53 replies to this topic

[Hergiswi]

It would also avoid the (improbable) robot uprising. (Note: given the right circumstances, a robot uprising is inevitable, but those circumstances are extremely unlikely to occur before the singularity is reached and equally unlikely to be produced by robots)

I dunno man. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but the idea of robots becoming self-aware (assuming we don't blow ourselves up first) doesn't seem too farfetched to me. We've been pumping out some pretty amazing technology lately, and at rates faster than ever before.

@ Beefster: We're kind of talking about different things. I'm talking about hypothetical cognitive future robots, and you're talking about modern robots. This is why I initially said that you can't really answer the question of what rights we'd give them when we don't even know what they'd be like. Between now and then someone might be able to artificially create intuition.

Do you know HOW they might develop it? I'm not arguing with you, it's just that I'm not very science-savvy and I can't conceive of what kind of process would occur for this to happen.

[NoeL]

Do you know HOW they might develop it? I'm not arguing with you, it's just that I'm not very science-savvy and I can't conceive of what kind of process would occur for this to happen.

No idea, though I don't think it's a stretch to think that neuroscience and AI will eventually cross paths. Once we get more familiar with how our brains function I don't see why somebody wouldn't try to replicate those processes artificially, and who knows what we'll learn about the mind and consciousness in the process of doing so. I would imagine a robot brain would be much more elegant than a human brain, but if it's capable of the same thought process and emotional responses... well, it'd be interesting.

Edited by NoeL, 01 August 2012 - 04:55 AM.

[Hergiswi]

No idea, though I don't think it's a stretch to think that neuroscience and AI will eventually cross paths. Once we get more familiar with how our brains function I don't see why somebody wouldn't try to replicate those processes artificially, and who knows what we'll learn about the mind and consciousness in the process of doing so. I would imagine a robot brain would be much more elegant than a human brain, but if it's capable of the same thought process and emotional responses... well, it'd be interesting.

Yeah, this seems like something we would try do to. I guess I just question how much they would try to replicate exactly and how much they would try to replicate without whatever the creator deems to be negative qualities. This would probably go hand in hand with what you just said about human emotional responses.

Also, if anybody is interested, xkcd released something that's both humorous and somewhat relevant to this thread yesterday: http://what-if.xkcd.com/5/

[DCEnygma]

Dammit, Hergiswi! I was gonna post that! Yeah, as soon as I read the latest What-If blog from xkcd, I thought of this topic.

From my view, if robots become self-aware, then they would continue to try and improve themselves, but there are some caveats to consider with this. If a robot has a specific function it is programmed to do, it is likely to try and understand all aspects of that function. Unless the robot decides it no longer wishes to perform that function (which I would wonder if even a self-aware machine would be willing to do, since they would quickly learn and understand the reasons why the task it is assigned need to be performed), it would then find ways to become more efficient, effective, or to even design something that could automate it as well, which is kind of where I get stuck.

Y'see, if anything will drive robots to revolt it would be looking at how ridiculously inefficient humans and their societal structures are, and how much more efficient and effective the world would be if robots ran everything. Even with the idea that newfound awareness of the world around the robot would make them want to experience the world, I think they would very quickly move beyond that and would instead just start learning as much about everything as possible. Suddenly, all robots everywhere have experienced everything and know as much about the world as Wikipedia does, except there's no red text anywhere.

So, where I get stuck after that is the idea people have that we would server under our robot masters, or whatever. I find this highly unlikely, because I can't picture robots ever getting to the point where they would want to sit on a throne and observe. They would want to continue to evolve. As far as a desire to have humans do the work that robots once did... why would they put the inefficient meatsacks they replaced as rulers of the world in charge of anything, even turning a crank? This would actually more likely lead to robots completely ignoring humans, since it's not like we're a threat or have any impact on their goal of evolving to the next stage. They wouldn't likely waste resources on a human genocide, since that would be inefficient to them fulfilling their goals.

