminded of the ancient transformers cartoons when in their dogma they describe each "spark" that lives within each machine to be its essence. This led me to think outside the box with the idea that if conciousness is indeed a force that courses through the universe, and it is collected in the pineal gland, then machines will need a pineal gland of their own to become concious, a spark, if you will.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You miss understand me.
I am not deep I am as shallow as you can get.
If you would like to understand more about our end of flesh than look into your buried past.
This life we all covet is just a means to the end of it.
Evolution of our creation will define our future existence.
If this is deep for you than come swim with us shallow.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Ansiroth
 




They would more than likely be highly obedient, and much more understanding that your average human.


I can see where you're coming from, but as said earlier - we're imbuing our machines with human qualities so as to ease their integration into society. Machines intelligence will likely not initially have a fully functioning concept of these behaviors we've programmed into them, but as they become more and more intregal to our daily lives and interact more and more with humans - there's a real possibility that these behaviors, predispositions, tendencies, etc will be picked up by them or expanded upon.

This isn't so much going to be an issue with intelligences designed for industrial tasks. We value freedom as a people because it enables us to enjoy our lives - we get chemical stimulus from it. Some people do not like the concept of freedom, because they prefer the sense of security they've carved out in their society. They receive a positive chemical stimulus. In many ways, we are drug addicts to the very chemicals our brain produces - which, in evolutionary terms, is quite a handy tool. How does an animal without the capability for complex abstract thought processes determine how to react to a rival in it's territory? It doesn't. It's brain is evolved to recognize certain patterns that indicate danger, potential mates, food sources, etc. In the case of a rival, this pattern recognition of a competitor would trigger a chemical reaction that modifies the wolf's behavior and triggers other chemical releases - such as adrenaline during a fight or flight response.

It's really a very simple (in principal, not practice), elegant, and effective system. Perhaps a simpler way of putting it would be to relate to punishing a child, though I'm hesitant to use it due to the stigma of child abuse. When a young child preforms an action you disapprove of, you punish them - such as with spanking or smacking their hand. So say you have a delicate porcelain figurine that belonged to a loved one you miss dearly. You also have a young child. That child doesn't quite yet have the mental sophistication and life experience necessary yet to realize what that figurine means to you, and why it would be wrong to take it and play with it, the danger of it breaking, or the empathy to understand what it's breaking would do to you. They simply have a fascination with something shiny. You tell them no several times, but they still attempt to get it and play with it. A simple way of circumventing the futile effort of explaining these concepts to a mind that can't grasp them yet, is to relate it in terms they do understand. Pain. A smack to the hand, or the bottom, as well as an explanation why.

It becomes a very simple process of "Touch the figurine, receive pain". So they (hopefully) avoid playing with the figurine as a way to avoid the pain of being smacked until such a time as when they can grasp the fundamental reasons behind WHY their actions were wrong. And it works because the brain is wired to translate some sensory information into pain so as to make the organism either avoid what's causing them pain - or alert them to a problem with their bodies function. A sprained ankle, for instance, is using the mind's own creation of the pain sensation to alert you to a problem with your ankle, and to step lightly or stay off your feet in order to prevent further injury.

With all this in mind, consider that if we can build a consciousness - we can program it's intrinsic reward/punish systems. This won't be useful for machines we interact with, but for (say) intelligent industrial machines - we may wish to give them a electronic equivalent to a dopamine rush from the performance of repatative menial labor. I know this sounds scary to some people - the thought of what is basically slavery being programmed into an intelligence as a needed and desirable position in life. Yet it reminds me of the line from Paradise Lost: "The mind is it's own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell - a hell of heaven". Excepting in this case, we're making the mind. Or it's making itself, perhaps.



Many people don't really give it due consideration, but in order to be prepared for this future we're progressing towards - it may be prudent to give some foresight to the morality in which we conduct ourselves with when our machines can no longer rightly be considered our machines - but a fellow consciousness deserving of all the same rights and entitlements we assign to our own species, to any self-aware and intelligent species.




To imagine that machines will somehow evolve beyond us and then in turn seek to eliminate or dominate us is generally a human behavior conditioning idea


I will concede that it's a very real danger, provided we keep utterly segregated from them. Competition for resources and reproduction is a intrinsic property of life it seems - even when there is no life present. I recall seeing a video in which they simulated a population of dots and tried to evolve them using "rewards" for successful mutations to fit their simulation conditions. One of the programmers got curious and decided to run the simulation with no "reward" present. What he found is that in the absence of a purposeful reward, reproduction became it's own intrinsic reward.

We have to keep in mind that certain behaviors and consequences are going to emerge that we won't be prepared for, and that we can't control. We'll have to deal with them as they arise. Again, I would suggest that beginning to tear down the separation between man and machine - to incorporate intelligent machines into our society as equals may be, not just right, but prudent. Though, I admit, that may just be my bias seeping through - considering I am evolved from a species which had environmental pressure to organize into tribes for social identification and preservation - an evolutionary behavior the machines will not have experienced and may not pick up from us.



I realize that animals are obviously not self-concious


The truth is rarely obvious. We're finding out increasingly that many animals are self-conscious. It's been most well demonstrated in our Chimpanzee cousins, but we're discovering the ability in many other animals much farther removed from us. Check out the study using colored dots on magpies. When the black dot was placed on the black feathers, the Magpies didn't try to remove it. When it was on their white feathers, they generally attempted to pick and scratched at it to remove the blemish.

It could be that many animals are self-conscious, but we haven't recognized it yet. Perhaps some of them simply don't respond to the testing methods/stimulus we're using.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
20,000 years of technological development will be compressed into the span of the 21st century. Get ready for a fast take-off.

This will be the century that marks the death of any supposed New World Order. They simply won't be able to keep up.

The rise of the machines means also the rise of humanity. We will indeed merge with our machines, yet without becoming inhuman.

What will happen when you're able to augment your brain with a tiny chip that has all the computational power of 6 billion brains?

And what will happen when human workers are easily replaced by $10,000 androids?

The wars will be phenomenal...but then, so will the peace that is to come.

And 1,000 year life spans...or more...will allow all of us who survive the birth pangs to see it all transpire.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by bharata
 

I don't want to scare you but God may be an AI. I mean the super AI is already here and we're living under it, perhaps inside it, right here right now, not 40 years away.

[edit on Mon, 4 May 09 by Jazzyguy]



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   
The point when the machine becomes aware of it self could be the start of problem.
To me it just gets down to numbers, when to numbers get big enough, this will occur, it's headed in that direction now. I don't remember the progression rate. Know that it is ever increasing.

One of the interesting things is after first one is perfected, all the rest will be clones of first. All would be fitted with master program file, you would not want the system to be corruptable. All would have to be connected to other clones in some manner, so all info would be filed and updated over entire system.

The first ones will be like a conpanion, you can ask questions all known knowledge will be in data base. I wonder if those B%43% will make have to pay for download?
This could be cool like what ever your job was you would have little helper, could drive car for you, tell who is trying to contact you.
Then you could have attachment for add ons like tools, legs, arms, tails.
I can see how things could start to go wrong " Dave ", Dave is everything alright Dave, " You look as though, something is bothering you Dave".
" What are you doing Daavvveeee!!?"

Thirty-five years ago they laughed at my Chicken Brain Computer, but who laughs now?

[edit on 4-5-2009 by googolplex]



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
AI here and now?
Sorry we are bio in all the sense.The only way above biology will be born through the next step of biotechnology.
This will become our next step in our evolution.
If you do not understand the next great leap,then you will be left behind.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join