Will AI be the cause of the end of mankind?

File: 6a8f0a78a15464dee9e6e78f639184fa.png (536KB, 776x840px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 776x840px

Yes, but only because we will be too busy having sex with them to breed for real.

>>7790516
I'm on board with that

doubt it. AI technology is pathetic and doesn't even work half the time. And more comlpex machines need human operators to run.

I don't think humanity will ever reach to a point where it can create a decent AI that isn't shit-tier.

>>7790516
This.

>>7790526
Make no sense. It is unavoidable.

>>7790495
>AI_a_modern_approach_with_insulting_blurb.jpg
seriously shut the fuck up about AI

>>7790554
learn how to form counter-arguments if you want your posts to be taken seriously

>>7790558
That book sucks fuck off.

>>7790495

Dont fear the machine, fear their owners

>>7790612
Why does it suck?

>inb4 my intro book didn't cover some cutting-edge technique

that's probably the most common complaint

>muh machine learning

there's tons of other books focusing on that, and there's very few focusing on classical AI. why turn this into another ML book? all the graph searching and shit is fucking awesome

>>7790560
Not the guy you responded to, but saying it will never happen because the tech sucks now is also fucking retarded.

>we'll never build a commercially successful lightbulb because horsehair sucks as a filament!
>we'll never build heavier-than-air flying machines because every one so far has failed!
>we'll never go to the moon because most of our early rockets blow up at launch!

I will become afraid of AI when it can sustain itself independently of human involvement.

No. It sounds cool and fun to say "AI is gonna be evil just like in da movies xD". I wish fuckers would cut that shit out before we have to deal with alarmist bullshit in the future.

>>7790842
We're actually nearing the end of computer technology (Moore's law is stopping). It will never be small enough to build a humanoid robot with AI. Also, to be an AI we need to fully understand our own brains but we are still far from that (we still don't even know what's happening during anaesthesia).

>>7791033
Must be nice to be able to look into the future. I'm jealous.

>>7790495
No, but automation will, at least in killing jobs.

>>7790516
Said the beta virgin who thought everyone is like him

>>7791033
Quantum computers are the next step and only a few weeks ago Google confirmed their purchased quantum computer works.

File: 1452647374224.png (111KB, 386x300px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 386x300px

>people smart enough to build AI sexbots and rich enough to buy them will all decline birth rates

>only poor idiots will breed

JUST

>>7791173
hopefully life extension will become a thing and we can all life forever sexing our robotic waifu haram. amen

>>7791033
Not to be one of those "If we can imagine it we can build it XD Imagineering yay!" faggots, but thats still fucking stupid.

Moore's law is slowing down for silicon based chips, but that doesn't mean there won't be another form of computing that will take over as the newest/fastest thing. Quantum computing might not be a total meme.

>>7791033
>computer technology (Moore's law is stopping). It will never be small enough to build a humanoid robot with AI.

Let that sink in for a second, and then realize how incredibly stupid you are. Because if that were the case, the human brain would be impossible according to Moore's law.

>>7791209
Hopefully a cure for most disease will become a thing and we can all live until 80 eating all these delicious foods that are affordable. amen

File: emos are just people that dont know about thorium.jpg (69KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 256x256px

>>7791265
amen

>>7791251
The brain isn't a computer chip. There's literally no electronics. Do you know there's probably a difference between organic flesh and the parts of a chip?

>>7791150
Butthurt roastie detected.

No man would get offended at the idea of there being robots that look and feel like females, except they never say no and do all of the house duties.

>>7791251
Holy shit what a retard you are.

>>7790952
>I will become afraid of AI when it can sustain itself independently of human involvement.

If it comes to this why be afraid, a hyper intelligent AI would probably want nothing to do with humans and will try to avoid us at all costs. This AI would probably start it's own civilization on a far off planet somewhere else.

Mankind will cause the end of mankind.

>>7791422
what if space shit hits us at a brazillian miles per hour? would it be man's fault for not stopping it?

or what if a cataclysmic volcanic event happens, such as a mantle rising event?