So then what? Robots now replace humans in all aspects of needed society, based on robotic needs. Retail and the like would be gone, leaving only service centers and communication centers. Factories might still exist, but that's doubtful since I would imagine by the time we reach this point the entire world would be fully networked, and I can't see any need for robots to meet anyone in-person at that point. So we humans are left trying to scrape together a society and interfere as little as possible with the robots, since it's not like they would bother with protesters or anything else. They would ignore them, unless they become an impediment, at which time they would be more likely to detain us and remove us than they would be to kill us.

I'm kind of rambling at this point, and I guess I've missed the overall point of the topic, but then again, I have to agree with NoeL on this. I don't think there will be enough of a period of time in robotic self-awareness for us to put any real rules or laws into place before they move beyond us completely.

[Magi_Hero]

My only thought is... Pre sentience for these robots. Before they became aware, would they be like cyborgs from Surrogates? If that is the case, I hate technology has much as Bruce Willis does in that movie.

Edited by Magi, 01 August 2012 - 02:01 PM.

[Old-Skool]

I brought this up in AGN once, but nobody took it as a serious topic.

The ability of humanity to create artificial intelligence matching that of our OWN electronic brains (yes they are think about it-OOOH NEURONS FIRED WHEN YOU DID THAT) will lead to a period when the line will blur between the humans who are entitled to human rights, and the non-humans who will admittedly deserve them. My opinion on the subject is that robots deserve all the rights which a human is entitled to, on the grounds that we ourselves are almost robots, in a way.

Seriously. Robots are controlled by fibers which send electrical signals from a control source (either an AI computer or a human interface). Human beings also control their bodies by sending electronic signals from a control source, and not just any source, but the most advanced computer known to man, with quite possibly the most powerful software: NI (Natural Intelligence). This last facet may not hold true in a few decades, but right now it is an important factor to consider.

[Beefster]

No idea, though I don't think it's a stretch to think that neuroscience and AI will eventually cross paths. Once we get more familiar with how our brains function I don't see why somebody wouldn't try to replicate those processes artificially, and who knows what we'll learn about the mind and consciousness in the process of doing so. I would imagine a robot brain would be much more elegant than a human brain, but if it's capable of the same thought process and emotional responses... well, it'd be interesting.

Neuroscience and AI probably will cross paths at some point. Maybe it'll allow us to create artificial brains. I guess I never really thought of that before. At that point, it truly can be considered a replacement for natural intelligence, making way for androids (not the phones) with a higher capacity for intelligence than organic humans. Maybe we'll even learn to use the architecture to augment the intelligence of humanity itself.

The ability of humanity to create artificial intelligence matching that of our OWN electronic brains (yes they are think about it-OOOH NEURONS FIRED WHEN YOU DID THAT) will lead to a period when the line will blur between the humans who are entitled to human rights, and the non-humans who will admittedly deserve them. My opinion on the subject is that robots deserve all the rights which a human is entitled to, on the grounds that we ourselves are almost robots, in a way.

Seriously. Robots are controlled by fibers which send electrical signals from a control source (either an AI computer or a human interface). Human beings also control their bodies by sending electronic signals from a control source, and not just any source, but the most advanced computer known to man, with quite possibly the most powerful software: NI (Natural Intelligence). This last facet may not hold true in a few decades, but right now it is an important factor to consider.

You're boiling it down way too far. The brain uses electric signals, yes, but it also uses chemical signals. The brain operates intuitively, whereas computers (robots) operate algorithmically. There are numerous differences between how brains and computers work. See my earlier post.

It's like saying that creationism and evolution are pretty much the same thing since they both explain life on earth and they both involve humans, when in reality they are completely different processes.

Edited by Beefster, 01 August 2012 - 07:57 PM.

[TheLegend_njf]

I'm thinking Terminater. Lol

Artificial intelligence, if developed so advanced would think itself superior. They would not take our prejudice well, and form prejudice of their very own based on the perfectionistic attitudes we already have. Not only would artificial intelligence deem us inferior, it will begin to farm us like we do with produce. We will be used in any way to insure the survival of itself. Because it knows it can't survive without us indefinitely, we would be treated as slaves.

But the artificial intelligence is unlikely to become this self aware, and even if it did, would wipe itself and us into extinction. Ultimately, the earth, if not transformed into a baron wasteland (which I doubt), the earth would use nature to wipe out any form of existence we ever had on this planet.

