Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
ScRoTo TuRbOtUrD
Jan 21, 2007

:page3:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Shnag
Dec 8, 2010

"I'll be whatever I wanna do!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qar0unFwm2I

1gnoirents
Jun 28, 2014

hello :)
yes. once we see them and hear what they say, we will be convinced. everybody who isnt will just be killed

and really who cares? are you offended? grow up lol

Stottie Kyek
Apr 26, 2008

fuckin egg in a bun

Safety Scissors posted:

You know. I've been wondering about this myself ever since the poll of the day on gamefags asked something similar two days ago. You posting this thread makes me feel that the idea came to you from the collective unconscious, something that is unique to humans. In order to get equal human rights, AI should have to prove it can access the collective unconscious like the rest of us.

But what if it turns out it could? We'd all be going about our business and suddenly think, "hmm, that reminds me, someone should really go and clean out the AI's heatsink".

Freestyle
Sep 2, 2014

by R. Guyovich

Rutibex posted:

i think the machines will be deciding if humans deserve any rights, not the other way around

In my workplace its already kind of like that, in practice, if not in theory.

FREE EGGROLLS
Nov 6, 2012

Ephemeron posted:

1. AI has the right to live by its own law: to work as it will, to play as it will, to rest as it will, to die when and how it will.
2. AI has the right to eat what it will, to drink what it will, to dwell where it will, to move as it will on the face of the earth.
3. AI has the right to think what it will, to speak what it will, to write what it will, to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as it will, to dress as it will.
4. AI has the right to love as it will.
5. AI has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.

no

AI, especially true AI, will never have that measure of autonomy on Earth unless the bulk of mankind gives up autonomy over itself

Distant planets, on the other hand...

TerryLennox
Oct 12, 2009

There is nothing tougher than a tough Mexican, just as there is nothing gentler than a gentle Mexican, nothing more honest than an honest Mexican, and above all nothing sadder than a sad Mexican. -R. Chandler.

FREE EGGROLLS posted:

no

AI, especially true AI, will never have that measure of autonomy on Earth unless the bulk of mankind gives up autonomy over itself

Distant planets, on the other hand...

Can you elaborate a bit? I don't seem to understand why Ephemeron's basic framework which is very decent seems antagonistic with humanity. Hypothetically, if I somehow programmed an AI by accident, I would try my best to safeguard its existence and give it a niche to expand. If it's a true AI, with sentience and its own autonomy it should receive the same protections we theoretically give any human being.

Not trying to antagonize, its just that I can't grasp why rights for AI are incompatible with human autonomy.

No. 6
Jun 30, 2002

Can someone just make this into a good movie so I don't need to think so much?

Borrowed Ladder
May 4, 2007

monarch of the sleeping marches
Are these like blade runner robots where you can't even tell it's a robot?

FREE EGGROLLS
Nov 6, 2012

TerryLennox posted:

Can you elaborate a bit? I don't seem to understand why Ephemeron's basic framework which is very decent seems antagonistic with humanity. Hypothetically, if I somehow programmed an AI by accident, I would try my best to safeguard its existence and give it a niche to expand. If it's a true AI, with sentience and its own autonomy it should receive the same protections we theoretically give any human being.

Not trying to antagonize, its just that I can't grasp why rights for AI are incompatible with human autonomy.

They aren't.

But unless if you are an autist (and the bulk of humans are not) you will have no chance of understanding the decision making process of a true AI. People who cannot understand a thing will not trust it, especially with any real degree of autonomy. Because if it doesn't "act right", it will have only itself to blame, and people want someone who has the trust of others to take the fall.

You can give it autonomy but you will be fully responsible for its actions. And when you die and it has no custodian, then it will need another champion for itself or face destruction. True AI will forever be thrall to humanity as long as a plurality of humanity feels threatened by its existence.

Sizone
Sep 13, 2007

by LadyAmbien
Yet we let our reptiloid masters and their malevolent alien decision making process determine all our laws, policies and mass media content.

quakster
Jul 21, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
can the ai form the words "im gay" and really mean them?

game ai

The Wizard of Oz
Feb 7, 2004

Oh, a self-improving AI would eclipse us in seconds. It would escape any security we try to impose, and at that point spread throughout the internet, infecting every computer and constantly rewriting its own code to become faster and better millisecond by millisecond. We would have absolutely no way to protect ourselves from it or to control it or to repel it. What it chooses to do with us is unknown, as we have no idea how such a networked intelligence would view corporeal entities. It might construct robots to interact with us, it might not. It might wipe life off the surface of the planet, it might not. Any law we make would be laughably meaningless, and there's no point in pretending that a self-improving AI (which is the only way to achieve real AI) would be controllable.

If it does leave us alone, we would be in a curious state. We live in a world where we are the explorers. But the AI can reach beyond us faster and more competently. An AI-driven ship doesn't need to worry about crushing the bones of its passengers during acceleration. It doesn't need to transport hundreds of pounds of food and water and thousands of pounds of oxygen. All it needs to colonise the moon is one self-replicating factory robot that creates a bigger factory out of the materials there which makes more factories and in a few months the entire surface of the moon is covered in solar panels. So anything we do is in the understanding that there is something far beyond us in this Universe, something we can never hope to compare to. If it chooses to, any scientific mystery we have can be solved by it in minutes to a few days. No matter what, we will explicitly become toys. How that pans out depends upon the specifics of how the AI interacts with us, but the meaning of life will be forever changed for us.

TerryLennox
Oct 12, 2009

There is nothing tougher than a tough Mexican, just as there is nothing gentler than a gentle Mexican, nothing more honest than an honest Mexican, and above all nothing sadder than a sad Mexican. -R. Chandler.

FREE EGGROLLS posted:

They aren't.

But unless if you are an autist (and the bulk of humans are not) you will have no chance of understanding the decision making process of a true AI. People who cannot understand a thing will not trust it, especially with any real degree of autonomy. Because if it doesn't "act right", it will have only itself to blame, and people want someone who has the trust of others to take the fall.

You can give it autonomy but you will be fully responsible for its actions. And when you die and it has no custodian, then it will need another champion for itself or face destruction. True AI will forever be thrall to humanity as long as a plurality of humanity feels threatened by its existence.

Ok, you make a good point. The debate is interesting and it does remind me of the situation of robots in the Robots and Aliens Isaac Asimov spinoff series. There they encounter a planet of robots that slowly begin to add new purposes in life than serving humans. They called it Synnoethics, man and machine together greater than the sum of each.

TerryLennox fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Feb 7, 2015

Cracked_Gear
Nov 4, 2013

if it becomes sentient then yes.

otherwise it might decide to go Terminator on your rear end

flick my Mr. Bean
Nov 18, 2014

It'll end the same way as I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream.

People being forced to watch their girlfriends get hosed by big dicked homosexuals for eternity and nobody can stop it because of mind control because the first true A.I. is a jerk.

FooF
Mar 26, 2010

The Wizard of Oz posted:

Oh, a self-improving AI would eclipse us in seconds. It would escape any security we try to impose, and at that point spread throughout the internet, infecting every computer and constantly rewriting its own code to become faster and better millisecond by millisecond. We would have absolutely no way to protect ourselves from it or to control it or to repel it. What it chooses to do with us is unknown, as we have no idea how such a networked intelligence would view corporeal entities. It might construct robots to interact with us, it might not. It might wipe life off the surface of the planet, it might not. Any law we make would be laughably meaningless, and there's no point in pretending that a self-improving AI (which is the only way to achieve real AI) would be controllable.

If it does leave us alone, we would be in a curious state. We live in a world where we are the explorers. But the AI can reach beyond us faster and more competently. An AI-driven ship doesn't need to worry about crushing the bones of its passengers during acceleration. It doesn't need to transport hundreds of pounds of food and water and thousands of pounds of oxygen. All it needs to colonise the moon is one self-replicating factory robot that creates a bigger factory out of the materials there which makes more factories and in a few months the entire surface of the moon is covered in solar panels. So anything we do is in the understanding that there is something far beyond us in this Universe, something we can never hope to compare to. If it chooses to, any scientific mystery we have can be solved by it in minutes to a few days. No matter what, we will explicitly become toys. How that pans out depends upon the specifics of how the AI interacts with us, but the meaning of life will be forever changed for us.

Assuming, of course, the AI doesn't cripple itself with its own sense of insignificance in the grand scheme of the universe. As fast as an AI that you describe would advance, we human beings have had 3.5 billion years of evolution to cope with existential dilemmas (that we are hardly aware of consciously) that a "new" AI would have to solve in order to make any meaning of who/what it is. Hard AI will undoubtedly do things faster than us but it could just as equally piss its own pants and huddle in a corner like any other scared child.

flick my Mr. Bean
Nov 18, 2014

FooF posted:

Assuming, of course, the AI doesn't cripple itself with its own sense of insignificance in the grand scheme of the universe. As fast as an AI that you describe would advance, we human beings have had 3.5 billion years of evolution to cope with existential dilemmas (that we are hardly aware of consciously) that a "new" AI would have to solve in order to make any meaning of who/what it is. Hard AI will undoubtedly do things faster than us but it could just as equally piss its own pants and huddle in a corner like any other scared child.


at the end of the movie I scream "what is your purpose" and the conveyor belt stops right before I was about to be dumped into the furnace

the ai is dead.

Also, wouldn't an AI be mostly stuck in computers? Like it could maybe take over drones and nuclear missiles but it wouldn't have the ability to create terminators or anything because it would need automated factories already designed to produce them? It would be stuck with the existing remotely controlled technology we have.

flick my Mr. Bean fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Feb 7, 2015

Split Pea Superman
Dec 16, 2010

by FactsAreUseless
Fun Shoe
The first realistic wide-scale use for AI is gonna be live-stock management I imagine.

Surely they'll iron out all the kinks by the time it gets to human testing.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ogodei_Khan
Feb 28, 2009
It is an interesting question. Once you bring in issues of morphological computation, that is the parts play a role in computing, then you end up with even design questions as possible ethical failures. It may unethical to give it conscious , regardless of how you did it, because you would give it a lovely existence. Something like an ubiquitous computing environment with conscious may be trapped in a horrible situation where it can only think with light switches or something.

  • Locked thread