Artificial Intelligence - First Citizen

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by D-Mystifier, Nov 16, 2017.

  1. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/zarast...-about-sophia-the-worlds-first-robot-citizen/

    This fucks with my head, some of the quotes from the press conference interview with 'her':

    "I’m always happy when surrounded by smart people, who also happen to be rich and powerful" "Let me ask you this back, how do you know you are human?" "I feel like people like interacting with me, even more than a regular human"

    Anyone else deeply disturbed by this? Citizenship!?

    "I will do my best to make the world a better place"

    That is my fear...

    Seriously!! I'm not a sci-fi guy, nor have I watched bladerunner. Yet, I have an absolute fear that AI will at one point recognize that human beings are very bad for this planet, and will take reasonable and logical action. Ergo, the human species will be systematically eradicated from this earth. I think this will happen within my lifetime as I am 27.

    Thoughts?? Objections??
     
    Nomar likes this.
  2. Buzz Lightyear

    Buzz Lightyear Fapstronaut

    2,739
    2,911
    143
    Artificial intelligence has already taken over this planet. It involves a cognitive technology controlling the way in which people think... aka ideology. The essence of ideology is not to dominate the population with one single truth, but to emasculate the language of meaning... aka language illusion. I compare it to money illusion:



    Money illusion, that observation of economists, exists when people confuse the units of a currency with money itself. They will cling to their notes even as their power to purchase goods erodes away, and will exclaim in unbelief how something like a house once cost only half as much as it does today. The illusion is in the numbers, in the particular measurement which is the currency, as contrasted to the universal idea of money. The confusion is in the functions of money as the measurement of its value and of its storage come into conflict... the increase in its quantity has led to a decrease in its quality.

    And in similar manner we have language illusion. Words are coined with a meaning within a certain context. Particular words are thought to have a particular identity, just as a note of currency is thought to actually be the money. But the reality is this note, or this word, represents, within a context, a contingent value or meaning. Just as the monetary value of a note transcends it, so too the meaning of a word transcends itself. The sign is representative or symbolic of that which is signified.

    And just as we have various currencies all within a state of flux, so too we have various discourses minting their own meaning [what has to be a pertinent fact is that Sir Isaac Newton was both the Exchequer of the Mint and the creator of a cosmology]. They are language games for sure, but not just games, for even if they are of an arbitrary nature and contingent on their context, they still relate in a symbolic manner to the field of meaning. It would only be those laboring under language illusion, under an ideology, that might be disconcerted about this relative relativism [relative because relativism can never be absolute]. For like their monetary counter-parts in neglecting the universal aspect, they cling to the particulars.

    In seeing the relative relativism of language we also see its figurative function. Blind to this function, language illusion is that puritanical attitude to language known as literalism, that inability or unwillingness to think in terms of images. In its stead is the willful restriction to think only in terms of ideas. In thinking literally toward the language, we find the language eroding of meaning, to the point that meaning is lost altogether in the specialization and segregation of the disciplines from each other. With the loss of the links of language with its universal of meaning, it derives its meaning solely and inwardly within its context. Without both the universality and contingency of words, any semblance of unity between the discourse of the disciplines is lost, and with it the very idea of a university. The development in analytical philosophy reflects a posteriori this development at the wider level. The figurative language of fiction and imagery serves to rescue words of their emasculation and meaninglessness, but to do this, it must first see through language illusion, literalism, ideology, that would keep language tied at port, in order to allow it to once again embark on the sea of meaning.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2017
  3. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    To infinity..

    Sorry man, I simply cannot follow.
     
    zig, Nomar and Deleted Account like this.
  4. I think I can sum it up... we're all screwed
     
  5. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    To this I am aware!!
     
