Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

[kid_merkury]

While modding pc (^^), a few users were talking about how in 100 years, the world would be taken over by machines. And I said, "this isnt the matrix. we arent going to have to fight for survival against machines and etc etc etc.

What are you thoughts? Would technology ever reach the level where we could potentially lose control and no longer be the dominant "species"?

Imo, not to that extent.

-Merky

[Sullyman2007]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

I can't see robots ever taking over the Earth. I believe that with time, the human species will develope new ways to travel, communicate, live work and play in which we create machines to help "make our lives better". However with that said, I don't see machines ever completely taking over the role of a human being, or our species ever being rendered inept to the likes of machines.

But technology works in strange ways. It can be our best friend or our worst nightmare, and I wouldn't be supprised to see the human race suffer catostophic consequences for allowing our imaginations to run wild.

They say the human species has technologically progressed further in the last ten or so years that it has in the last 200. It is only logical to assume that if we continue on the current trend, our unquenchable yearn to progress and "better ourselves" will ultimately lead to our great demise.

[fido123]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

The non-robotic war machines were currently use are the machines that can cause the most destruction therefore the best robot for this would be similar to these with the exception that it is unmanned therefore we will be at an even playing ground with some kind of unmanned jet-plane/tank. Also this idea is pretty dumb in the first place as machines can't think for themselves and unless somebody builds an army larger than the combined worlds forces/efforts and manages to program all of this perfectly...it's not going to happen.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

It depends.

1) Humans have to obtain the ability to produce machinery that transcends the powers of humankind. Note, just because a computer can do super rapid math compared to a human, doesn't mean it transcends us. By a machine transcending us, I mean a machine that can act on its own. Machines that require some manipulation from humans do not transcend humans at all.

2) Humans have the choice after they obtain this ability: To either lose to their curiosity/greed and create such a machine, or not. Of course, doing the former would most likely result in the start of machine domination. The latter, would most likely not.

I don't believe it can get anymore simple than that.

If we take it to the degree where we think of human emotion, it is a different story. Machines most definitely have made humans a lot more lazier than previous generations, as well as somewhat physically weaker as a whole. Therefore, in that sense, machines may be dominating our will for self-action.

I assume humans will cause their own extinction way before we reach this level of intelligence anyway. I also doubt anything other than humans can bring the creation of machinery at this level. You can change I assume with I hope.

[Reach]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

Well, it is fairly self evident that machines have the ability to greatly surpass human ability if they were ever able to think for themselves, since we rely heavily on machines to figure out many things for us nowadays that our brains are incapable of computing.

Hell, even a fairly basic program you run on a home pc that follows a few simple algorithms can compete with grandmasters at chess, simply because they can perform raw calculations at a level millions of times faster than we can. The difference is currently machines cannot, or can only demonstrate very little, fluid intelligence, i.e. the ability to think for yourself and come up with a unique solution, rather than relying on a set of instructions like a computer must currently do.

By the time we actually figures out a way to make computers 'think', it could be a very long time from now, and we could have quantum computers that are millions of times more powerful than they are today. Things could get out of control very quickly, as we would be dealing with intelligence beyond what we are capable of imagining. I mean, try to imagine what havoc could start by inserting only a single hacker on the planet, not only more than a billion times more intelligent than any human being is currently, but who can work billions of times faster. I don't think it's something we will want to deal with. Aside from immediately having access to unlimited amounts of information it could store and remember, you could almost immediately do a lot of damage.

I would much rather a cyborg scenario where we use computational power to increase human intelligence, rather than for the creation of incredibly intelligent machines that might not be so fond of following rules.


However, with that said, the scenario is incredibly unlikely and I don't believe such a thing would ever happen. I don't think the technological leap and epic blunder necessary would be able to occur fast enough for machines to immediately grab control of human civilization. Progression with sophisticated forms of AI will likely be slow, and we will likely be well aware of their power before they are out of our hands.

[SnS]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

Even if humans will be able to build intelligent robots, it's not like they won't implement fail safe measures, in the event that the robots "malfunction" and develop an ardent desire to take over the world.

