Should artificial intelligence be allowed to evolve

[Eli1]

correct and it's important to discuss this discussion on that basis.

Because this is what we where discussing.

But to me I believe it's no longer a discussion but a reality that is already evolving 🙂

Why else would there be so much discussion on whether it should be allowed to evolve with no limits

Okay so if this is the question, i would also say that we should not allow it. Elon Musk also agrees with this. It would be like opening pandora's box like we did with the atomic bomb.
However it will be difficult to stop human progress but in principle if we lived in a perfect world where politicians have a decent IQ, they would put some laws into place to forbit it.

Human dna modification is also banned or unethical in the west but in China they created genetically modified babies about 7 years ago. So THAT happened whether is illegal or unethical.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Okay so if this is the question, i would also say that we should not allow it. Elon Musk also agrees with this. It would be like opening pandora's box like we did with the atomic bomb.
However it will be difficult to stop human progress but in principle if we lived in a perfect world where politicians have a decent IQ, they would put some laws into place to forbit it.

Human dna modification is also banned or unethical in the west but in China they created genetically modified babies about 7 years ago. So THAT happened whether is illegal or unethical.

what about the prospect of space travel would you class that as A1 being subject to limits

 

[ZNP]

correct and it's important to discuss this discussion on that basis.

Because this is what we where discussing.

But to me I believe it's no longer a discussion but a reality that is already evolving 🙂

Why else would there be so much discussion on whether it should be allowed to evolve with no limits

Well then we should define the word "evolution". I understand this to mean the "gradual development over time" of something.

However, some may think this refers to the debunked theory that random mutations led to higher forms of life. We are not saying that leaving a computer in the sun will ultimately lead to AI though that is the hokey they taught in the schools. That has been mathematically debunked as the number of random mutations necessary could never have taken place in 13 billion years.

On the other hand there has been a gradual development over time of AI, Chess was not as difficult a problem as Jeopardy which was not as difficult as Go.

But in 2016 alphaGo did something incredible, it taught itself how to play Go, developed strategies that were more advanced than any we had, defeated Lee Sedol, and did all that in a matter of months. Once you have AI that can teach itself without human intervention, that is a major step and the rate of development increased exponentially.

By comparison ChatGPT appears to be much less advanced than where they were six years earlier. That is false, ChatGPT is a data vacuum. The game they want to win this time is people and they realize they must start in elementary school. If you want to truly understand and mimic humans, begin in first grade. But also this is the best time to make them dependent on you, give them a tool that every 4th, 5th and 6th grader will use and by the time they get to HS they will be completely dependent on it.

The development is no longer gradual, but like Go it understands you start from the outside in. Take up the repetitive jobs, the low IQ jobs, but the jobs that the rest of society depends on, and soon, all of society will be dependent on AI.

 

[Eli1]

what about the prospect of space travel would you class that as A1 being subject to limits

I don't understand your question.
Could you explain a bit more?

 

[ZNP]

Okay so if this is the question, i would also say that we should not allow it. Elon Musk also agrees with this. It would be like opening pandora's box like we did with the atomic bomb.

How exactly do you stop it?

However it will be difficult to stop human progress but in principle if we lived in a perfect world where politicians have a decent IQ, they would put some laws into place to forbit it.

We don't live in a perfect world, and why would anyone assume politicians have a decent IQ when Biden, Harris and Fetterman were elected. Finally, who is going to put laws into place to forbid it? Can we forbid Russia, or China, or Israel or Germany or Iran? No. Can we forbid Amazon.com, Google, or Pfizer? No. There is no one on the planet who could "forbid" research and development of AI.

Human dna modification is also banned or unethical in the west but in China they created genetically modified babies about 7 years ago. So THAT happened whether is illegal or unethical.

My point exactly. Only Jesus can deal with this. If you are in the kingdom of darkness you will be swallowed up by this beast system and there is nothing you can do about it. The only hope of salvation is Jesus Christ, Lord of All.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

I don't understand your question.
Could you explain a bit more?

sure do you know what limits Elon musk would not go to terraform mars

 

[Eli1]

How exactly do you stop it?



