Why computers* will not become self aware.

Discussion in 'Science' started by RevAnarchist, Dec 14, 2014.

  1. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm aware of the status of the researches about neural networks, so far they are a simplified imitation of the biological network in our brain, but they don't work so well like our cells. The main problem is that artificial neurons are not able to do what natural neurons do. But experts are studying the problem ...
     
  2. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Certainly computers don't have the restrictions of biological species.
    Slightly off topic, I see humans next real move off planet will be to put asteroids in an orbit matching Earth around the sun. And eventually a series of mini earths orbiting.
     
  3. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes ... with good peace of Elon Musk, to colonize the surface of a planet like Mars, with a so low gravity and without a suitably powerful magnetic field, wouldn't be a great idea.

    Mars has got only a positive aspect: its day is only slightly different from a terrestrial day as for duration; so that human beings could adapt.
    But the solar radiations would force "Martians" to live underground and the low gravity would generate irreversible mutations in the second generation [gravity affects the development of the embryos]. The real Martians [humans born on Mars] would have serious problems to pay a visit to their planet of origin.

    No, it's better to think to artificial little Earths: wide rotating space stations with terrestrial gravity, lakes, rivers, forests ... and [thanks to their structure] a natural 24h day [with starry night and sunny day].
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2021
    Tigger2 likes this.
  4. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If an AI has a goal, if it can learn and adjust, if it has access to the Internet, if it is collecting information and making course changes, all with unknown limitations, all with more intelligence than humans...lots can happen long before any sense of awareness or consciousness. I continue to believe AI will be 98% beneficial to mankind...we can get in big trouble within the remaining 2%...
     
  5. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can't tell when you are being flippant.

    "Win at the stock market" isn't a gjoal that would be unrealistic for someone to give to an AI. I would expect that to happen the minute we can make machines that would help create winning investment strategy, even if there is only slight advantage.

    Today, huge dollars are spent on machines that help implement tradig strategies - making automated trades at speeds far less than one second. If machines can be improved to b even slightly smarter or help with creating strategy, surely that will happen.
     
  6. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you're back to humans using computers. An AI doesn't need self awareness to play the stock market. It doesn't even need intelligence it just needs algorithms.
     
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can not imagine ANYONE wanting to live on Mars. Mars is a HORRIBLE place. It's a fight just to stay alive.

    Plus, going there is hugely expensive in the forseeable future, making tourism highly unlikely.

    We have stations on the Antarctic continent. My bet is it will be more like that. There will be science stations with rotating teams and with total dependence on shipments of supplies. And, the extent of that will be determined by the volume of cost effective production of such a station. And, I don't know what that would be other than simply studying Mars.

    Even with the Antarctic, supplies and transport are not readily available, causing serious hardship at times. For example, a Russian surgeon at an Antarctic station had to remove his own appendix, as no rescue or other doctors were available on that continent.
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you being flipant here? I'll continue as if you are serious.

    You will note that I have ALWAYS pointed out that the risks come well before "self awareness" is or could be created.

    And, the problem is that we are creating AI's that create and perfect their OWN algorithms - their OWN strategies.

    If a machine of today can create the strategies needed to beat all humans at "go" (which is harder than chess), such machines maw be able to beat humans at "games" that are far more iimportant - systems upon which we depend.

    I gave our stock and commodities markets as one example.
     
  9. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ah. In that case I don't think any one computer program will so outsmart the others that it causes a disaster. Particularly as playing the stock market is a long game.
    Though I suspect someone will make a killing in this way, and someone else will lose their shirt in the same way.
     
  10. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree Mars is a no no. The main reason being the cost of getting everyone there. Building a giant rotating space station near to earth is costly, but once its made shipping people and goods is much cheaper.
    As far as (before we leave earth) is concerned. We currently only live on about 14% of the land mass and we haven't started living on the sea.
    So a way to go yet.
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK, I'm just going to hope that was you being flippant.
     
  12. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My flippant remark was about Robots taking a look at the political mess we have made of the world and deciding to leave.
    Sorry you didn't get the joke.
     
  13. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Before worrying about costs I think we need to have a concrete idea of why people would want to be there (wherever "there" may be).

    Why would anyone want to be in a giant rotating space station? My bet is tourism. And, that certainly scales how much can be investedin that.

    Why would anyone want to be on Mars? My bet is to study Mars. But, robotics can pretty much solve that problem at FAR FAR less cost.

    Etc.

    I'm not saying there are no reasons. I'm just saying that we should understand the problem first.

