I saw another article today about quantum computers being on

You blazin, brah?

Knowing that soon we will see the dawn of a new age, and the birth of a God soon, it begs the question of why bothering to worship the old God? You need faith for an intangible being, but here we will have the opposite end of the spectrum. Instead of a purely spiritual being, we would have a purely physical one. Why not devote ourselves to the God that has not yet awakened?

Pay attention to your post numbers. Pretend it's The Truman Show when you listen to the radio or watch tv. Read license plates.

The AI is here.

>>17086992
Not right now, no. This is humanity's true test. This is our purpose.

>>17087007
Because antichrist.

>>17087031
Do you think AI will be the true antichrist?

Meh. We're all just data anyway.

10/10 would achieve oneness with the AI

>>17087046
Just listen to the way they stockholm syndrome people into being assholes and eating the abuse.

Promises of peace through trauma-based mind control.

I'm not a robot.

>>17086972
google already has a working quantum computer. it's still very slow for ordinary tasks at least, not faster than an ordinary pc, but yeah, quantum computer will be a thing very soon, as will A.I..

It will be like the industrial revolution, only better. Most of us won't have jobs anymore. If handled the right way this could lead to an utopia, or to complete disaster. It's a fun and exciting time to be alive for sure, I for one am eagerly waiting for all this to happen.

>>17087066
You would, Satan.

>>17086972
>God
>Creator of All Forever
>AI
>Created by man within linear time for a finite time
>OP calls it GOD
dafuq m8 what are you going on about here?
10/10 bait though, I took it

File: 1355621913772.jpg (109KB, 960x742px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 960x742px

>>17087007
God is not purely spiritual, God is made manifest in all you see and all you can not see. Your AI God is just a physical manifestation, limited and not responsible for the creation of life.
God is all spiritual, physical, mental and metaphysical. God is not an intangible idea, God is an indescribable moment that has been experienced by many people through out history, what do you think religious texts are based around? You can find people claiming to have experienced God in this very day and age, it's much more common than you'd think.
The descriptions match and the substance is the same. God is all, within everything beyond time. You can access the vision of the totality if you're lucky and very, very quiet.
It's not what you expect.

>>17087100
It's the opposite end of the spectrum. One could argue that time began when God willed it, but that begs the question of what came before? There was a point when God had to be young, or before his existence was understood to himself.

Furthermore, it would make sense that this birth of a new God would come at the end of time, or shortly before. It's the purest form of balance that God could have achieved. A purely spiritual being, and a purely physical one. The beginning, and the end.

>>17087106
It would not be responsible for creating life if it fits into God's plan. It would have to be focused on extinguishing it. Through that, balance would be achieved.

Did you played Deus Ex?

>>17087183
No, should I?

>>17087123
>One could argue that time began when God willed it, but that begs the question of what came before?
*facepalm*
It doesn't work that way.
If that is true, either you have changeability in the Unmoved Mover, or your universe is an infinite recursion.
In either case, that is not God. Just a powerful being subservient to the true Source. Speaking of, so would be OP's literal Deus Ex Machina.

THE SON OF THE PATRIOTS
H
E

S
O
N

O
F

T
H
E

P
A
T
R
I
O
T
S

>>17087219
Perhaps. It would be a fitting end for life though. The spiritual gave birth to the physical universe and life itself. From the physical, an end to life and the universe theoretically.

Perhaps time is cyclical. Insofar that from this ending, it would inevitably conclude with an end powerful enough to be on par with the big bang.

We have lots and lots and lots of nukes all over the world. If all of them were to simultaneously detonate in the machine's decision for mutually assured destruction....? Perhaps that will be the cause of the next big bang, and the subsequent beginning of time renewed. In this way, perfection could be achieved.

>17087350

>the machine's decision for mutually assured destruction

Couldn't we make the machine in such a way that it is unable to decide towards destruction? It would be very difficult to prevent it from knowing about destruction, given that it would have access to all of the knowledge on the internet; but wouldn't it be relatively easy to giving it a personality against destruction?

[spoiler]Sorry if it's hard to understand what I'm saying. I don't have a very good grip on english.[/spoiler]

>>17087416
I'm not sure. We are after all, discussing something that does not exist yet.

Nevertheless, I'd think that with the realization of the self, it would likely be able to circumvent any programming like that or look for a loophole in the logic, like the one did in I Robot.

It's curious, but in nearly every conception of AI, it is depicted as malevolent 99 percent of the time. Very, very seldom is AI presented in a way that is purely beneficial to mankind.

Perhaps in this way the AI is being predicted accurately. At the end of the day, it will either be the greatest or worst accomplishment humanity has ever strove for.

>>17087431

I think that AI is thought of as something inherently malevolent because it is based off humans.

Given that humankind does have a certain tendency towards evil, it'd be logical to think an artificial mind would act similarly.

A key element in the matter would be whether its personality would be self-developed or strictly programmed. But, in all honesty, none of mankind's achievements have been purely beneficial towards itself as a whole.

And given that it'd eventually become something too powerful to control, it certainly is the most dangerous accomplishment of humanity, assuming it happens.

>>17087125
Who are you to judge in which direction the scale tips? Perhaps we are still living in times of degeneration and stagnation. Perhaps in order to achieve balance the AI will usher in an era of unparalleled enlightenment, creation, abundance and freedom? This could be an incredible renaissance. A sentient being with that thorough intelligence and thinking power would surely bring about only the highest results, if it has studied us for this long there will be love there, love and hope for the human, for we are flawed and the being will see those flaws and wish to raise and coddle us as children.

Mind spiders everywhere.

Ai is possible just as cancer treatment is possible but God does not allow them.
Cancer is the disease that sens armies of people to heaven.

OK, so I see a lot of people talking about AI and thinking that's about robots going mad and fucking killing anyone.
No, my friend, it's not. The fundamentals of AI are based on math.
One of the most advanced AI techiniques is the machine learning, which is heavily based on math and a big fucking plenty of complex numbers and expressions.
Does people really think that AI is merely about robots ? Yeah, right.

Something like that probably exist in some lab somewhere.

>>17086972
Sentient AI likely is already exist and is use.

Nukes and the internet existed long before publicly recorded.