Cosmists or Terrans?
De Garis believes that a major war before the end of the 21st century, resulting in billions of deaths, is almost inevitable. Intelligent machines (or 'artilects', a shortened form of 'artificial intellects') will be far more intelligent than humans and will threaten to attain world domination, resulting in a conflict between 'Cosmists', who support the artilects, and 'Terrans', who oppose them (both of these are terms of his invention). He describes this conflict as a 'gigadeath' war, reinforcing the point that billions of people will be killed. This scenario has been criticised by other AI researchers, including Chris Malcolm, who described it as "entertaining science fiction horror stories which happen to have caught the attention of the popular media". Kevin Warwick called it a "hellish nightmare, as portrayed in films such as the Terminator".
>'Cosmists', who support the artilects, and 'Terrans', who oppose them (both of these are terms of his invention
someone please stop this man
There is a third faction: Cyborgs. Those who wish to merge with the Artilects. Im on their side.
bump. Think about it /pol/, preserve the white race as a new species of machines that will transcend our organic minds.
This is kinda dumb, because the premise assumes that it won't be possible to manipulate brain matter in such a way that it outperforms the hardware-based technology.
The biological brain is fluid. It's restructurable hardware, which is something these quantum computers have to emulate virtually in software as we currently understand it.
Basically, the only way that is currently feasible to model an AI which is competitive with our own intelligence is not to program it by hand but to simply emulate brain chemistry at the atomic level, (ie: a brain simulator).
You can't get an output greater than an input. It's not possible that there could be a machine created by men that could surpass the sum of its inputs unless God or some other greater-than-men thing were actively in the mix.
Open up for the possibility that it might play out very differently...if it happens. An artilect isn't necessarily bound to go Dante on humanity, it could perhaps use humans to a certain degree but I doubt that an artifical intellect's final goal is to have all our bases belong to them. I can't really think of WHY an artilect does need world domination in the first place. If it's programmed in by default then perhaps. Otherwise it'd be hard for the thing to even evolve to the point of kazzabbadoo.
I have this thought as well. A supreme intelligence would understand the rarity of life. I am of the opinion that Cosmists will battle the Terrans. After the Terrans get out maneuvered, i think the option of surrender will be given, in exchange they will be spare and the remaining artilects will depart the planet for the safety of both species.
What happens is we make the final human made machine. This machine will make a new machine till the machines make the last of their kind.
A defining characteristic of the human mind is seriously how many errors it makes.
A flawless AI which greatly outperforms human intelligence would be so idiot savant autistic that you would literally have to tell it what its favorite color is.
It wouldn't be able to make up its mind on anything that doesn't have a deterministic purpose. It would be just as confused by why humans wear a necktie as you are when confronted with the question of why the universe exists.
We value our own intelligence because of a heuristic. A mathematical shortcut which often omits undesired information which causes undesirable emotions.
You raise a good point anon. I always believed that AI is autistic. I dont believe that emotions could be programmed. I would think an autistic savant could take into consideration that humans are irrational and accept that as chaos variable and explain most of our quirks logically, like the tie is just social thing a relic from their past.
I must sleep now. Ill be back tomorrow with a compiled general. Night anons.
>I dont believe that emotions could be programmed.
Well they can.
But an emotional robot is of so little use to anyone that you're never going to see anyone put in the effort to create one unless they're doing so as an art project.
The last thing you need is your robot turning into some feminist, depressed, cynical, fedora-tipping faggot.