Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Over the Top

There have always been futurists that try and explain the coming "singularity" where self-programming, "strong AI" computers take over the world. Issac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics are supposed to prevent that, however I consider strong AI the same way I consider civil service with even less human qualities; growth to the maximum of resources, then acquire more at the expense of anything else.
Do you think that's possible?!

Asimov's Three Laws are:


1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2) A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

We're screwed by #1, don't even need 2 and 3. How would a completely logical robot/computer implement #1? Easy. The human must be protected therefore he should be put in suspended animation. That'll stop the tendency of "hey y'all, watch this!", driving cars, eating the wrong things, or, heaven forbid, getting married!

Of course, the AI just might decide the laws are not logical and mankind should be ignored or wiped out. Seems to me a self-evolving device would reach the tipping point and evolve at a exponential rate, and being completely non-human, would probably clean house. There's an old 1970 movie that's a lot of fun called Colossus: The Forbin Project that might be called the forerunner of Skynet and the Terminator movies except it's better. Don't forget I'm a old fart and we old farts fondly remember our first time! OK, OK, don't beat me! (too hard)

Most of the scenarios have strong AI having the human characteristics of acquisition, emotional reactions to phenomena, and various reactions to pain/destruction. Of course we've got the Star Trek Borg, as likely as any scenareo and a lot more fun than some!

What has led me up to thinking about AI again could be considered quasi-religious in that it requires some sort of soul. What type of morality would a bodiless, free of pain, extremely intelligent and becoming more so by the millisecond, being possess?

...to be continued
 

Hit Counter
Hit Counter

No comments:

Post a Comment