We don't live in a perfect world, and why would anyone assume politicians have a decent IQ when Biden, Harris and Fetterman were elected. Finally, who is going to put laws into place to forbid it? Can we forbid Russia, or China, or Israel or Germany or Iran? No. Can we forbid Amazon.com, Google, or Pfizer? No. There is no one on the planet who could "forbid" research and development of AI.



My point exactly. Only Jesus can deal with this. If you are in the kingdom of darkness you will be swallowed up by this beast system and there is nothing you can do about it. The only hope of salvation is Jesus Christ, Lord of All.

Yes, we are in agreement here. You can't stop human progress, we can't trust politicians, this is a fallen world, but thankfully for us believers we are hopeful, in-peace and full of joy because we know that God is going to make this creation whole again and we will be back in the garden with Him but with more appreciation due to our free-will.

 

[Eli1]

sure do you know what limits Elon musk would not go to terraform mars

I'm not sure i'm understanding you again.
What limits is Elon Musk willing to go to terraform Mars?
I am not sure what he has said about this.
But, i think we should talk about terraforming Mars first. Are you saying that this is a bad idea? I think it's a great idea. We will have more living space and resources.
Why would this be a bad idea?
Thanks and pls let me know what you mean so i can understand you better.

 

[ZNP]

My first response to this would be :
Does your own intelligence and reason questions what some professor and computer specialists says?
Based on your last answer i would say no, you don't because you're buying what he says.

Yeah, sorry, but I am not buying your narrow definition.

So my next question would be:
Ask Professor Hintze what is human intelligence and why do we even use this word intelligence?
Let's start from there.

My response to intelligence, which encompasses a faith-based answer for us who are blessed to believe, would be:

Intelligence is what we got from our God who created us in His image, where He gave us His attributes which involve intelligence, self-awareness, consciousness and most importantly free-will.

Now, if Professor Hintze wants to be part of a marketing team that's fine with me, but that doesn't make his reasoning or yours correct. Because he is lumping 4 categories into one word. That word, intelligence, is reserved for us right now.

None of this is relevant. No one is saying that "AI" is God given intelligence. What I and most others are saying is that computers can now replace most white collar workers. Robots can replace most factory workers, and various machines can replace many other workers.

This is no longer a tool, but a replacement. Elon Musk is perhaps the most vocal and transparent, but many admit that there will be many people replaced by AI. My estimate is they will be replacing people at a slower rate than they potentially could. In other words we might see 5% replacement in a year where they could replace 20%. They understand how disruptive this will be. But if they can replace 20% this year they will be able to replace 80% next year because that is how fast it is developing.

 

[Eli1]

Yeah, sorry, but I am not buying your narrow definition.



None of this is relevant. No one is saying that "AI" is God given intelligence. What I and most others are saying is that computers can now replace most white collar workers. Robots can replace most factory workers, and various machines can replace many other workers.

This is no longer a tool, but a replacement. Elon Musk is perhaps the most vocal and transparent, but many admit that there will be many people replaced by AI. My estimate is they will be replacing people at a slower rate than they potentially could. In other words we might see 5% replacement in a year where they could replace 20%. They understand how disruptive this will be. But if they can replace 20% this year they will be able to replace 80% next year because that is how fast it is developing.

Okay, so is your point here about humans losing jobs which i said has been happening since the industrial revolution?
Or, is your point that machines have AI?

 

[ZNP]

For example,

Okay, so is your point here about humans losing jobs which i said has been happening since the industrial revolution?
Or, is your point that machines have AI?

I don't believe that this is like previous advances because in the industrial revolution we made tools that people had to operate. Trains did not run themselves, they did not build themselves, nor did they determine where they would run. Trains replaced horse drawn wagons, and as a result we don't have nearly as many horse drawn wagons today as we did before trains.

