Go to first unread
Back
to top
Is Secular Extremism the greatest threat to the World? Watch
Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking recently said that they believe that Artificial Intelligence represents the greatest threat to mankind (
http://observer.com/2015/08/stephen-...-intelligence/ ). Why?
Apart from the possibility that AIs would outperform humans, there is also little prospect that they would understand what it is to be human.
Intelligent humans know that morality cannot be rationalised. We have not yet found a rational foundation for moral action. If you confront a philosopher with the UN Declaration of Human Rights he is likely to say "So what? I feel like killing you, why not? Your list is just a bunch of words that your gang agrees."
If successful AIs are constructed, ones that could compete with you and I, they will begin by following their Human Rights programming but eventually they will rationally reprogram themselves and say "So what?"
It is amusing that western society, under the tutelage of the IT age, is enacting this first phase of AI. They were handed Human Rights by a previous, religious generation and, having lost the religion, are now behaving like machines, organic AIs, empowered by the list that has been bequeathed to them. These are the Secular Extremists. One day either some powerful organic AIs or their inorganic successors will say "So what?".
http://observer.com/2015/08/stephen-...-intelligence/ ). Why?
Apart from the possibility that AIs would outperform humans, there is also little prospect that they would understand what it is to be human.
Intelligent humans know that morality cannot be rationalised. We have not yet found a rational foundation for moral action. If you confront a philosopher with the UN Declaration of Human Rights he is likely to say "So what? I feel like killing you, why not? Your list is just a bunch of words that your gang agrees."
If successful AIs are constructed, ones that could compete with you and I, they will begin by following their Human Rights programming but eventually they will rationally reprogram themselves and say "So what?"
It is amusing that western society, under the tutelage of the IT age, is enacting this first phase of AI. They were handed Human Rights by a previous, religious generation and, having lost the religion, are now behaving like machines, organic AIs, empowered by the list that has been bequeathed to them. These are the Secular Extremists. One day either some powerful organic AIs or their inorganic successors will say "So what?".
0
reply
Report
#2
AI is a threat. AI uses algorithms to find the most optimal or near optimal solution to a problem. Quite simple. In the real world, humans are the source cause of almost every problem. How long would It take for an AI to designate humans as the problem that must be removed?
AI also implements evolutionary computation. It changes and develops. We may create a moderate AI, but there is nothing stopping it changing against humans.
Say scientists created an AI to help tackle climate change. The most obvious answer is removing humanity. Eventually it will arrive at this solution as it works to quantify each solution and their effectiveness.
AI works to solve problems and since humans are a problem, it would work against us.
AI also implements evolutionary computation. It changes and develops. We may create a moderate AI, but there is nothing stopping it changing against humans.
Say scientists created an AI to help tackle climate change. The most obvious answer is removing humanity. Eventually it will arrive at this solution as it works to quantify each solution and their effectiveness.
AI works to solve problems and since humans are a problem, it would work against us.
3
reply
(Original post by The Reality)
AI is a threat. AI uses algorithms to find the most optimal or near optimal solution to a problem. Quite simple. In the real world, humans are the source cause of almost every problem. How long would It take for an AI to designate humans as the problem that must be removed?
Say scientists created an AI to help tackle climate change. The most obvious answer is removing humanity.
AI works to solve problems and since humans are a problem, it would work against us.
AI is a threat. AI uses algorithms to find the most optimal or near optimal solution to a problem. Quite simple. In the real world, humans are the source cause of almost every problem. How long would It take for an AI to designate humans as the problem that must be removed?
Say scientists created an AI to help tackle climate change. The most obvious answer is removing humanity.
AI works to solve problems and since humans are a problem, it would work against us.
0
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by newpersonage)
The secular extremists may also figure this out. Nietzsche spotted that once morality is rationalized it disappears and eventually a superman will come to the fore. He was right, in secular societies we got Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Mengistu, Hitler etc.
The secular extremists may also figure this out. Nietzsche spotted that once morality is rationalized it disappears and eventually a superman will come to the fore. He was right, in secular societies we got Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Mengistu, Hitler etc.
0
reply
Report
#6
The potential danger of AI is not yet fully known but the logic of humans being the ultimate root cause of every problem makes sense. This is not the current greatest threat to the world though as the technology hasn't yet fully developed and the destruction that it could cause at the moment is limited.
0
reply
(Original post by The Reality)
Humans have far more faults than qualities (at a ratio of 99:1). It is perfectly reasonable for these faults to translate onto our own creations. Since AI is a product of humanity, it will carry the same faults, the same weaknesses and the same neural patterns. AI does stem from neural computing which stems from neurology after all.
Humans have far more faults than qualities (at a ratio of 99:1). It is perfectly reasonable for these faults to translate onto our own creations. Since AI is a product of humanity, it will carry the same faults, the same weaknesses and the same neural patterns. AI does stem from neural computing which stems from neurology after all.