[darkness1477]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

but if the compters are really that smart than they can get past the safeguards humans have put on them. i don't believe something like that could happen because people want power and if somebody came close to devoloping something like that he would be killed and someone else would take it then they would get killed and so on until someone was able to keep it. but then they wouldn't be smart enough to finish it so he would have to hire people who would probably sabotage his work and take it for themselves, then get caught and killed which would start an endless cycle until the technology is destroyed, or the human race is (whichever come first)

[SnS]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

Humans would create the robots and make them dependent on something which the humans control. If that something is gone, so are the robots.

For example:

if blablabla=1 then: intelligent robot code.
else: self-destruct.

Humans can set the value of blablabla. I think it makes sense.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

But if the point of a "super-robot" was that it didnt rely on human command...

there would be no such thing as a safety measure. because that is a human command.

[Master TAnK Evans]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

robots huh no matter how good we get a robot cannot' preform every single task without at least some kind of human assisstance not to mension we can make them do things sure but how much power will they take? is it worth replacing a person when the person is probably the cheaper way out? robots are only useful to preform their certain task so we don't have to...like making pizzas in bulk and such because they are tedius jobs that have to be done and most people won't want to do and employers won't want to risk them quiting, showing up late or anything like that (injury)

why would we want a robot that can do everything? i doubt we would want or need to in the end. no robots will only be used for stuff we can't do by ourselves and that's it in my opinion ( I am not at all worried about any genocidal super robots and the near or even distant future)

Have a great day
Master TAnK Evans

[Skeleton-GotW]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

I could see the army developing some very "resourceful" new robot soldiers that could adapt to varying combat scenarios and make quick decisions, but in no way does that translate to what we're discussing.

However, I COULD see some evil scientist (hundreds of years down the line when it becomes easier to make dangerous robots like that) creating one and programming it with a high level AI that enables it to:

A) see the world similar to or as we do (3-dimensionally).
B) be able to interact and gain from the 3-D world around it.
C) reconfigure its pieces to create additional robots that can do what it does.
D) seek out new energy sources and potential robot pieces to maintain it's ability to function and make new robots.
E) be amazingly well armored and equipped, very small, or both as to evade or defeat the humans in combat.

It would have to be RIDICULOUSLY well-designed to do that though, not to mention such operations would probably be discovered and stopped in that security hundreds of years down the line would ideally be far more efficient.

[SnS]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

But if the point of a "super-robot" was that it didnt rely on human command...

there would be no such thing as a safety measure. because that is a human command.

Then make a very intelligent robot, but make it unable to act by itself (with no physical power), that can only come up with suggestions that humans can use to improve themselves. Like a super computer. Suggestions like "Become extinct." could be disregarded, haha.

[darkness1477]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

I could see the army developing some very "resourceful" new robot soldiers that could adapt to varying combat scenarios and make quick decisions, but in no way does that translate to what we're discussing.

However, I COULD see some evil scientist (hundreds of years down the line when it becomes easier to make dangerous robots like that) creating one and programming it with a high level AI that enables it to:

A) see the world similar to or as we do (3-dimensionally).
B) be able to interact and gain from the 3-D world around it.
C) reconfigure its pieces to create additional robots that can do what it does.
D) seek out new energy sources and potential robot pieces to maintain it's ability to function and make new robots.
E) be amazingly well armored and equipped, very small, or both as to evade or defeat the humans in combat.

I think that if 1 robot could do all that we would have other robots that could do almost as much so if it tried to take over the other robots could help us stop it.

It would have to be RIDICULOUSLY well-designed to do that though, not to mention such operations would probably be discovered and stopped in that security hundreds of years down the line would ideally be far more efficient.

which would bring us back to my original statement that human ambition would keep us from ever possesing such technology (unless something happens like on i robot but then we would have a war and eentually win because we could build strongewr robots that are totally dependent on humans though).

[mightymic]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

I don't think that robots could take over the earth but I always believed in the fact that if the human specie have to come to an extection, it will be because of us. I mean it will be ourself that will have created something that will kill us all like some kind of weapon that we don't control.

[yk13]

Re: Mankind vs. Machine....kind.

It will be almost impossible to build and program a "super" robot. Millions, or even billions of lines of code will be required to build a robot which can pass the Turing Test. Entering in all this code will take years and human error will make sure that there will almost always be a bug or an error in the code. When that happens, scanning through the billions of lines of code will take years, too.
It's much more easier to program in a set of rules the robot adheres to and let it learn on it's own.