AI is not replacing horses or wagons, it is replacing people.

Computers replaced type writers and calculators. Again, they didn't replace people.

For example, we are all familiar with customer service over the phone and we all agreed with every phone call to have the conversation taped for "training purposes". They have trained AI to do those jobs. Now if you can't tell the difference between AI and some guy from India then that passes the Turing test. This will not "create" jobs, what will happen is a call center with 100 operators will become a call center with AI and one manager. You will replace 99% of the workers with AI. They won't do that at first. Initially they will have 5 phones using it, and then once they are confident it will be 25 phones, and then it will become so hard to get enough hours to work there that you have to quit and a year later it will be 100 phones.

It is simple enough, you route the calls to the AI first, and only to employees after that. If you have 95 employees you decide which 20 you want to quit and you put them at the back of the cue, the last ones to get a call. Then you pay them based on the calls they answer. As they quit because they aren't getting any calls you replace them with AI. You do this until everyone else quits.

 

[Magenta]

Now, if Professor Hintze wants to be part of a marketing team that's fine with me, but that doesn't make his reasoning or
yours correct. Because he is lumping 4 categories into one word. That word, intelligence, is reserved for us right now.

Do you not believe animals are in possession of intelligence? They have the same breath of life that we do...

And good morning .. ah... almost noon LOL

 

[Magenta]

Okay so if this is the question, i would also say that we should not allow it. Elon Musk also
agrees with this. It would be like opening pandora's box like we did with the atomic bomb.
However it will be difficult to stop human progress but in principle if we lived in a perfect
world where politicians have a decent IQ, they would put some laws into place to forbit it.

The man who has had such a hand in developing AI speaks quite clearly about the need for restrictions...

 

[Eli1]

For example,

I don't believe that this is like previous advances because in the industrial revolution we made tools that people had to operate. Trains did not run themselves, they did not build themselves, nor did they determine where they would run. Trains replaced horse drawn wagons, and as a result we don't have nearly as many horse drawn wagons today as we did before trains.

AI is not replacing horses or wagons, it is replacing people.

Computers replaced type writers and calculators. Again, they didn't replace people.

For example, we are all familiar with customer service over the phone and we all agreed with every phone call to have the conversation taped for "training purposes". They have trained AI to do those jobs. Now if you can't tell the difference between AI and some guy from India then that passes the Turing test. This will not "create" jobs, what will happen is a call center with 100 operators will become a call center with AI and one manager. You will replace 99% of the workers with AI. They won't do that at first. Initially they will have 5 phones using it, and then once they are confident it will be 25 phones, and then it will become so hard to get enough hours to work there that you have to quit and a year later it will be 100 phones.

Okay but how do you think mass-production was achieved after the industrial revolution? Due to humans working harder and faster?
No, they lost their jobs and were replaced by a conveyer belt who processes stuff that humans used to do manually.
Have you seen a show in history channel called How Food Changed America? That's exactly what it talks about. Mass productions, worker strikes because they lost their jobs and had no working conditions back then like they do today in terms of safety and how machines revolutionized progress.
How do you think Henry Ford made more cars? By hiring more humans? No, he introduced machines.
Today cars are made almost exclusive by robots.

So i'm not really sure why you're making "AI" this thing which will replace all jobs. Also how logically is this anyway?
If all jobs are replaced then does that mean we will be on vacation because robots will do everything for us? Or does this mean that we will have some jobs checking on the robots?

 

[Eli1]

Do you not believe animals are in possession of intelligence? They have the same breath of life that we do...

And good morning .. ah... almost noon LOL

Of course they do, they also have some consciousness. However they do not possess the same level of intelligence as ours. Consciousness is also measured in units working together. At MIT they created an experiment where autonomous robots formed a simple "consciousness" by linking with each-other to perform a more difficult task.