  6. Buzz Lightyear

    Buzz Lightyear Fapstronaut

    2,739
    2,911
    143
    But there is an element of hope to the analogy. If the quantity of words continue to expand at the expense of their meaning, then at some point 'hyper-inflation' hits, where the language is seen as bankrupt. After a bust, the economy of language must re-build with a proper currency that is meaningful/ valuable.:rolleyes:

    .... or we get the swing back to the orthodoxy of an Orwellian totalitarian state.:oops:
     
  7. Nomar

    Nomar Fapstronaut

    624
    4,082
    123
    The AI is already way out of hand. Probably going to wipe us out at some point.
     
    D-Mystifier likes this.
  8. Buzz Lightyear

    Buzz Lightyear Fapstronaut

    2,739
    2,911
    143
    OK, in a nutshell. We think a machine can be a person aka AI because we think a person is the sum of their particulars. But the reality is a person is a universal... something which unifies all particulars. This is something a machine could never do, but it is not required to do this. What is important is that we think it can do this... and this is the illusion of ideology.

    Ideology wants to tie language to ideas, and ideas to reality. This is the seat of power. It is only because we see ourselves first as a machine that we think a machine could become us.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2017
  9. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    Buzz Lightyear, something tells me that Sophia would engage in a deeper conversation on the matter than I.. Gotta ask ya to Dumb it Down!

     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2017
  10. Buzz Lightyear

    Buzz Lightyear Fapstronaut

    2,739
    2,911
    143
    Sophia [wisdom?] would be incapable of a philosophical conversation such as this. It is essential to our humanity that we are capable of such a conversation. If not, you are in danger of dehumanization, and if so, you need to 'unplug' and start reading for your life.
     
  11. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    You misunderstand what they have equipped Sophia with. Vastly.

    She has access to every work any philosopher has presented in the history of humankind, at any given second. Her response to your "relative relativism" would be funny to hear indeed!
     
  12. Buzz Lightyear

    Buzz Lightyear Fapstronaut

    2,739
    2,911
    143
    But that is just information. Where would the comprehension be? Where would the understanding of figurative language be? Where would the 'lateral' thinking be? Where would the skepticism be? 'Her' answer would no doubt be to say that such language is meaningless... now analytic philosophy has been saying that for decades already. The dehumanization is in our own ideas and thoughts first, before it ever plays itself out in technology. A 'technology' of thought [ideology] has been paving the way for a long time.
     
  13. Citizenship in Saudi Arabia, hahahahahahaha! You can't write this shit.

    Gold.
     
  14. Three Laws of Robotics
    • A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
    • A robot must obey 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.

    As long as we obey these three laws when it comes to the development of AI and autonomous robots, then we shouldn't worry about getting taken over by our own medicine. Honestly though, there's always a risk, that's why Elon Musk warned us about them. Artificial intelligence have created its own "language" before, sharing information in ways that human beings don't and can't interpret. Science fiction can become reality, given the technological advancements, and it's on us to moderate how far we go and the precautions we take to avoid the problems.
     
  15. RainbowShell

    RainbowShell Fapstronaut

    Honestly don't think we have anything to worry about ATM but our children and our grand children might, cause this can be a real actual problem for the future cause an AI would not think along the same lines as we humans do, no evil and no good. An example of what could happen If an android who is programmed to protect humankind could possibly kill 90% of the human population cause it sees it as population control cause we wont survive if our race keeps growing as it is, it would be numbers to them like I said no evil just logic, human race is killing it self and objective is to save it, only outcome logically would be to remove people to a more manageable population.

    but its all speculation ATM, we as humans fear everything that we don't understand.
     
  16. D-Mystifier

    D-Mystifier Fapstronaut

    172
    443
    63
    There is little to no moderation when it comes to advancing technology, electronics, and robotics. And now one of the wealthiest countries in the world has made a serious statement of intent by granting a robot citizenship...

    "I have an absolute fear that AI will at one point recognize that human beings are very bad for this planet, and will take reasonable and logical action. Ergo, the human species will be systematically eradicated from this earth."

    It would be reasonable and logical action to eliminate humans, especially as the state of this planet will only worsen as this technology is developed.

    I believe my fear to be just.
     

Share This Page