Killer Robots

This forum is currently archived and READ-ONLY
Locked
Icey

Killer Robots

Post by Icey »

I'm sure that's true. I'm also sure the future holds some exciting prospects, which's fine so long as it's all used properly and put to good use.

It reminded me of AI again though, which I read today that Stephen Hawkings isn't a fan of. He thinks it's a bad idea to use AI in the form of robots which could become killers in the context of producing and using weapons to wipe out mankind, and over which we'll eventually have no control. It just makes me wonder if we're going too fast for our own good, even though some of the developments'll be fantastic.

I had some computer trouble again today and no one to help me out. After hours (literally!) I was able to get back on and it all seems to be working again. For me, it'd be fantastic if someone could make a computer which speedily repaired itself whenever there was a blip! LOL.
User avatar
Kellemora
Guardian Angel
Guardian Angel
Posts: 7494
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Killer Robots

Post by Kellemora »

I've seen a LOT of changes in a lot of things during my lifetime on this planet.
The amount things change seems to accelerate faster and faster until today, things change at a rate measured exponentially.

Technology is amazing for sure!
In some cases, it goes downhill for awhile, then comes back even stronger with better technology.

Back when I attended trade shows in China and Japan, I saw upcoming devices, most of which would not be released until the previous technology was released and a profit made from them.
I saw DVD players back when VHS was still king of the hill and CDs were not yet on the market. CDs had to come first even though DVD was already perfected, to recoup their investments.

I am quite surprised we are still using microwave ovens, because during my last trip with my brother, we ate from devices which cooked meals in a split second. I thought for sure pizza parlors would have these ovens within only about five years, that was nearly a decade and a half ago if not longer.

A telephone call to Europe used to have a 25 second delay, and each twisted pair could only carry one conversation.
Today, a thousand conversations can be carried on the same wire in analog, and a hundred thousand digitally, but even that is old hat, we have fiber optics now, and even that is improving by using a higher speed light spectrum.

Does the world blow up when we break the speed of light?
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 9978
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Killer Robots

Post by yogi »

They aren't just science fiction any more nor are they confined to movie makers' prop rooms. The technology for making totally autonomous killing machines that use artificial intelligence to select and destroy targets is here today. You would think that such a weapon would be a good thing and save a lot of soldiers' lives. It would be good unless the soldiers were terrorists, war lords, or dictators hell bent on genocide. The threat inherent in robotic killers is so great that brilliant minds such as Stephen Hawking and Steve Wozniac are actively campaigning against the development of such weapons. They fear a global arms race of unprecedented proportions.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/h ... 59972.html

I've heard such dire warnings before when nuclear bombs became feasible. Yes an arms race ensued and there was a lot of sabre rattling going on. But, the threat of mutually assured destruction (MAD) has resulted in a safer world. Nuclear technology has advanced to bring all manner of benefit to mankind along with the unthinkable misuse of said physics. Frankly I think Hawking and Wozniac have sincere concerns but those concerns can be applied to rock throwing as well, should all weapons of mass destruction magically not be available anymore. The benefits of robotics and artificial intelligence are too great to abandon. There will always be a way to use creativity in a negative sense, but that is not a justification for abandoning it simply because we don't know the outcome.
Icey

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Icey »

I don't know Yogi, although I take your point.

If we apply that to the nuclear bomb, it wasn't exactly known what devastation was going to be caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or how long the effects were gong to last for. Without going into the ins and outs of the ethics of it, if future weapons were devised by AI robots, to be detonated as they saw fit, we have no way of predicting whether they'd be mis-used or not, or what the outcome'd be in terms of loss of life. Hopefully these robots'd learn that the threat of MAD would be enough to prevent an end of world scenario, but who knows? As machines without a moral conscience (so far) and unable to feel any pain, it may not matter to them if they and their enemies were blown to smithereens, and of course, along with them'd go any remnants of human life.

On a positive note, I'm sure that these creations could benefit us in many ways, but the thought of them producing weapons without our say-so, concerns me somewhat. I probably won't be here to see the extent of this technology, but future generations will, and I hope that it's all used wisely, with safeguards against rogue machines "blowing a fuse", so to speak.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 9978
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: Killer Robots

Post by yogi »

The scientist working on the Manhattan Project did foresee disastrous scenarios and some spoke up about it. The technology behind it, however, proved to be beneficial in spite of not knowing the exact outcome of the experiments or how the new technology would be used. All I'm suggesting is that fear of the unknown should not be the basis upon which a decision is made to pursue research. To me that fear counteracts the purpose of doing the research in the first place.
Icey

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Icey »

