2040 - Humans to be replaced by machines.
Discussion
Brighton Derly said:
Marf said:
Dangerous2 said:
Marf said:
Brighton Derly said:
Marf said:
Fascinating how so much thought on this subject seems to be influenced by fiction.
Fiction reflects reality.
particularly the bits that appear to have no relevance, yet break it on removal.
Updated following the recent singularity summit:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SingularitySummits
http://www.singularitysummit.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/SingularitySummits
http://www.singularitysummit.com/
rfisher said:
We have evolved consciousness and emotions to enable survival amongst ourselves.
Both of these quirks of nerve cell interconnections give us the ability to anticipate the reaction of another individual directly in our presence.
We can then accurately assess which 5F is appropriate (fight it, f
k it, feed off it, befriend it or fry for it (sacrifice yourself to protect your offspring).
This has led to our recent (around 100,000 years) emergence as top dog on this planet. It's been an uneasy alliance of groups of humans.
Conscious intelligent machines will be totally logical and not not dependent on any physical factors. No need for food, sex, behaving appropriately in a clan or grouping.
Within a matter of a few decades of such creations being invented, we will become irrelevant.
Shortly after that we will correctly be seen as an undesirable freak of nature whose sole purpose was to develop intelligent conscious machines.
All higher life will then be destroyed.
Cheers.
(This may actually happen much sooner that we think.)
Both of these quirks of nerve cell interconnections give us the ability to anticipate the reaction of another individual directly in our presence.
We can then accurately assess which 5F is appropriate (fight it, f
k it, feed off it, befriend it or fry for it (sacrifice yourself to protect your offspring).This has led to our recent (around 100,000 years) emergence as top dog on this planet. It's been an uneasy alliance of groups of humans.
Conscious intelligent machines will be totally logical and not not dependent on any physical factors. No need for food, sex, behaving appropriately in a clan or grouping.
Within a matter of a few decades of such creations being invented, we will become irrelevant.
Shortly after that we will correctly be seen as an undesirable freak of nature whose sole purpose was to develop intelligent conscious machines.
All higher life will then be destroyed.
Cheers.
(This may actually happen much sooner that we think.)
"V'Ger, we are the creator..."
The problem, as will all things computery, is not the power of the hardward (in terms of instruction rate) but compiling a suitable instruction set and program to actually achieve what is required.
Take the process of picking out a face.
A 3 year baby can easily pick out a face of a person in just about any picture you show them, irrespective of the setting of the picture. For example, put 1 real person among 100 plastic dolls and they can point to the real one. To do that with a computer takes an immage processing program of vast complexity and subtlety. And that program currently is limited by the people who write it (as they have just a normal human brain) The next big jump in computing power will be "self programming" computers, which may well be biological rather than electrical, and so can "evolve" to suit their task. Once computers have the power to optimise themselves, well, then the skys the limit (well actually it's not, the sky is no limit whatsoever!).
But, the task of writing a language that is capable of defining a sentient and evolving instruction set is fraught with issues. For example in current computing there are only 2 states, yes and no, there is no maybe etc. Even things like "fuzzy logic" are only programmed manifestations of "blurred" logic, they cannot be truely random or illogical.
On top of all, that the task of "debugging" increases by at least the square of the number of lines of code (due to the interelation and "nested" nature of code). Mother Nature has had millions of years in which to optimise your control code (and occasionally you still get it wrong and fall down the stairs (although the true fuzzy logic of alcohol should not be underestimated;-).
Take the process of picking out a face.
A 3 year baby can easily pick out a face of a person in just about any picture you show them, irrespective of the setting of the picture. For example, put 1 real person among 100 plastic dolls and they can point to the real one. To do that with a computer takes an immage processing program of vast complexity and subtlety. And that program currently is limited by the people who write it (as they have just a normal human brain) The next big jump in computing power will be "self programming" computers, which may well be biological rather than electrical, and so can "evolve" to suit their task. Once computers have the power to optimise themselves, well, then the skys the limit (well actually it's not, the sky is no limit whatsoever!).
But, the task of writing a language that is capable of defining a sentient and evolving instruction set is fraught with issues. For example in current computing there are only 2 states, yes and no, there is no maybe etc. Even things like "fuzzy logic" are only programmed manifestations of "blurred" logic, they cannot be truely random or illogical.
