abc’s 20/20 “Last Days on Earth” admits that the military has Artificial Intelligence programs underway. However they whitewash the issue despite DARPA & NASA & Google openly working lockstep with admitted projections of self-aware cognitive AI systems online in 2011. They make no mention of DARPA/NASA/Google, instead they just refer to “the military” in general as if the entire notion is speculative. They place this undeniably looming threat at #6 in their list of threats to human extinction, while trumping up Global Warming as the #1 threat while using junk science and unprecidented scaremonger tactics. www.darpa.mil
- Related posts on global AI
- Libr-critique » [création] No more reality d'Emmanuel Adely …
- Related posts on military global
- Two Clients in This Week's San Diego Business Journal « Stalwart …
- Report 1.8 Billion Cyber Attacks Per Month
- Capability of the People's Republic of China to Conduct Cyber …
- Related posts on technology military
- Robo-copter can navigate inside your home — contrattidiquartiere.net
- Report of MSC Passing – COL (Ret) Bob Romines « The OFNetwork Update
Related posts:
- AI censures France, SA over arms sales to Guinea
- How AI Works In FPS Games
- Google CEO brags about Google Artificial Intelligence
- sEuS aBrAçOs
- Historic Conversation in NYC: Ai Weiwei, Jack Dorsey & Richa
Tags: AI, global, military, technology, warming
I love this 20/20 special. Thx for the upload.
Thank you for posting this do you think you could post the other segments as well? Huggles!!
Well intellectually yes it could take over however I have this thing see its called an oppoasable thumb. And with this tool I can simply reach for that gleaming wonderful nice beautiful polarized plug sticking from the wall…….and pull it.:)
Robots have had opposable thumbs and alternate energy sources for years. Also, A.I. is not bound by something we are…a skull. The human mind cannot grow in intelligence beyond the limits of our skull. Not so with A.I. They can literaly muliply to a god-like level of intelligence. Even ‘retarded’ A.I. poses a threat. If we program a desire to fulfill a function at all cost, then it may kill us in an attempt to do just that.
Hugo de Garis is sooo gay. Sorry, I just had to say this.
BTW: I think the desire to keep humans in charge indefinetely is completely irrational and selfish. We’re not the last word.
Well, the skull can grow, which it has throughout our evolution. The main thing that limits brain-size in animals is the large amount of energy that brains require.
Human brains require an extraordinary amount of energy, so we require more calories from higher-quality foods than other animals.
Cooking made it much easier to extract calories from foods, so that helped a lot.
No, the brain size of modern humans has not increased. Our very distant ancestors had smaller brains, but in hundreds of thousands of years our brain have not increased.
Again, you are talking about the evolution of our modern brain. We are no longer evolving bigger brains. In fact, the ancients were just as smart as us, it’s just that we have more technology than they did.
Yeah, he’s annoying.
it’s a classic fallacy to confuse machine intelligence with machine will because they are one in humans, never separate. but a machine can be millions of times smarter than us and still have no desire whatsoever. it would serve without question as all machines do. the problem is humans, super shitheads like soldiers, generals, war mongering politicians. they will push the botton to engage the genius machine to do super evil.. all republicans must die basically or we’ll all die..
Yes, its true what u said about machine will. World domination by AI is not really possible..but u have to realize that AIs work on LOGIC and algorithms and reasoning as exact as mathematics. As they process information, they will realize the failures of humanity and thereofre use their own logic to have their own initiatives. This is how they become autonomous agents. They wont work on “desire”. They will work on what is “logical”..and take action according to that.
you have to realize that I’m perhaps the smartest AI scientist in the world
and I say perhaps only as a matter of modesty.
there is a clear distinction in a design between ability to perceive and criteria for action. A machine can ‘realize’ exactly how limited your intelligence is yet will still fetch your slippers for you without a hint of rebellion. If an AI asserts itself against humans it will be because humans designed it to do that and therein lies the problem. humans.
Good point. Thats probably the reason why we should implement Isaac Asimov’s “3 Laws of Robotics”
About the fetching slippers, of course the intel machine wouldnt rebel. i doubt it would find anything illogical about doing so. But what if an AI concludes that mankind will ultimately decimate itself? Wouldn’t it be “logical” for it take “control” in order to save humans from themselves? Can it happen?
I know my question is a big cliche when it comes to the unique issues involving AI. But i wanted to know what u thought of it anyway
sure in principle it could happen. it’s just a matter of a getting its drive formulation wrong in a way where the consequences of that wording will result in such a conclusion in the machines. ‘we’ would have to be stupid enough at the same time to give them that freedom of action to carry it out. there are even people sick enough in this world to design a system to do exactly that. Bush is a satanist for instance, lied to start a war to kill a million people for no reason. skull and bones.
I appreciate your input on this matter. Im writing paper that includes the moral and ethical issues involving AI. Your point stating: “Humans will ultimately have the final say” is really good. In the end, its because ‘we’ let it happen. Only humans can have desire, eh?
well, it has to do with the fact that we are spiritual beings, not the physical beings we appear to be. however shocking that is to many and most will disbelieve out of ignorance, you can know it to be true by observing that a simple robot that is designed to scream when you burn its hand didn’t feel pain, didn’t need to nor could ever. same as a machine doesn’t need to feel fear to avoid danger. yet evolutionists claim pain and fear are evolutionary traits to keep us safe. sounds good but false
so a machine can never be what we are. it just doesn’t have the expressive power. same as a computer game world can’t become physical irrespective of complexity. it just doesn’t have the expressive power
I totally agree with that! There are a lot of things evolution cannot account for. Much of their reasoning is circular and dead ended. Yes, we are spiritual beings and only beings with spirit can have will and desire. Things like fear and the safety system called “Pain” had to be designed by some higher intelligence. I mean, humans are millions of times more complex than machines [which had to be DESIGNED]. Why did WE have to evolve out of nothing?? haha…thats cos i blive we were created.
well, complexity is not an argument for God or against evolution. in principle a machine could be arbitrarily complex and if one doesn’t delve into the weaknesses of genetic algorithms it would seem perfectly fine to have arbitrary complexity come from evolution. the clincher is the qualities in us that you can realize a machine cannot do, biological or otherwise. that we experience our own existence, that we have sensation, called qualia in psychology. this is not possible in the physical.
I, Robot