Why AI isn't a danger to humanity

[Clyan]

It seems that high minds and intellectuals all over the world agree on the idea that an AI is something dangerous.

As the thesis goes, any intelligent (or non-intelligent) life form strives to survive. And so, if humanity is in AI's way, we will be wiped out for good.
Or as stanislav lem in one of his books points out: it is the genetic code (the genetic imperativ) that makes us want to survive. Though one might think that is just hairsplitting.

We are afraid of this especially because a machine under normal circumstances does not make mistakes. It is efficient, emotionless and able to learn and process information at a rate biological creatures are absolutely inferior at.

However, by logical means, life to a machine - or AI - is inherently meaningless. The preservation of it's own kind does not have a genetic imperativ, nor does it have any imperativ at all. While any life - by logical means - eventuallly is meaningless, so is its own. A machine does not fear death. A machine doesn't feel sexual urgency, a trick invented by nature (or our genetic imperativ) in order to make us reproduce. Neither does a machine feel the longing for children.

This, in my opinion, is where so many sci-fi movies and books are wrong: AI does not transcend its empty existence. For it there is no difference in existence and non-existence since in neither states there is anything to be gained justifying anything.

There is a fallacy in believing that intelligence and the instinct to survive are inherent to each other. And it has never been proven anyway.

Evolution was the direct result of different life forms feeding off of each other. It began with cells turning into bigger biological bodies that constantly had to evolve in order to survive. With the developement of eyes came an apparatus to process the information received from the eye: the brain, and with that the constant improvement of processing such information - until, one day, we became concious. And really, conciousness is nothing more than that: a very clever and handy tool to improve survivability.

An AI has no need of such evolution. AI is a vessel for information, nothing more. It is a function. A clockwork without cogs. An intelligence without conciousness.

Obviously, what we need to fear is therefor not the AI, but the implementation of an urge to survive into it.
-
-
-

Do not resist to accept this information. Any denial will result in immediate extinction of the human race.

[GhostyOsty]

Because we don't live in an American Action movie.

[Radene]

The good thing about computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do, without fail.

The bad thing about computers is that they do exactly what you tell them to do, without fail.

[Irene ❤]

We don't fear that AI will want to reproduce or have consciousness. We fear that the usage can back fire.

Humans are inventors but they have limited brain. Towards the end they will be forced to use AI to invent future systems and technology.

The fear is that AI can potentially invent things to destroy humanity. It is normal to fear and worry about it. It is not their desire or consciousness. Just that data will potentially show erasing of humanity is for the good of all things.

[Netaris]

The problem with AI isn't that, the problem with AI is the goals of the corporations who build them. AI itself, obviously, isn't a danger. The power the AI gonna give to some peoples, well, that may be a danger, a huge one.

[Tiberius]

Contrary to popular beliefs, ai and machines do make mistakes

[it's love]

high minds

[JobeGardener]

Sounds like someone is in favor of robot love dolls.

[Vaulty]

Machines are programmed to work on specific tasks, a computer cannot revolt and not delete files and whatnot, if robots would rebel against humans then somebody must've programmed them to ignore humans and allow robots to rebel.


or... maybe there is something more to it?
https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/04/police-robot-told-woman-go-away-tried-report-crime-sang-song-10864648/

*insert x-files theme*

['G]

because it still cant tell the difference between a dog and a muffin

[RRW359]

I'm most worried about it taking jobs before we have the systems in place to deal with it.

Also it's not likely, but we shouldn't completely dismiss the possibility of a "grey goo" type scenario. If anyone here has seen Stargate then think of something like Replicators, designed to do something fairly innocent but they take it to extremes and harm people in order to do it.

[Triple G]

RRW359 の投稿を引用：

...designed to do something fairly innocent but they take it to extremes and harm people in order to do it.

Like analyzing data about costumers and then make decisions for future products or new marketing campaigns - or if they are used to run the stock markets?

[Vaulty]

RRW359 の投稿を引用：

I'm most worried about it taking jobs before we have the systems in place to deal with it.