On top of all, that the task of "debugging" increases by at least the square of the number of lines of code (due to the interelation and "nested" nature of code). Mother Nature has had millions of years in which to optimise your control code (and occasionally you still get it wrong and fall down the stairs (although the true fuzzy logic of alcohol should not be underestimated;-).
Frankeh said:
The technological singularity will eventually happen (Providing we don't manage to kill ourselves) and all bets are off when it does. That'll be us evolving, I imagine.
We'd probably be kept around out of respect by the singularity. It won't be any skin of their nose.
So we turn into 'The Culture'?We'd probably be kept around out of respect by the singularity. It won't be any skin of their nose.
Max_Torque said:
The problem, as will all things computery, is not the power of the hardward (in terms of instruction rate) but compiling a suitable instruction set and program to actually achieve what is required.
Take the process of picking out a face.
A 3 year baby can easily pick out a face of a person in just about any picture you show them, irrespective of the setting of the picture. For example, put 1 real person among 100 plastic dolls and they can point to the real one. To do that with a computer takes an immage processing program of vast complexity and subtlety. And that program currently is limited by the people who write it (as they have just a normal human brain) The next big jump in computing power will be "self programming" computers, which may well be biological rather than electrical, and so can "evolve" to suit their task. Once computers have the power to optimise themselves, well, then the skys the limit (well actually it's not, the sky is no limit whatsoever!).
But, the task of writing a language that is capable of defining a sentient and evolving instruction set is fraught with issues. For example in current computing there are only 2 states, yes and no, there is no maybe etc. Even things like "fuzzy logic" are only programmed manifestations of "blurred" logic, they cannot be truely random or illogical.
On top of all, that the task of "debugging" increases by at least the square of the number of lines of code (due to the interelation and "nested" nature of code). Mother Nature has had millions of years in which to optimise your control code (and occasionally you still get it wrong and fall down the stairs (although the true fuzzy logic of alcohol should not be underestimated;-).
Really old post, but since this thread has been resurrected, I thought I'd comment on this...Take the process of picking out a face.
A 3 year baby can easily pick out a face of a person in just about any picture you show them, irrespective of the setting of the picture. For example, put 1 real person among 100 plastic dolls and they can point to the real one. To do that with a computer takes an immage processing program of vast complexity and subtlety. And that program currently is limited by the people who write it (as they have just a normal human brain) The next big jump in computing power will be "self programming" computers, which may well be biological rather than electrical, and so can "evolve" to suit their task. Once computers have the power to optimise themselves, well, then the skys the limit (well actually it's not, the sky is no limit whatsoever!).
But, the task of writing a language that is capable of defining a sentient and evolving instruction set is fraught with issues. For example in current computing there are only 2 states, yes and no, there is no maybe etc. Even things like "fuzzy logic" are only programmed manifestations of "blurred" logic, they cannot be truely random or illogical.
On top of all, that the task of "debugging" increases by at least the square of the number of lines of code (due to the interelation and "nested" nature of code). Mother Nature has had millions of years in which to optimise your control code (and occasionally you still get it wrong and fall down the stairs (although the true fuzzy logic of alcohol should not be underestimated;-).
While it is true to say that in current computing architecture, the only states are boolean states (ie. on/off, true/false, yes/no, etc), that doesn't mean a computer cannot give a 'maybe' answer. A 'maybe' is based on probability, which is simply a mathematical function. Think about it, to use your example, when you look at a picture containing 1 real person and 100 plastic dolls, your brain is subconsciously answering a collection of 'yes/no' questions about what you're seeing. The aggregate of those answers determines how sure you are that a real person exists in the picture.
PS. Forget 'fuzzy logic', quantum computing changes everything... a bit can be on/off, or both on AND off at the same time
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-260...
Rise of the robots: Humans will compete with droids for jobs by 2040, study claims
Rise of the robots: Humans will compete with droids for jobs by 2040, study claims
einsign said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-260...
Rise of the robots: Humans will compete with droids for jobs by 2040, study claims
Immigrant droids, coming round 'ere...Rise of the robots: Humans will compete with droids for jobs by 2040, study claims
Marf said:
Dangerous2 said:
Marf said:
Brighton Derly said:
Marf said:
Fascinating how so much thought on this subject seems to be influenced by fiction.
Fiction reflects reality.Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff