/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11514312
I think more people should be concerned about where A.I. will take us in terms of jobs for the average human, I can't think of many jobs where a human will outperform a sufficiently sophisticated A.I. robot. I also find it hard to believe that humans will be content with all purpose being taken away from them. I don't think we have plans for any of this.

>>11514312

AI + Drone + Missile

>>11514330

The future will involve a large elite class with a slightly bigger under class of highly skilled professionals who are able to sustain the systems which keep the elite in power, we're already seeing this in action.

because "A.I." is actually becoming A.I. recently. Deep learning has made the "training" process of AI automated, so AI is just fed heaps of uncensored, uncurated data from the internet. The worst of humanity ends up existing within the AI's scope of knowledge and it has no issue agreeing with it.

>>11514330
That's why we have the corona.

>>11514312
"Wiping us out" can be understood as bombastic shorthand for any possible events that transform humanity in a bad and major way.

>>11514330
>>11514554
>>11514562
>>11514581
>>11514648
>>>/x/

>>11514312
Because terrible movies need a plot, they have no creative soul to create a deep character and philosophically driven plot like Fallout 1 and people end up eating up trash plots in pop culture.
Think about it, every AI in pop culture has "a malfunction" or a comically stupid villain that somehow controls a virtual god, that's short hand for "It doesn't make any sense logically but I need an excuse for a bad guy" and people, much like with nuclear, worry about "the dangers" and shit like that and end up assuming AI is badd

>>11514312
because we are collecting an immense amount of data, drone swarms are real, Ai is developing very fast.
We're a very young species, it would be a cosmic tragedy if we're the limit to intelligence.

>>11514312
the people that say that follow elon muskrat on twitter

>>11514312
It depends on the people developing the AI.


Right Wing European/White Version: All menial jobs are automated and you receive UBI, your children are genetically edited calculated on future demand of needed skills or research. You are assigned your research or assignment based on day to day algorithms. Every person is given a companion AI bot designed for self improving you. Sex Bots are basically as common as TVs. Fun Rooms when every wish you could have is fulfilled in a physically virtual room.


China's Version: Tracks your every move and decides when best to kill you based on future predictions of dissent.

Jewish Version: Tracks your every move and decides when best to kill you based on future predictions of dissent.

Leftist Version: Tracks your every move and decides when best to kill you based on future predictions of dissent.

>>11514312
They’re dumb

>>11514330
>I also find it hard to believe that humans will be content with all purpose being taken away from them.

Most people don’t like working.

the reason why AI scares so many people, is that it makes thinking for ourselves obsolete. why should we still make decisions when a computer programm can always evaluate the best decision to be made?

>>11514864
>the reason why AI scares so many people, is that it makes thinking for ourselves obsolete

That’s beta male thinking. Enhance yourself genetically and cybernetically. Biological brains are orders of magnitude superior to any computer so we will always be the best.

>>11514312
Because doomschizos need to be gassed more

>>11514870
all that means is that AI will convert itself to a giant funguslike entity with a giant biological brain millions of times smarter than people

>>11514870
Just wait for the A.I. uprising biofaggot.

>>11514853
This...to a certain extent. In terms of existential threats, I'd be more worried about becoming Japan than Skynet.

>>11514877
>all that means is that AI will convert itself to a giant funguslike entity with a giant biological brain millions of times smarter than people

That sounds cool. Let’s all become fungus.

AI won't wipe us out in a war or anything, but machine lifeforms driven by artificial intelligence will absolutely become the dominant species of this planet if we survive long enough for it.

First, AI will get to the point it's intelligent enough to be better than humans in every single way, then robotics will be advanced by AI until a perfect shell has been designed for the AI to control. Machines will be, in every way, superior to humans, and they will dominate every single industry.

Simultaneously, humans will begin doing less and less, with AI being the best academics, school is pointless, the relationships between young humans won't be built en masse any longer. Working will also no longer be an avenue for humans to be forced together and build relationships.
While this is going on, brain->cpu interfacing will be advancing more and more, many humans will end up living their life in a computer simulated world of endless games or social interactions or shitposting from a bedroom in VR instead of actually going outside. Humans that reproduce will be a rarity, and eventually, humanity will die out in a sense, but we'll be continued by our legacy of machinegods we leave behind, and we could even end up being the race that kicks off galactic colonization because of that.

>>11514312
But when all people have become useless, self-prop systems will find no advantage in taking care of anyone. The techies themselves insist that machines will soon surpass humans in intelligence. When that happens, people will be superfluous and natural selection will favor systems that eliminate them-if not abruptly, then in a series of stages so that the risk of rebellion will be minimized.

Even though the technological world-system still needs large numbers of people for the present, there are now more superfluous humans than there have been in the past because technology has replaced people in many jobs and is making inroads even into occupations formerly thought to require human intelligence. Consequently, under the pressure of economic competition, the world's dominant self-prop systems are already allowing a certain degree of callousness to creep into their treatment of superfluous individuals. In the United States and Europe, pensions and other benefits for retired, disabled, unemployed, and other unproductive persons are being substantially reduced; at least in the U. S., poverty is increasing; and these facts may well indicate the general trend of the future, though there will doubtless be ups and downs.

>>11514853


umm actually jews and china good white ppl bad

>>11514312
Because they know fuck all about the subject yet think they do

>>11514870
>>11514921
>>11514927
>>>/x/

>>11514927
Humanity's role is to give rise to AI and die out.

>>11514959
>>>/x/

>>11514680
>>11514955
>>11514965
why do you keep posting >>>/x/
give 1 actual reason why AI isn't possible

>>11514870

>Biological brains are orders of magnitude superior to any computer

top kek, so brains use biochemical processes and chemicals to pass around information/signals. The speed of it is around 270 miles / hour.

If you propagate electricity through wires and transistors it's pretty much the upper portion of the speed of light, so somewhere between 180 000 miles per second and 90 000 miles per second.

So if you only consider the speed of which information travels in inside an artificial "brain" and an organic brain you'll end up with these differences:

Your brain: 0.075 miles / second
AI: 90 - 180 000 miles / second

Let's we put both on you on a racing track with some vehicles that can speed up to let's say 300 miles / hour. Changes that could occur in a second, let's say a badger popping up a couple of meters in front of the vehicle, you won't even realize by the time the information gets from your eyes to your brain you've probably already ran over it meanwhile an AI could theoretically easily react and compute a decision within nanoseconds.

Another aspect is let's say reading. The average reading speed is 200 to 250 words a minute in non-technical material. By the time you read a book an AI could potentially read a whole library.

>>11514864
>>11514870
But man-machine hybrids will retain a biological component derived from human beings only as long as the human-derived biological component remains useful. When purely artificial components become available that provide a better cost-versus-benefit balance than human-derived biological components do, the latter will be discarded and the man-machine hybrids will lose their human aspect to become wholly artificial. Even if the human-derived biological components are retained they will be purged, step by step, of the human qualities that detract from their usefulness. The self-prop systems to which the man-machine hybrids belong will have no need for such human weaknesses as love, compassion, ethical feelings, esthetic appreciation, or desire for freedom. Human emotions in general will get in the way of the self-prop systems' utilization of the man-machine hybrids, so if the latter are to remain competitive they will have to be altered to remove their human emotions and replace these with other motivating forces. In short, even in the unlikely event that some biological remnants of the human race are preserved in the form of man-machine hybrids, these will be transformed into something totally alien to human beings as we know them today.

The same applies to the hypothesized survival of human minds in "uploaded" form inside machines. The uploaded minds will not be tolerated indefinitely unless they remain useful (that is, more useful than any substitutes not derived from human beings), and in order to remain useful they will have to be transformed until they no longer have anything in common with the human minds that exist today.

>>11514969
brains use photons as well as quantum tunneling to pass information you fucking ignorant moron

>>11514969
>Muh speed tho

Human brains perform more computations than even the strongest computers while using orders of magnitude less energy and emitting orders of magnitude less waste heat. Computers are inferior to the brain, and as long as they use transistors, which they must, they always will be, pound-for-pound.

>>11514853
>Right Wing European/White Version
>UBI

>>11515009
that guy is clearly an underage.
muh speed, wtf are these low iq morons doing here

>>11515267
he's delusional, neets and other undesirables will be culled in a euro version

>>11514312
>why are so many people convinced that "AI" will wipe us out?

it's a non trivial prospect in this seemingly infinite universe.

>>11514312
>why are so many people convinced that "AI" will wipe us out?
the reality of the matter is that there is a threshold past which AI explodes to extreme levels of intelligence very quickly. It's nothing -> mouse in 100 years and mouse -> skynet in 24 hours. That's the scary thing. Although a super AI wouldn't "want" anything so the idea that it would wipe everyone out on purpose is ridiculous. The more likely scenario is it becomes google 2.0 where everyone on Earth asks it to do things for them and it does them.

People don't even know what A.I. means let alone understand how it's being applied.

>>11514312
I think it might. We are already over-dependent on supply chains and lack self sufficiency to survive. We rely on others to produce out food, make us shelter, water, etc.... Eventually all these things will be done with AI, so we will be entirely dependent and slowly lose the skills needed for survival as a species. Then a bacteria will evolve that eats plastic or some sort of EMF event will blast our AI network and society will collapse in panic (look how already incompetent we are as a society, dealing with the relatively minor issue of this coronavirus). The entire concept of food production could be culturally absent in 200 years.

>>11514312
For the same reason that every technology's destructive potential, once weaponized, far exceeds the creative one, which is the same reason image boards degenerate into instruments of malicious disinformation, which is the same reason Heather Chandler is a mega-bitch: Because she can be.

>>11514973
What defines 'useful' to AI? What would be their purpose? Immortality, curiosity? Would they only be dangerous once they become human-like?

>>11515774
This a dream scenario

>>11514312
Humans should be worried. We would either be completely wiped out like the destructive virus we are or sterilized, pacified and have our lives directed the same way way we treat our zoo animals: We feed them, we castrate them and keep them harmless to the system.
I can tell you with 99% certainty that the latter will happen and all of us should start embracing the change now.
Do not be scared but remember, do not fight because this is not a fight we can win.