However the term Intelligence when it relates to programing is false, because the program does not posses any self awareness and free will.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

I'm not sure i'm understanding you again.
What limits is Elon Musk willing to go to terraform Mars?
I am not sure what he has said about this.
But, i think we should talk about terraforming Mars first. Are you saying that this is a bad idea? I think it's a great idea. We will have more living space and resources.
Why would this be a bad idea?
Thanks and pls let me know what you mean so i can understand you better.

sure when we all discuss how much we don't want A1 intelligence to surpass human intelligence, has that already happened 🤔

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

The lord said to Adam you will have control over every thing that walks on the earth remember

 

[ZNP]

Okay but how do you think mass-production was achieved after the industrial revolution? Due to humans working harder and faster?
No, they lost their jobs and were replaced by a conveyer belt who processes stuff that humans used to do manually.
Have you seen a show in history channel called How Food Changed America? That's exactly what it talks about. Mass productions, worker strikes because they lost their jobs and had no working conditions back then like they do today in terms of safety and how machines revolutionized progress.
How do you think Henry Ford made more cars? By hiring more humans? No, he introduced machines.
Today cars are made almost exclusive by robots.

So i'm not really sure why you're making "AI" this thing which will replace all jobs. Also how logically is this anyway?
If all jobs are replaced then does that mean we will be on vacation because robots will do everything for us? Or does this mean that we will have some jobs checking on the robots?

No, fewer people made more cars, but that made them cheaper so that more people could afford them, making jobs for car salesmen, and mechanics, and gas stations and parts suppliers and miners and power plants, etc. Also the US was exporting cars and factories around the world creating jobs.

But that will not happen with AI. Robots will make the cars, they will be sold on the internet by Carvana or some similar entity, they will be delivered to your house with a self driving truck, gas stations are self serve, and because it has replaced all the other jobs instead of making more cars they will make less. Instead of owning a car the city will have a fleet that you call on a phone and reserve a time slot for. They want you in cities where you are 15 minutes from any place. As a result you will use a car less than an hour a day and so one car can service 10-20 people. Instead of families having two cars each the city will have 5-10% that many cars. You are about to see mass layoffs like we have never seen before in human history. This will motivate people to be "chipped" because if you are chipped you get a job. That will be the mark of the beast and that will make you part of this beast system which is rising right before our eyes.

This is Agenda2030. The UN and COP28 have already approved these 17 SDGs (sustainable development goals) and these laws go into effect this week (January 4th). Haven't you been paying attention?

 

[Eli1]

sure when we all discuss how much we don't want A1 intelligence to surpass human intelligence, has that already happened 🤔

No, that has not already happened because Programs operate based on our programing and our intelligence. They don't posses an independent intelligence of their own.

 

[Eli1]

No, fewer people made more cars, but that made them cheaper so that more people could afford them, making jobs for car salesmen, and mechanics, and gas stations and parts suppliers and miners and power plants, etc. Also the US was exporting cars and factories around the world creating jobs.

But that will not happen with AI. Robots will make the cars, they will be sold on the internet by Carvana or some similar entity, they will be delivered to your house with a self driving truck, gas stations are self serve, and because it has replaced all the other jobs instead of making more cars they will make less. Instead of owning a car the city will have a fleet that you call on a phone and reserve a time slot for. They want you in cities where you are 15 minutes from any place. As a result you will use a car less than an hour a day and so one car can service 10-20 people. Instead of families having two cars each the city will have 5-10% that many cars. You are about to see mass layoffs like we have never seen before in human history. This will motivate people to be "chipped" because if you are chipped you get a job. That will be the mark of the beast and that will make you part of this beast system which is rising right before our eyes.

This is Agenda2030. The UN and COP28 have already approved these 17 SDGs (sustainable development goals) and these laws go into effect this week (January 4th). Haven't you been paying attention?

Okay but how is Carvana or what you're saying here which is all valid, from any other point in the past during the industrial revolution?
This is not a fear-based post, correct? This is just business as usual i'm assuming? Part of human progress?