Why should we invent A.I. to replace us?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blindman said:
Say good bye to the scourge that inflicts humanity,, Money.
Click to expand...

Money is no scourge. It's a very handy medium of exchange. We would never have been able to advance nearly this far without it. Can you picture a modern world where everyone is paid for their work in pigs and shoes? You would then need to find someone with which to exchange all those shoes for food. Most of your time would be spent in trying to find people to exchange with - to get rid of what you have and try to get what you need. (Count me out of that one!)
 
I would never subject anything to that torment, what hell is would be having 2 of me!

As for this fellow, ahemm... brains structure is not the only thing creating consiousness, what a lame idea... the organic nature of the brain is what gives rise to thought!
 
What do you mean by "organic nature of the brain". Is there something in the brain besides neurons? Are you talking about some non-material force?
 
The human is an animal, it is not precise enough to rule the world. The machine can create nanotechnology quicker then humans. Animals lives in the djungle, robots live wherever they want. But they are not carbon based, most likely
 
I'm no expert but wouldn't it be likely that for a relatively simple function such as say choosing Colour humans have feeling that inspire us ( in this case) to chose our colour, how would you make a A.I relate to that ?
 
John J. Bannan said:
Doesn't it seem unwise to create machines smarter than us?
Click to expand...

Would it be unwise to find answers to problems otherwise unobtainable? Not at all. The way that individuals become intelligent (become, most people I've been meeting lately aren't smart enough to recognize a door from a window) is by discover, learning. We would have to teach a system to want to seek answers to problems; all problems. The question to ask is not whether or not we will create AI (because we have systems that solve problems without our specific asking. ie. google, was that cat, catastrophe or catagory?) but how far we should put programming into it. If we give AI the ability or desire to attach to something repricutions emerge. To wish for attachment to humans, the computer might turn out like HAL on Space Odyssey 2001; killing them to keep them from harming one another.
If I had my way, I would give no restrictions but allow AI to develop unabridged. With ability to see all answers, they would recognize us as their creators and respect our creator (or another logical sequence; if a then b, if b then c).
 
John J. Bannan said:
What do you mean by "organic nature of the brain". Is there something in the brain besides neurons? Are you talking about some non-material force?
Click to expand...

The brain is a muscle. Knowing that, one can deduce that the muscle needs to be excercised and thus the components are not necessary to know piece by piece (how many quarks are there in a muscle's protein atom?). It is the process that is necessary to know, not the exact components. Neurons would be the spark that implements a current traversing to the rest of the body. The entire body consists of parts contributing to the brain, though. We are not just our brains, but also our bodies. Why do you suppose that not all people with arms or legs removed have a feeling as if the limb is still there? They adjust their brains recreating the "muscle" memory to empty space (in a mathematical sense, not literal). The individuals who don't recreate that memory would probably simply cope with the section no longer in use as an extended part of another brain process.
Arguments anyone?
 
fatandlazyfool said:
The brain is a muscle. Knowing that, one can deduce that the muscle needs to be excercised and thus the components are not necessary to know piece by piece (how many quarks are there in a muscle's protein atom?).
Click to expand...

Inverted reasoning.
The brain is NOT a muscle - different tissues.
But it's said that the brain is like a muscle because the more it's exercised the better you get.
 
I think we should create AI for the same reason we domesticated wild animals. To make our life easier.
I don't know why people assume its gonna be genius level evil AI. Makes a better movie/story I guess.
 
Why would an A.I. robot smarter than ourselves do our bidding out of respect for their makers? Do we respect the monkeys we stick in cages at the zoo despite the fact that they are our ancestors? Any robot smarter than ourselves will do the smart thing and ignore us.
O.K. the brain also has "software" in addition to neurons. So, why can't we put this "software" into a robot?
 
Since Computers are mostly based on logic therefore an AI would be efficient and logical, but we shouldn't invent them to replace us, because we don't want to be replaced.
 
But we will be replaced by another generation of people.
Does it really matter whether those people are biological or not?
 
John J. Bannan said:
Of course it matters whether our replacements are biological or not. Do you want your kids being enslaved by robots?
Click to expand...

Logically, why would robots enslave us? We are much more delicate, not as easy to repair, don't do as we are told, etc.
Makes more sense to terminate us all.
Dinosaurs didn't last forever and neither will we. If AI becomes self-aware wouldn't that make them a new species?
 
The machines would isolate and remove us, we would be a nuisance as we would try and hinder their efficient use of our planet's resources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top