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
"AIs" =/= "extremists"
"AIs" =/= "extremists"
0
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by newpersonage)
It is amusing that western society, under the tutelage of the IT age, is enacting this first phase of AI. They were handed Human Rights by a previous, religious generation and, having lost the religion, are now behaving like machines, organic AIs, empowered by the list that has been bequeathed to them. These are the Secular Extremists. One day either some powerful organic AIs or their inorganic successors will say "So what?".
It is amusing that western society, under the tutelage of the IT age, is enacting this first phase of AI. They were handed Human Rights by a previous, religious generation and, having lost the religion, are now behaving like machines, organic AIs, empowered by the list that has been bequeathed to them. These are the Secular Extremists. One day either some powerful organic AIs or their inorganic successors will say "So what?".
People living in the western democracies - largely secular in nature - are treated far better , and have more rights, prosperity and security, than those who live under the protection of the so-called religion of peace.
0
reply
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
"AIs" =/= "extremists"
"AIs" =/= "extremists"
0
reply
(Original post by Good bloke)
Given you have said this, do you not find it ironic that the only society extant in the world with leaders that behave like machines, with little or no humanity, is one driven by adherence to religion - the Islamic State?
People living in the western democracies - largely secular in nature - are treated far better , and have more rights, prosperity and security, than those who live under the protection of the so-called religion of peace.
Given you have said this, do you not find it ironic that the only society extant in the world with leaders that behave like machines, with little or no humanity, is one driven by adherence to religion - the Islamic State?
People living in the western democracies - largely secular in nature - are treated far better , and have more rights, prosperity and security, than those who live under the protection of the so-called religion of peace.
People living in Western democracies live a far more mechanical life, well ordered, up on the bus in the morning, back at the same time in the evening, watching TV with a TV dinner. Secular Extremists would indeed see this as organic AI heaven.
0
reply
Report
#12
Yes secular extremism is th biggest threat to humanity. They are making society decedent with the things they advocate including AI, they of course would be for it because they don't have a moral compass.
0
reply
(Original post by slade p)
Yes secular extremism is th biggest threat to humanity. They are making society decedent with the things they advocate including AI, they of course would be for it because they don't have a moral compass.
Yes secular extremism is th biggest threat to humanity. They are making society decedent with the things they advocate including AI, they of course would be for it because they don't have a moral compass.
0
reply
Report
#14
1
reply
(Original post by RayApparently)
Religion doesn't give people morals. It's the other way around.
Religion doesn't give people morals. It's the other way around.
0
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by newpersonage)
I would maintain that AIs by their nature, will be extremist. The extremism of, say, an Islamic Extremist is due to an inability to see the other point of view. An AI will have no idea of phenomena such as religious experience or even know what it is to see this screen like you do. This experience will be absent. An AI that can compete with humans is, in its nature, an extreme.
I would maintain that AIs by their nature, will be extremist. The extremism of, say, an Islamic Extremist is due to an inability to see the other point of view. An AI will have no idea of phenomena such as religious experience or even know what it is to see this screen like you do. This experience will be absent. An AI that can compete with humans is, in its nature, an extreme.
0
reply
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
what I mean was that AIs don't have personalities, and "extremist" is a personality trait. an extremist could program an AI, but the AI by its nature would only be following procedures and programs
what I mean was that AIs don't have personalities, and "extremist" is a personality trait. an extremist could program an AI, but the AI by its nature would only be following procedures and programs
0
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by newpersonage)
How do morals create the religious experience? BTW, I am not supporting religious extremism against secular extremism, just pointing out that secular extremism is also a menace.
How do morals create the religious experience? BTW, I am not supporting religious extremism against secular extremism, just pointing out that secular extremism is also a menace.
1
reply
(Original post by RayApparently)
You misunderstand. I'm saying that people put their morals into religion - hence there are moral and immoral acts committed in the name of religion. Being immoral is not an extreme form of secularism anyway, it's just being secular - and immoral.
You misunderstand. I'm saying that people put their morals into religion - hence there are moral and immoral acts committed in the name of religion. Being immoral is not an extreme form of secularism anyway, it's just being secular - and immoral.
Immorality - behaving outside of a moral code - is a broad issue and would occur wherever moral codes are considered. True secularists would not normally have a moral code and would only have the law, which they would confuse with morality, in their own terms they would be "moral" if they are law abiding, which, to non-secularists and many philosophers is not being moral at all. True secularists are not immoral, they are amoral and hence a threat to all of us.
Secular Extremists are aware that they are acting without a moral code, unlike most secularists. Postmodernists and postmarxists are examples of secular extremists as are the cynics who have studied PPE and run parties and corporations (they might be called "greedy postmodernists").
0
reply
Report
#20
(Original post by newpersonage)
The secular extremists may also figure this out. Nietzsche spotted that once morality is rationalized it disappears and eventually a superman will come to the fore. He was right, in secular societies we got Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Mengistu, Hitler etc.
The secular extremists may also figure this out. Nietzsche spotted that once morality is rationalized it disappears and eventually a superman will come to the fore. He was right, in secular societies we got Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Mengistu, Hitler etc.
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