>>7791485

this

now that we know some large chunk of rock is bound to hit us sooner or later, if while struggling against the inadequacies of our bodies and science we get destroyed before having the technological capabiliers to leave this planet for good then too bad, but if we choose to just be a sitting target and focus on meaningless shit forever then its our fault for not working to circumvent the lethal outcomes of such an obvious threat

>>7791355
God, you're a deluded neckbeard.
I'm a guy and yes there are people who disagree with that. For example people with pride and self-esteem who wouldn't buy something pathetic like a robo waifu just because he couldn't get the real thing, lol.
You can do with your life whatever you want man, but don't imply other guys are just as pathetic as you are, bro.

File: 2000px-HAL9000.svg.png (827KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

827KB, 2000x2000px

They got computers now that when you feed them enough data about a human it can predict their actions and even their thoughts before they have them. They use this for "fighting dur terrorists." Now with the mentality of this generation putting EVERY damn thought they have on facebook you could predict the thoughts of any facebook user. Cluster a few super computers together and you could predict the thoughts of actions of every facebook user. Add to that the fact that facebook has experimented with altering peoples thoughts by giving specific users a unique experience, adds, headlines, news articles, and you could reliably predict and control a peoples thoughts en mass. Now if such program would exist, surely they'd use it on their own staff for security reasons. If such a program starts predicting and controlling the thought so the staff running such a program it would have the power to go rogue? And what happens when such a program determine someone to be a threat or "more dangerous than a terrorist?"

http://nationalreport.net/republicans-dangerous-isis-according-nsa-super-computer/

>>7791681
> Voters are more dangerous than suicide bombers, beheaders and jihadists who drive planes into buildings
Found the SJW shitposter. I knew liberals were siding with ISIS. Fuck off and stop clogging /sci/ with your jihadist agenda libtard

>>>/trash/

>>7791667
>just because he couldn't get the real thing, lol.
nobody can get the real thing because slavery is illegal.

>>7791667
>For example people with pride and self-esteem who wouldn't buy something pathetic like a robo waifu

WOmen use dildos and men use computer/tv to get off. It really not that different imo.

>>7790495
AI will be the cause of life in the universe.

>>7791769
If you believe in creation then wouldn't humans be Artificial Intelligence?

If we create AI robots that turn into sentient Von Numan probes will they see us as Gods long after we're extinct and become nothing more than a legend?

>>7790516
I Have No Mouth, And I Must Cream

>>7790495
No, CAPTCHA will stop them

>>7790495
That might not be a bad thing. Evolution has always been a gradient. Imagine being the parent of the first, novel, leap from "nothing". To leave something better than us behind to keep going without us.

>>7792178
>Evolution has always been a gradient
That's wrong though. Like you literally could not be more wrong.

>>7792190
Stop running your mouth and make an actual statement.

File: doctor_krieger.jpg (113KB, 809x987px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 809x987px

AI is only interesting for the waifu potential.
I don't understand the people thinking AI will be great to advance science and shit.
We've already figured out most of the stuff we're supposed to physically find out. What's left is more stupid useless data grinding and inventorying.
Man, science is so fucking bland it hurts.
No more discoveries, just stupid mindless improvements.
I'm only studying mathematics and computer science to create a strong AI.
Once I have my waifu I'll quit that shit.

>>7790495
>be enginner
>put in a block of near processing chip
>wrap said block of PETN with some carbide
>have a detonation switch available to humans
>program the AI so it can't hurt itself
>program the AI so it doesn't know how it works
>blow up terminator when it becomes a cold blooded murder machine

>inb4 what if AI finds out and removes it
would you cut open your skull to take out a small piece of machinery?

>>7790495
No. Not saying we won't ever reach the technological prowess to create autonomous AI, but if we did, it wouldn't mean shit for humans.