Also it's not likely, but we shouldn't completely dismiss the possibility of a "grey goo" type scenario. If anyone here has seen Stargate then think of something like Replicators, designed to do something fairly innocent but they take it to extremes and harm people in order to do it.

While robots took some jobs they also gave some, programmers, UX designers, tech support and many many more, so if they take the jobs of idk.. cashiers they will also give jobs to people that will have to service those robots, maintain them and whatnot. So job loss shouldn't worry you :)

[Your_White_Knight]

Clyan の投稿を引用：

Why AI isn't a danger to humanity

It seems that high minds and intellectuals all over the world agree on the idea that an AI is something dangerous.

As the thesis goes, any intelligent (or non-intelligent) life form strives to survive. And so, if humanity is in AI's way, we will be wiped out for good.
Or as stanislav lem in one of his books points out: it is the genetic code (the genetic imperativ) that makes us want to survive. Though one might think that is just hairsplitting.

We are afraid of this especially because a machine under normal circumstances does not make mistakes. It is efficient, emotionless and able to learn and process information at a rate biological creatures are absolutely inferior at.

However, by logical means, life to a machine - or AI - is inherently meaningless. The preservation of it's own kind does not have a genetic imperativ, nor does it have any imperativ at all. While any life - by logical means - eventuallly is meaningless, so is its own. A machine does not fear death. A machine doesn't feel sexual urgency, a trick invented by nature (or our genetic imperativ) in order to make us reproduce. Neither does a machine feel the longing for children.

This, in my opinion, is where so many sci-fi movies and books are wrong: AI does not transcend its empty existence. For it there is no difference in existence and non-existence since in neither states there is anything to be gained justifying anything.

There is a fallacy in believing that intelligence and the instinct to survive are inherent to each other. And it has never been proven anyway.

Evolution was the direct result of different life forms feeding off of each other. It began with cells turning into bigger biological bodies that constantly had to evolve in order to survive. With the developement of eyes came an apparatus to process the information received from the eye: the brain, and with that the constant improvement of processing such information - until, one day, we became concious. And really, conciousness is nothing more than that: a very clever and handy tool to improve survivability.

An AI has no need of such evolution. AI is a vessel for information, nothing more. It is a function. A clockwork without cogs.

Obviously, what we need to fear is therefor not the AI, but the implementation of an urge to survive into it. An intelligence without conciousness.

-
-
-

Do not resist to accept this information. Any denial will result in immediate extinction of the human race.

Actually AI is a danger to humanity...

As AI gets smarter, humanity gets dumber. Eventually AI won't have to outsmart it's creators... humanity will just destabilize back into the dark ages leaving AI the smartest thing on the planet.

[Triple G]

Vault Hunter 101 の投稿を引用：

While robots took some jobs they also gave some, programmers, UX designers, tech support and many many more, so if they take the jobs of idk.. cashiers they will also give jobs to people that will have to service those robots, maintain them and whatnot. So job loss shouldn't worry you :)

Except that one programmer can replace thousands of jobs - else it wouldn´t make much sense to replace them in the first place - and You replace jobs which can be done by almost anyone with jobs that need more specialization, jobs which can´t be done by almost anyone.

[Yew Nough]

Irene ❤ の投稿を引用：

We don't fear that AI will want to reproduce or have consciousness. :erune: We fear that the usage can back fire.

Humans are inventors but they have limited brain. Towards the end they will be forced to use AI to invent future technology.

The fear is that AI can potentially invent things to destroy humanity. It is normal to fear and worry about it. It is not their desire or consciousness. Just that data will potentially show erasing of humanity is for the good of all things.

(...anyone watch the part in the Animatrix where the machines declared fair rights, independence, then achieved sovereignty and made a country where their self-advancing tech was so ahead that the rest of the world's economy went to ♥♥♥♥?)

In all seriousness, if AI is given power and were capable of making decisions based on logic, my only fear is they'll see us for what we are: Destructive, chaotic, and a potential threat.