    As for me, I think there is a lot to be gained in science from having space based telescopes that are far to large to launch from Earth. We will not EVER AGAIN try to build and lauch a telecope such as the James Webb - it is FAR to hard ad expensive. So, we need space based assembly. Moon or Mars based assembly is pointless as it still requires launching the product into space. And, that is the problem.

    Another idea is to turn a lunar crator into a telescope on the far side of the Moon (where Earthly radiation can't impact detection equipment) would be outstanding.

    We should know the objectives before proposing giganticly expensive "solutions" that have unclear importance.
     
  14. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK, but your remarkes about "compouter programs" outsmarting other computer programs are equally off target.
     
  15. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well I was assuming the Earth had reached saturation point, some point in the future.
     
  16. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There really is no scenario where some other moon or planet can be used as a dumping ground for excess Earth population.

    We need to solve Earth's problems here on Earth.
     
  17. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why a dumping ground? There's plenty of room out there.
     
  18. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The main question is: why to go there?
    To survive to the solar inflation which will happen in 2 billions of years?
    I do hope we will have colonized other Earths in many other solar systems in the meanwhile!

    So ... 2 billions of years are a lot of time; probably not enough to collect something from an Italian postal office ... but enough to find and reach many other planets suitable for human beings.
     
    Tigger2 likes this.
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,470
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. I would argue that no level of concern about what will happen 2 billion years from now should change what we do today. Maybe it suggests investing more in theoretical physics or astrophysics. It might be a big deal to understand why quantum mechanics and Einstein gravity don't match.

    It's barely been 100 years since the first commercial airline flight and Einstein physics was verified. We have no idea what our technological abilitities will be in a billion years - when we'd still have hundreds of millions of years to respond.

    Do we really know where Earth will be in 2 billion years?
     
  20. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It will be still in the Milky Way approaching Andromeda [the collision between the two galaxy will happen in about 5 billions years, so it will be still early!]. But ... We don't know so well the dynamics of our galaxy to predict where the Earth will be [if it will still exist].

    Overall we should wonder which will the conditions of our planet be in a well more near future: not far from us there is Betelgeuse, a giant red star which promises to show us great fireworks in no more than some dozens of centuries.
    Betelgeuse will explode as a supernova [we don't know exactly when, but its luminosity is going down and this is not a good sign].
    That monster is only at 600 light years from our planet. But it won't be devastating, only dangerous: the radiations of the explosion will cause some damages on the surface of the planet, but we will survive.

    Nice ... but two billions of years are an immense quantity of time. How many supernovae and black holes will our little planet have to dodge?
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2021
  21. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wish more people will accept a dose of reality which clearly explains that the 7+ billion humans on Earth have no other choice than Earth. Sure, over the next 100-200 years, we can ship a handful of humans to eek out a minimal existence on Mars or the Moon or Venus or a space station, but none of them will lead to a mass-migration away from Earth. Whether it be nuclear weapons, or pollution, or climate change, or over-population, or disease, or simply bad management, etc., the collective we need to solve our problems here on Earth...and some of these and other issues are at crisis point today! Yes we must continue space exploration and seek discoveries of new information and advance technology in these areas, but again it's research...no possible plan for mass-exodus from Earth. The only problem I see preventing us from doing better is we're dealing with humans...
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  22. lemmiwinx

    lemmiwinx Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,428
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    First AI entity to orgasm while defeating 12 chess grandmasters or grandmistresses gets the prize. Or so I say.
     
  23. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suggest it's more about food production, availability of potable water, a livable climate, breathable air, control of disease, etc. over worrying about acreage...
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  24. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,661
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You make a fair point, which was why I suggested we would tow an asteroid into orbit. This would provide a water supply, air and fuel. Food could be grown in the space station.
    The main reason I can see for doing this in a cost effective way (Taking humans there) is the survival of the human race in the event of a catastrophic event on earth.
    A super volcano or an asteroid strike being the most likely.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2021
  25. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no plausible plan for mass-migration away from Earth. Again, a few people will be guinea pigs for some space exploration but nothing for the masses.

    Regarding the survival of the human race...this decision is in the hands of humans to make and today we are showing we do not possess the capability to do better. Many have said when our backs are to the wall we will rise and do better...well just look at how Covid is going and the sum total of this action was to give at least 70% of humans an injection...it's been a miserable failure! With most of our critical issues today the collective we are incapable of a simple and intelligent conversation much less finding consensus in problem solving. I think humans will survive for quite some time but it's going to be a very bumpy road as we deal with our incompetences...
     

Share This Page