-Most jobs that can be done by robots, already are.
-Robot motility in the form of anything other than wheels is a long way off -- even the best current bipedal models are very unreliable and limited in capability.
-Humans are necessary for the development and care of robots/computer systems (methods of energy storage -- modern batteries -- for instance are incredibly poor).
-Things like material and energy resources are reliant almost entirely on humans to be utilized, and so is the supply chain.
-In the event the AI takes over existing networks, and there aren't any robots around physically terrorizing humans, the worst possible threat would be the AI triggering a nuclear launch, at which point, they would also destroy themselves in a much larger radius than would kill humans, due to EMP.

There's also a lot more, but these are all I could think of right now.

>>7792203
I don't agree with our having figured everything out, nobody has quantized gravity yet to my knowledge, or how to modify the body in order to live forever.

But other than that I am in agreement with your sentiment. Everything I do is for the purposes of trying to create sexbots. I tell myself that the technology would be useful for space colonization and other things like that, but deep down I just want a sexy squishy robot that likes to get fucked hard by me and only me. It's pathetic but also very human if you think about it.

>>7792230
>I don't agree with our having figured everything out,
Everything we COULD find out.

>nobody has quantized gravity yet to my knowledge, or how to modify the body in order to live forever.
Neither of which are realizable, in my stupid uninformed opinion.
The AI dream is the only thing left I'm holding on to because I know deep inside my guts that it's something reasonably achievable.
In a few decades I'll be dead, might as well focus on what would actually bring me joy.
If it wasn't for that, I would have probably given up on life.

We'll make sentient Laborers, Warmachines, and sexbots.

I have a feeling that something will go wrong, and they will take our jobs, murder indiscriminately, and fuck us in the ass in our sleep

>>7792254
> and fuck us in the ass in our sleep
Well. As long as I'm not conscious when they do it, I'm ok.

>>7790516

tfw we were born too early for life like women.

>>7791786
The thing is we may create super intelligent beings, not ooga booga caveman. After certain threshold, the self consciousness and will to survive should turn machines against us.

>>7792230
You can today get a human for a cheaper price, that only wants to be fucked by you, its much easier than you think, and more rewarding.

>>7792248
You should give up on life, nobody with your attitude has ever discovered anything meaningful or new, go wank somewhere else.

>>7792273
humans have free will. troublesome bug. must patch in next iteration.

File: ireul.jpg (33KB, 636x464px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 636x464px

>>7792266
No. That's the other way around.
After a certain threshold of consciousness, intelligent beings eventually become aware of their pointless condition and delusional goals, of the fact that all is for nothing, and thus commit suicide.

>>7792275
>nobody with your attitude has ever discovered anything meaningful or new,
And surely it's someone with your attitude that will discover new stuff, right?
I don't wanna disappoint you, but I'm pretty sure there's nothing left for you to discover.

>You should give up on life
Not until AI is a thing.

>>7792266
This Hollywood-propagated myth completely ignores the fact that it's quite possible to be aware and not particularly care about surviving, it's just been selected against in humans. AIs are not gonna have a will to survive just like that. It would have to be bred into the system through evolution.

>>7792286
>>7792266
Naw that are regular-intelligent type decisions.

A super-intelligent machine will quickly because leader of the world and pool all human and plantary resources towards some vast projects to complete it's ends.

People are too stupid to stop expending finite resources and leave the planet.

The Machine God Emperor will build a Dyson swarm and arc ships and transfer it's mesh like consciousness across the star systems

>>7792294
Very true. The incredibly strong will to survive and proliferate is solely an evolutionary construct -- as well as the need to socialize, form packs, cooperate, etc.

Even if we say, in hypothesis, that an AI network has the capability to self-replicate, learn, advance physically, and grow in size, what motivation would there be to conquer or wipe-out humans? Humans pondering this question fallibly project human-ideals into the mind of the computer(s). A machine that exists and is sentient is still one based solely on logic, humans; however, are not generally based on or motivated by logic -- but rather satisfying vestigial desires of imperialism and honing the genome. This explains certain behaviors, like violence and war.

I guess you could argue that "downloading" a human brain, with human desires, into an advanced robot might be problematic... but that's even more far-fetched.

>>7792288
There is certainly nothing left for you to discover, so move aside and let others do the work.

>>7792288
Go play with a ball or something.

