RE: Is Artificial Intelligence Going To Make Humans Obsolete?
You glossed over the most likely aspect of the article while spending most of the time on the parts that are far fetched.
To start, technological unemployment is already starting and will continue, at an increasing rate. People seem to think blue collar when they talk about automation but white collar automation is easier to develop. Dexterity is very difficult for robots and, while they are getting better, it is still a slow process. Writing a computer code to automate office tasks is much simpler.
Now about the AI and us versus them. Do you really feel AI is separate from humans? Heck, what is human? Are we already not seeing people become "cyborgs"?
We have people walking around with artificial limbs...are they not human? How about the person with a pacemaker or defibulator in the heart...is he or she not human? My dad has one and he is connected to the internet anywhere he goes in the US...is he human?
But those are not of the brain you say. Okay what about the person who has a chip installed in his/her brain to slow (and even reverse) the effect of dementia? Again, I ask, is he or she still human?
Of course, you probably think of chips as something of foreign material placed in the brain. Yet the worlds of biology and informational technology are merging. Microsoft has already saved data on organic material. And we see much of the genome project and other aspect of bio research dealing with the decoding of our DNA and cells. We are realizing it is nothing more than software.
So what happens when the chip installed within you to connect you to the blockchain so you can share in all the knowledge out there in a swarm system at the speeds you mentioned is organic? What happens when it is your own DNA that is used? Is it still foreign material and different from you? Is this really any different from getting a pint of donated blood put into you...is it separate from or a part of you?
And what is Artificial Intelligence? There is a saying that AI is called AI until you start to use it. The formulas in excel are AI and do a task that use to be done manually. So is the automatic switching chips on the telephone network. Now if you are talking singularity and neural networking, well we are not there yet. Some like Kurzweil are highly optimistic that we not only will get there but do it soon. Others feel it is a pipe dream and will not happen...most are in between.
I love ole Elon and think him a genius. He is a world changer in my opinion. However, he is also a bit of a salesman and will use tactics to help push his points. He is one of the foremost doom and gloom guys about AI...yet for all his fears, he is developing his own computer-brain interface.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/27/15077864/elon-musk-neuralink-brain-computer-interface-ai-cyborgs
Of course, this does not mention the fact that he is one of the leading proponents and his company at the top of the list in the race for AI driven cars.
It seems Elon's talking points and his actions do not quite match up.
What parts specifically seem far-fetched to you?
Of course. they are human, but the moment that limb has the right to vote as a citizen I think we're talking about another issue entirely. That limb will outlive its host and if it has rights as a citizen it may become more than just a tool to help humans.
and software can be programmed. I get enough involentary programming just living in the world we live in, I don't need to bio-install the interface into my skull to fascilitate whoever is doing that programming.
This is a really good point and I'm going to have to think about this before giving a thoughtful response.
I know AI is here to stay but I still don't think it is in our best interest to give it legal citizenship. Just because a tool is useful to us we don't give it rights. Once AI are smarter and faster than us, use less resources than us, earn more than us, and live longer than us, and eventually become us, they will vote for policies that support their interests. Natural humans could become second-class citizens.
Thank you for the extended reply.
The terminator scenario. People look at AI and conclude that since it might be able to think, that it will be like humans. The difference is that people have emotions..something AI lacks. Hence, when you look at most decisions, how many are made mostly from thinking as opposed to emotionally based. I think it is easy to conclude that our thinking is more emotion than pure thought. Humans kill, destroy, and control out of fear and because they are threatened.
I agree this process of giving citizenship to AI is pretty foolish. Of course, we see the same thing in the US about corporations, another non human entity that the courts gave "person" to.
That said, the conspiracy part of me says that machines are already voting and determining the outcome of our elections.
With every technology, there is always the double edge sword. There are people who abuse it. Yet, in most cases the benefits outweigh the costs to society. There has been a ton of software and programming the last few decades but it is hard to argue that the world is not a better place than it was 20 and 30 years ago.
Again, you are presuming that AI will be selfish like humans are. Humans seem to be the only ones who kills and maim without cause. Other animals operate out of instinct, the need to protect...we, on the other hand, allow greed, revenge, and anger lead us around. AI will be thinking beings something that I think a case can be made that humans are not.
Good discussion.
That was a big mistake and arguably the cause of much of the plutocracy shaping our society today.
No, I'm presuming that corporations will own these legal citizens and will program them to further their causes. Once they outnumber and outlive us they will vote in their interests, not ours.
If an AI robot is a legal citizen then what's to stop it from being the CEO of a corporation that will tolerate human demonstrations against its policies, knowing it will outlive any revolt against it?
With the hive mind that all AI's are connected to called singularitynet.io they could organize and vote to change policies that would not be in humanities interest.
Giving them legal rights is shortsighted and could be catastrophic.
I agree giving robots the same rights as humans is ignorant. But, then again, we do a lot of ignorant things.
I sense the problem is you feel that corporations and the elite will own everything. We are seeing a major transition away from the powerful. Yes they still are in control big time but it is dwindling. Blockchain is one of the first steps in this direction. We also see things that once were only in the hands of the powerful and corporations owned by everyday people. Computers, drones, and robots were once only in the hands of a few. Today, these items cost under $1,000.
As for AI, there are people all over the place developing AI systems...some within corporations, many open source. Mark Zuckerberg can spand a couple hundred thousand to develop an AI system for his house....5 years from now, a kid with a smart phone will be able to do that.
@originalworks
I do believe there will be a time when work will become obsolete in the sense that it currently is, but again I still don't see how a little linear algebra will make humanity obsolete.
Unless that linear algebra is considered a legal citizen with rights