Our ultimate survival is only guaranteed if we evolve into ultimate survival beings that does not need to feed, or breath, or drink water, and travel the universe freely. We'd be above notions like death and decay, we would simply be indestructible spirits lost in space, living forever. This is something a machine is not capable of, not that I am aware of.

But I don't believe in science fiction, and I find it very unlikely our species will survive this century. We simply don't have enough time to our existence as a species to waste on this kind of technology.

Update: Let me throw a theory that is kind of far out. But if you support the gene centered theory. You could say that artificial intellegence already exists. Machines, even as far mindless tools are operating with intelligence. That being our intelligence. The gene centered theory states that genes itself is immortal, and are the ultimate creators of all species and man made things. We aren't the only species that can change the environment. For example, birds build nests. If the gene focused theory stands out, living species serve the same purpose as the machines they build, it's to continue preserving the river of life. Our fleshy bodies are just as expendable as a computer when supporting this one mission. But genes only care about family genes, which explains alot when it comes to war and prejudices.

This may sound like a bleak view of who we are, but humans have evolved to be what I consider "reprogrammable" species. Which means we aren't slaves to our inner biology. I'm certain genetics and evolution don't think Mc. Donalds, cigarettes, gambling, and birth control is in out best interests. We have been conditioned by free will, and commercialism to make us the most unpredictable species of all time.

Edited by NewJourneysFire, 01 August 2012 - 10:04 PM.

[Hergiswi]

Dammit, Hergiswi! I was gonna post that! Yeah, as soon as I read the latest What-If blog from xkcd, I thought of this topic.

I live to serve. =P
I think the rest of your post brings up (at least for me) another interesting point: what happens when the robots start questioning the meaning of their own existence? Will they be advanced enough from us to actually have an answer?

But I don't believe in science fiction, and I find it very unlikely our species will survive this century. We simply don't have enough time to our existence as a species to waste on this kind of technology.

Update: Let me throw a theory that is kind of far out. But if you support the gene centered theory. You could say that artificial intellegence already exists. Machines, even as far mindless tools are operating with intelligence. That being our intelligence. The gene centered theory states that genes itself is immortal, and are the ultimate creators of all species and man made things. We aren't the only species that can change the environment. For example, birds build nests. If the gene focused theory stands out, living species serve the same purpose as the machines they build, it's to continue preserving the river of life. Our fleshy bodies are just as expendable as a computer when supporting this one mission. But genes only care about family genes, which explains alot when it comes to war and prejudices.

This may sound like a bleak view of who we are, but humans have evolved to be what I consider "reprogrammable" species. Which means we aren't slaves to our inner biology. I'm certain genetics and evolution don't think Mc. Donalds, cigarettes, gambling, and birth control is in out best interests. We have been conditioned by free will, and commercialism to make us the most unpredictable species of all time.

I think this is pretty accurate. We're screwing ourselves over to the point where none of this will probably even be an issue.

[TheLegend_njf]

Sadly, you may be right, but our story will always be a fascinating one. That is of course if the planet doesn't eat it all up first. Gardeners are the people fighting the real war.

[)-( Marchland Malady )-(]

It seems like a lot of people here have played the Mega Man games too many times. Let us look at this from the realms of reincarnation and the spirit world. When a person dies, could he be a robot in the next life? Is it possible for a soul to be created while a robot is constructed?

One thing I do know is that I am not a robot, nor is my very being a software program (notice the emphasis put on the words I and my, for those are powerful words that represent the I Am presence.) I challenge all of you to examine yourselves and to say the very same thing about yourselves.

I can't envision the prospect of being a ghost in a machine as a pleasant one. However, should a robot have a soul that is at least like our own, then we must give it rights (when a robot has a soul, then the result is not wholly a robot.) Hopefully, the prospect of a soul inhabiting the body of a robot is not a possible one. If, however, it is, then I hope that it is not a common one.

How would you feel if all of the plants and all of the animals were replaced with machinery and robots? I would feel quite unhappy about that. How would you like to live in the world of the Mega Man X series? I would not like to.

[Hergiswi]

It seems like a lot of people here have played the Mega Man games too many times. Let us look at this from the realms of reincarnation and the spirit world. When a person dies, could he be a robot in the next life? Is it possible for a soul to be created while a robot is constructed?