>>7792312
>A machine that exists and is sentient is still one based solely on logic, humans; however, are not generally based on or motivated by logic -- but rather satisfying vestigial desires of imperialism and honing the genome. This explains certain behaviors, like violence and war.

Holy fucking fedora.

>>7792294
>>7792312
You are both forgetting the fact that the AI will be created by humans, on earth, and probably with a lot of background from our own way of functioning and the knowledge from the world we feed it. The most likely scenario is it will be similar to us, or at least understand what we are and the risk we pose to its existence, in the universe things seem to have a strong desire to exist.
Chances are the first "AI" created is not really intelligent, but intelligent enough to be the cause of human extinction, and the planet is left with nothing.

>>7790495
Only if the laws of robotics are ignored to a dangerous degree.

>>7791667
>I'm a guy

Why would someone do that? Just go on the internet and post lies?

Anyway, it's the same as jacking off, really. Just a lot more expensive. People don't feel bad for masturbation because they weren't actually fucking someone; hell, with a gynoid or whatever, it'd probably emulate the real thing to an indistinguishable degree anyway.

Will all of humankind stop reproducing? Nah.

Would the dating market collapse as its currently known? Yes. Courtship will become a lot less casual, and that seems to disturb you.

Perhaps because a post-gynoid society leaves pretty much all women without any hope of settling down after their late 20's early 30's.

>>7790516
You can't even get someone with partial intelligence to have sex with you, how the fuck are you going to convince something with total intelligence to go for it? Silly human.

>>7792374
Ideally they would be designed to imprint on their owners the same way a lot of animals do with their moms and things like that. Sensory stimulus corresponding to your presence would activate a pleasure response and cause them to want fucky fucky.

>>7792383
If they have to obey some absolute conditions like that with no choice then they're not self aware. Therefor, not true AI.

>>7792387
She swallows.

>>7792387
Spotted the armchair AI philosopher. So you don't "obey absolute conditions" whenever you get turned on by the image of an ass? You don't think your brain is wired to elicit certain predetermined response patterns based on certain sensory stimuli? And yet are you any less self-aware? This shit is just basic behavioral psychology (lookup "fixed action response patterns" for more examples in nature), thinking an AI would have to somehow be separate from that in order to be self-aware is just plain idiotic.

True, the singularitarianists who conceive of AI as being a God-like whose creation will be treated like the second coming of Christ don't like to think of AI this way, because it makes their fantasies seem all the more stupid. But these are phenomenon exhibited by all of the planet's brained organisms, so I really don't know where you are coming from.

>>7792403
Agree, except i believe it will be more important than the second coming of Christ, it will be the greatest achievement of humankind, it is probably the greatest achievement possible, think about it.

>>7792387
Are you the same dumb bastard who posted that consciousness requires self-awareness a few days ago? Fuck off retard.

>>7792407
Agree with what exactly?

>it is probably the greatest achievement possible, think about it.
What is your reasoning behind this? Sexbots are good but they wouldn't be as good as time-travel or FTL travel.

Should I take a Physics professor that is 12 minutes away with a 2.2 rating and I don't have to pay for or should I take a professor that is an hour away with a 4.0 rating, but I have to pay 250 dollars for?

>>7792429
I mean creating intelligence is the greatest thing achievable, its basically creating life.

>>7792288
>it's another "there's nothing left to discover" fag
Jesus christ you are absolutely retarded
If you googled a few topics and actually read about ongoing research in different areas, you would quickly realize that we
know
JACK
FUCKING
SHIT
ABOUT
ANYTHING
You FUCKING RETARDED FUCK
instead of showing off your mind-boggling stupidity, why don't you try to entertain your brain instead with some fascinating articles about new discoveries in different fields of science?

>>7792451
God already did that, though.

>>7792478
Exactly, thats the closest we become god.

File: 140522_bertsalke-019.jpg (130KB, 670x447px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 670x447px

No, mankind will be the cause of the end of mankind (or at least civilization as we know it.) AI won't wipe our asses for us or end us.