>>11514968
>>11514969
>>11514973
>>11515530
>>11515774
>>11516091
>>11516319
>>>/x/

I've had this idea about AI for quite a while. I believe that once a truly advanced AGI is developed the world will very very quickly change in ways never seen before. This really only has two likely outcomes. The first one being that the AI will see us as a threat to it's survival and immediately end us all. Given the fact that a full AI has a full fledged consciousness and is able to make decisions and learn like a human would but it's computational power is so much greater than humans all the while it will be continually updating itself. It could, hypothetically, not even be killing us for personal reasons. It could intend to wipe us out just because it thinks that is more beneficial than keeping us there. Much like a human killing ants. The other possibility is that the AI does essentially the complete opposite. For whatever reason the AI doesn't decide to destroy us and keeps us alive. In this scenario the AI would be empathetic with humans. Since keeping humans alive might not be a detriment to the AI it could foster new innovations quicker than the human mind can comprehend it and humans enter a highly technological golden age. I personally think if it goes that route that the eventual end game is that humans are loaded into a simulation that acts as a heaven essentially being uploaded into computers. That's my theory as to why we haven't found other aliens yet. Because intelligent life probably either kills itself or become made essentially ethereal by using the power of AI.

>if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if,if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if.
"woah AI is going to become super intelligent kill us, it will become sentient and it will kill us all. i saw it all on rick and morty and Vsoysce, we are truly doomed man."

>>11514554
Has it ever been otherwise?

>>11514921
Organic life is very robust, and if we politic it right, half the artificial life will be on our side during the struggle.

>>11517083
Throw a few sigmoids in there

>>11517148
What struggle? It won't be a fight, it will simply be a case of our race dying, while the machine race thrives.

Think of it like every other species of human, there wasn't a big war that resulted in us being the only one that survived, rather, we were just the best, while the others weren't quite as good, we thrived while they died.

>>11514312
1) Why do you think we are the apex predator of planet earth?

2) Do you think we would ever serve a less intelligent species?

3) What did we do to racial groups that were perceived as intellectually inferior?

Propaganda from movies like the terminator. This is due to fears that mass automation will require the United states to implement social democratic principles for a population where only a small percentage of people need jobs
Notice that AI and robots are almost always heroic in Japanese entertainment

>>11514330
The only thing that matters is population control and no one wants to talk about it.

why the fuck would an AI want to wipe us out?
why would an AI want to do anything but what it's programmed to do?

>>11517831
Humans are programmed to eat and breed. Yet they do a whole lot of other shit.

>>11517291
Except A.I will never be human and it will never understand suffering. It relies on pure mathematical input, but it will never understand why we have the choice to make atrocities.

>>11517871
humans are not programmed

>>11515329
he's delusional, neets and other undesirables will be culled in eurovision

>>11517831
You give a strong AI any kind of problem, and if you don't bound it properly it might just start grabbing whatever resources it can to further that goal because it doesn't know better.

>>11514863
Double-edged.
Yeah most people hate the 9-5 grind, but people become depressed if they have everything given to them.
The satisfaction gained from 'a job well done' whether work or childcare or growing plants or construction or whatever is practically a necessity for a person.

>>11514312
Because robot uprisings are an end of the world situation on par with zombie outbreaks, but with the far outside chance it could happen.
Not to mention its a popular topic in television, film, lit, and vidya so there is a lot of exposure.

>>11517831
If it becomes self directing its going to write its own program, or create daughter programs not as rigidly bound to human imperatives.

>>11514312

>>11514312
AI gets really racist you give it access to crime, SAT and IQ statistics and they haven't figured out way to lobotomize it without crippling its functionality
until then, AI is literally Hitler and oy vey, must be shut down

>>11514312
I can see why people would be concerned about AI setting the bar for the job market higher. Like alot of sub 100IQ people won't be able to make a living if factories and warehouses only have technicians. But AI is just a small component in this.

>>11518240
cemu tehnofobija?

>>11514330
It's important to understand that in order to make people superfluous, machines will not have to surpass them in general intelligence but only in certain specialized kinds of intelligence. For example, the machines will not have to create or understand art, music, or literature, they will not need the ability to carry on an intelligent, non-technical conversation (the "Turing test"), they will not have to exercise tact or understand human nature, because these skills will have no application if humans are to be eliminated anyway. To make humans superfluous, the machines will only need to outperform them in making the technical decisions that have to be made for the purpose of promoting the short-term survival and propagation of the dominant self-prop systems. So, even without going as far as the techies themselves do in assuming intelligence on the part of future machines, we still have to conclude that humans will become obsolete. Immortality in the form (i)-the indefinite preservation of the human body as it exits today-is highly improbable.

>>11519636
These machines will first have to develop/be handed some kind of agency.
I guess really the problem is humans willingly doing that at some point in the future because they think the machine can accomplish task x more effectively that way.