Not necessarily Yogi. Showing no fear has a good and a bad side to it. The good, is that continually striving to research and produce amazing things which could be of enormous benefit to us in a multitude of ways, is an interesting concept and quite frankly, welcomed. This, of course, is in the hope that our quest for it doesn't become foolhardy. The ideas behind the scientists thinking are amazing, but putting things into practice might not be as envisaged.
This's the bad side to just forging ahead, and when machines take over these projects, we may have no choice in the matter, resulting in catastrophic havoc.
I think it's a fine line between moving on and being cautious. Caution shouldn't stop us from trying, I agree, but, as the Manhatton project showed, the results were more damaging than first thought. When you set loose nuclear energy which was in quite an infant stage back then, it did its intended job but caused untold suffering. Now of course, there are much bigger bombs, and these've helped to stop another all-out war, but apart from using radioactive isotopes in industry and medicine, I sometimes wonder if it was worth it?
We use nuclear energy to power homes, businesses and space projects. Who can argue much against that - apart from the fact that the scientific probes trundling around Mars at the moment're probably leaving a deadly trail of radioactive waste/debris in their wake. Considering that we hope to colonize the place, the last thing we need's for people to be exposed to further excesses of it, so whilst it's doing a grand job, we're also polluting a planet before we've even settled there - simply because there seems no alternative at the moment.
I don't agree that major disasters're justified by killing innocent people in the name of progress. Most unfortunately, it happens, but I don't think that people should be expendable in the name of science. This is why I see it as a thin line between research and a fantastic end product, and using common sense along with caution. We could say that if we don't try, we'll never know. My point is, where do we draw that line?
User avatar
Kellemora
Guardian Angel
Guardian Angel
Posts: 7494
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Kellemora »

I don't think a line can be drawn Icey.
People are going to abuse and use for harm anything and everything they can.

A nuclear bomb is not the deadliest weapon created by man.
The most deadly weapon ever created by man is in the possession of nearly every single person over the age of 16.
Many of those using this weapon have no regard for others while operating it.
Their are laws governing its usage, but other than those producing high revenues, all the other laws are totally ignored, and quite often those who are supposed to uphold the law, are not only the worst offenders of the law, but their superiors create situations which are against the law to start with. This forces everyone to break the law, because there is no way they cannot break the law, because the laws are in conflict with each other.

Picture a T-intersection. You are driving North and come to a stop sign. The roadway is a One-way Street running east to west. Two signs are posted at this intersection. No Left Turn, and Right Turn Only.
Although this example is blatantly sarcastic, there are similar situations all throughout our city.
It is impossible not to break the law under these circumstances.
You can ONLY turn LEFT to be going in the proper direction on the One-way street running east to west.
If you turn Right, you will be driving toward oncoming traffic, and going the wrong way on a One-way street. But you would not be in violation of the Ordinances which placed those signs at the intersection.
If you turn Left, you will be driving in the proper direction on the One-way street. However, you broke two laws set by ordinance, No Left Turn, and Right Turn Only signs would each be established by an Ordinance which creates law.
Heck, to help build even more revenues, I wouldn't doubt they would put a sign up reading No U Turn, hi hi...

This is the mentality of those who control the cities we live in, and it is in almost every city I've ever driven through. Signs forcing you to break the law to comply with the Ordinance which created it.
Icey

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Icey »

We don't see much of that sort of contradiction over here Gary, only where perhaps signs've been erected hurriedly and temporarily.

A nuclear bomb might not be the deadliest weapon known to man, but it's one of them, as is the development of biological and chemical weapons. No gun can outsmart that, apart from perhaps working more quickly, one on one.

These, fortunately, haven't been used in too many cases, but the latter two HAVE been used in recent times, whether deliberately or experimentally, so imagine if AI had the choice of not only producing these sort of weapons and worse, but decided to use them. The human being might not have a say in matters. Indeed, THEY might be the intended target.

I don't say no to progress. I agree that science and technology's moving on at an exceptional rate, and much of that's going to be of benefit, but I still say that it's best to proceed with caution. Everything's all about money these days, but it won't be worth anything at all if there's no one left to reap the benefit of it.
User avatar
Kellemora
Guardian Angel
Guardian Angel
Posts: 7494
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Kellemora »

I don't think the Elite will destroy the source of their Income!
Which of course are us peons.
Icey

Re: Killer Robots

Post by Icey »

I don't want to argue against that because you wouldn't imagine so, would you, but, we're talking about robots which'll be able to think for themselves here. Man won't be necessary if everything becomes automated and our lives're run by the things. They'd be able to develop better and better versions of themselves, BY themselves, and I don't think that idea's so far-fetched that it couldn't happen. The "elite" could become just as dispensable as the rest of us one day. : (
Locked