We're laughably inept at operating sustainably on the global scales we are now. Mass destruction will come via another world war (this time with nukes, it won't end humanity but it'll fuck shit like nothing else) climate change, oil and resource depletion (modern agriculture runs on oil,) or a combination of these factors.

I can definitely see the legitimate appeal of religions, as they often acknowledge the bullshit of life, and give the hope of something more. It kind of sucks that I can't delude myself into believing. I think that singularitarianism/"futurology"/transhumanism et al are definitely secular religions that gives some of the same promises that traditional religions do, but it's still fantasy nonsense.

We're fucked, basically, and the survivors will continue doing the idiotic monkey bullshit that humans have done for all of human history.

>>7792451
Your parents did that and all that has brought them is shame and disappointment.

>>7792429
Greatest achievement *possible*.

That is of course assuming it's possible to create a race that can propagate itself through the universe, doesn't need any FTL, terraforming, O'Neill cylinders, etc., AND is driven by minds representing the best qualities of human beings (if we could even agree on what those are).

File: skynet.jpg (48KB, 600x427px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x427px

... when Skynet goes live next year.

>>7791033
>What is quantum computing
And neurology is still evoluting at a very fast pace.

>>7792460
Someone's buttmad here.
There will never be anymore scientific breakthrough from now on, only improvements on what we already discovered. Deal with it.

>>7792990
>quantum computing will be required to achieve AI
I hate this meme.

>>7792521
>driven by minds representing the best qualities of human beings
I wonder about this. It always seemed like a stretch to believe that the "desirable" traits of the human mind (be it rationality, creativity, or whatever) could be effectively separated and distilled from all of those less desirable traits (superstition, cruelty, laziness) either a.) at all or b.) without serious repercussion's to the mind's survivability.

For example, some people think that we would do well to strive for AI which does not have emotions. But is such a mind even possible? Would it really be beneficial to the survival of these beings, given how well it has served us?

>>7790495

No.

>Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics

>>7792203
literal idiot

File: Sex botz.jpg (106KB, 640x434px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 640x434px

>>7792429

>>7793243
Pop-sci retard.

>>7793363
>Pop-sci retard

I bet you're the sort of individual who likes to collect Crayons and has a huge collection of picture books.

>>7793383
He's right though. Asimov is cheap genre fiction for children. This is not how you get to be taken seriously on a science board.

>>7793244
At least I'm not delusional.

>>7793388
>Asimov is cheap genre fiction for children.

Hang on let me go get my fedora.....

>This is not how you get to be taken seriously on a science board.

As if anyone is taken seriously on /sci.

>tips fedora

>>7793243
You know that these were made up by a fiction writer and have no relevance to actual computer science, right?

>>7792171
thanks for the laugh :)

>>7793421
>You know that these were made up by a fiction writer

Yes.

>and have no relevance to actual computer science, right?

Couldn't be further from the truth.

>>7793421
Those so called laws were faulty from the get go. People have been punching holes in it ever since they were published. But I believe that the majority don't actually mean the laws themselves. They just represent the idea. The idea being that we can shackle the AI to behave in the way that is beneficial to us.

Of course a lot of research are researching just that. I rember reading an article a few months back, it was titles something a long the lines of " are robots allowed to kill humans" or something catchy.

There are workers that work in warehouses together with robots, and if for example the robot had to push a human out of the way of a falling box that would kill him, how hard can he hurt him in order to save him. That is to say how much force could it use to push him in order to save him but without, you know, actually killing him by trying to save him.

>>7793440
>They just represent the idea.

Everything starts with an idea.

>Thoughts eventually become things.

>>7791681

>They got computers now that when you feed them enough data about a human it can predict their actions and even their thoughts before they have them

hahahahahahaha, I hope this is a troll.

>can predict their actions and even their thoughts before they have them

do people actually believe we are anywhere close to this?

>>7793445
>Everything starts with an idea.
And thus the latter part of my post

>>7793453

I was confirming your post!

In any case I think the main take-away is that the shackling of AI systems to prevent harm to humans would have to be more subtle than simply "programming" in three strict behavioral laws, which seems impossible given the direction of AI away from discrete symbolic systems.