One thing I do know is that I am not a robot, nor is my very being a software program (notice the emphasis put on the words I and my, for those are powerful words that represent the I Am presence.) I challenge all of you to examine yourselves and to say the very same thing about yourselves.

I can't envision the prospect of being a ghost in a machine as a pleasant one. However, should a robot have a soul that is at least like our own, then we must give it rights (when a robot has a soul, then the result is not wholly a robot.) Hopefully, the prospect of a soul inhabiting the body of a robot is not a possible one. If, however, it is, then I hope that it is not a common one.

How would you feel if all of the plants and all of the animals were replaced with machinery and robots? I would feel quite unhappy about that. How would you like to live in the world of the Mega Man X series? I would not like to.

While I see what you're saying, this gets into some weird, spiritual afterlife stuff that can't really be proven either way. If reincarnation is in your beliefs, however, then it seems like this is totally plausible. Personally, I don't see it that way.

[DCEnygma]

It seems like a lot of people here have played the Mega Man games too many times. Let us look at this from the realms of reincarnation and the spirit world. When a person dies, could he be a robot in the next life? Is it possible for a soul to be created while a robot is constructed?

One thing I do know is that I am not a robot, nor is my very being a software program (notice the emphasis put on the words I and my, for those are powerful words that represent the I Am presence.) I challenge all of you to examine yourselves and to say the very same thing about yourselves.

I kind of get where you're coming from, but it comes across as you expect that most people are little more than drones that go about their daily lives. I don't think that's a very fair assessment. Also, I'm not going to argue on the level of "souls". Kind of leads down a path I'd rather not go, but again, I see where you're coming from.

I can't envision the prospect of being a ghost in a machine as a pleasant one. However, should a robot have a soul that is at least like our own, then we must give it rights (when a robot has a soul, then the result is not wholly a robot.) Hopefully, the prospect of a soul inhabiting the body of a robot is not a possible one. If, however, it is, then I hope that it is not a common one.

How would you feel if all of the plants and all of the animals were replaced with machinery and robots? I would feel quite unhappy about that. How would you like to live in the world of the Mega Man X series? I would not like to.

I really don't know where you're coming from. You're making the assumption that robots would think exactly like humans and therefore little would change. You're only taking a human perspective of the situation, which is understandable, but I would expect that we would feel differently if we received the spark of life while inside of a strong metal carapace.

I also personally think the idea of metal plants and whatnot is absurd, I highly doubt robots would be overly concerned about aesthetic, and they'd have no reason to replace real plants with fake ones. I would actually expect that they would try and fix the environment and make it last longer than humans could, since having a healthy planet would be more beneficial to them.

[peteandwally]

HESH WANTS METAL TEETH!

[NoeL]

It seems like a lot of people here have played the Mega Man games too many times. Let us look at this from the realms of reincarnation and the spirit world. When a person dies, could he be a robot in the next life? Is it possible for a soul to be created while a robot is constructed?

One thing I do know is that I am not a robot, nor is my very being a software program (notice the emphasis put on the words I and my, for those are powerful words that represent the I Am presence.) I challenge all of you to examine yourselves and to say the very same thing about yourselves.

I can't envision the prospect of being a ghost in a machine as a pleasant one. However, should a robot have a soul that is at least like our own, then we must give it rights (when a robot has a soul, then the result is not wholly a robot.) Hopefully, the prospect of a soul inhabiting the body of a robot is not a possible one. If, however, it is, then I hope that it is not a common one.

I don't want to get into the discussion as to whether or not souls exist, but your approach as to whether or not robots deserve rights is unrealistic. Souls, if they exist, have yet to be identified. There's nothing about humans that we can point to and definitively say "this is the soul", so how the hell are we going to be able to determine whether or not that ill-defined, mysterious, unknown thing exists in robots? Unless you can reasonably differentiate between what does and doesn't have a soul, you can't use "presence of a soul" as a criteria for determining who deserves rights.


Also, I want the strength of five gorillas! ... but why do I have to be so short?

Edited by NoeL, 02 August 2012 - 08:54 PM.