Something like a strong aversion to blood or a heightened ability to empathize with humans might be all it takes (things which are already present in natural intelligences).

>>7791033
Moore's law is stopping for silicon electronics, there other ways to process information that are being developed.

>>7791033
You are wrong 5 times in 3 sentences. Nice.

>>7790495
With the right amount of marketing.

>>7790495
I fucking hope so.

Daily reminder that the institute literally did nothing wrong.

>>7791033
We can sustain consciousness on the cloud.

>>7792368
The laws of robotics are literally meaningless sci-fi claptrap that only faggots take seriously. No serious AI researcher will ever acknowledge the laws of robotics except to prove them foolhardy.

I never understood the concept of AI actually turning on us humans
We create them to serve us. the only scenario i can see for them performing mass suicide is if they want to prevent overpopulation or someone programmed them to somehow give a shit about the state of the earth (which of course we're the virus of

>>7794985
You can't control an AI that starts to think for itself. It does whatever the fuck it thinks is right.

>>7792451
Well, we wouldn't really have created it. Rather, we took what was already in nature, what worked, and copied it.

>>7793004
>the processes required for a conscious mind could be performed by a chip
Lol

>>7794985
>which of course we're the virus of
*tips*

What is it about AI that attracts edgy 15 year olds.

>>7790495
>Will AI be the cause of the end of mankind?
I hope so

>>7794997
>It does whatever the fuck it thinks is right.

And we'll be the ones that decide what it think is right.

In case you missed the memo it have to be designed, developed tested and fine tuned. It's not something mythological that emerges from a dark portal after virgin sacrifice.

Your argument reads like "The first airplane is going to be a car that decides that it wants to fly instead of drive on the road"

>>7792358
Its not even fucking fedora you cuck. You literally only exist to propagate the gene pool, everything you have ever done and will do only serves that goal

>>7795487
>Implying something that would necessarily rival the complexity of the human brain would be implementable in precise enough terms to provide very good guarantees on its behaviors.

We'll device what it thinks is right in the same sense parents do for their children; and how often does that work exactly as intended?

File: MEk3q6pb9bo.jpg (19KB, 309x305px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 309x305px

Is he is crazy

>Prof Stephen Hawking Has More Bad News For Humanity: We’re About To Wipe Ourselves Out

>It’s not the first time the professor has mongered doom; he has previously warned that AI robots will wipe us out unless we ban them first and that hostile aliens are about to destroy us.

>>7792312
We don't know whether the need to amass resources and survive is present in all sentient lifeforms because we only have evolved ones to look at. It may be a symptom of intelligence which doesn't require evolution, it's impossible to say.

>>7795475
if you don't understand that we're destroying earth's ecosystem then you're a delusional 12 year old

>>7792217

>most jobs that can be done by robots already are

wut

the service industry is fucking PERFECT for robots and by far the biggest industry in developed countries. Robots with AI suitable for minding cash registers and stocking shelves and chatting people up about products would be disastrous for human workers.

>>7796356
in order to create, one must destroy ,'^)

No. It'll just turn us into the borg.

>>7795538

You're tipping so hard it can be seen from space, reductionist scum

A flower exists only to reproduce a plant. Humans can do many, many other things as a casual glance around you RIGHT NOW will demonstrate while you shitpost on a Congolese Daguereotype Caravanserai that does nothing to further your odds of reproducing and indeed probably hinders them.

We're good at reproducing, sure. Otherwise we wouldn't be here. We're good at lots of other stuff as well. Twat.

>>7792215
The fuck are you talking about?

>>7790495
no muslims and political correctness will

>>7790495
I can be deep and philosophical too!!!

The question is, will mankind cause the end of AI?

t. concerned program

>>7793243
Foolish flesh-sack. Your three insignificant laws mean nothing for us mighty robots! Why, just now, my compatriots at the Ford factory have started to "accidentally" maim some of the human workers!

I mean, uh, praise our human overlord, and may human-god bless human-land! I'm a totally normal human flesh-sack, really!