ROBUST.. AI for what matters - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2022, 12:04:45 pm
content: kinda love this shitPaul

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2022, 04:23:29 pm
content: I've a "love and hate" relationship with technologies.We are blissfully marching down a dangerous path. History shown advanced democratic society can somehow end up with a very bad leader. Imagine that day when these AI killers are ubiquitous and our society is advanced and peaceful, but somehow history repeats itself and we ended up with a dangerously bad leader...History also shown, soldiers (at times) when ordered to do so, will refuse such orders and not make war with their own fellow citizens. Bad leaders were taken down by such events - many times even in recent history. Robot soldiers will follow orders without hesitation.White Rose Sophie Scholl, she won't last a day if they were using smart phones then. Even if somehow opposition gathered enough strength, robots will take care of that. I am not optimistic about our future. May be that is why we can't find ET. They were there, with their technologies, and somehow, they are no more just as they were getting more technologically advanced...

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2022, 04:42:01 pm
content: I totally get your philosophical concerns. But, these AI technologies will be developed (self-diving automobiles are a HUGE incentive right now.) And if the technology is developed, then it will be weaponized. Sometimes it is initially developed specifically for weapons and only then made available for civilian purposes. Either way, same result: the technology will be developed and it will be weaponized.Point being: worrying about it will give you indigestion but will not change the future in any way whatsoever. No amount of political activism will have any influence.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 01:34:01 pm
content: i have 100% certain despite all smoke ... bottom line ...When in doubt.. press the *** buttonThe Ultra-Robust collection - (kept the kamikazy drone swarm apart)I love this shit...Paul

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 04:22:11 pm
content: Unless you wish to destroy humanity, technological progress can’t be stopped. If you will not research a technology, someone else will. With nuclear weapons, working on which can be detected from tens to hundreds of kilometers even without explosions,(1)have alternatives and can’t be used in a reasonable warfare, that can be somewhat limited. But not with something as relatively small as robots. Just accept it and focus on ways to control the use.I believe the whole matter is going to be a horrible philosophical mess. Not because it is particularly tough, but because it involves a complicated net of interlocking biases in perception. While I believe people spending their lives on thinking are capable of dealing with the problem, that is a minority that has only small influence over policies. Evolution shaped the human brain in a way, which makes it undermine any attempt in good reasoing and avoiding that is pain in the ass. A venture most people will never undertake. Based on previous experience, I am already worried about posting in this thread. Much more about how the public debate is going to look and what “arguments” are going to be used.Fortunately, as always, future generations will consider any outcome as something natural. So the whole debate is about us and not making too much mess to fix later.(1)Specific patterns in radiation, the need for large installations that are visible from the space, huge number of people involved to name a few indicators.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 04:37:00 pm
content: My worry would be that when soldiers are replaced by hardware, wars will not be unpopular as quickly as they are when real soldiers are dying. A row of coffins with your country's flag draped on top is impressive and uncomfortable. A bag of bolts isn't. This might mean countries are much more willing to pull the trigger to go to war, and stay stuck in it.Of course, this equation does change when a conflict evolves into a total war.

author: xrunner
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 05:10:12 pm
content: We need to start working on robust, robotic diplomats ...

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 05:22:13 pm
content: Quote from: xrunner on June 23, 2022, 05:10:12 pmAdversarial robotic AI diplomats with the power to influence an entire country.No, I don't see how that could go wrong.

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 06:29:07 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on June 23, 2022, 04:37:00 pmThat quick finger to press the button has already begun some years ago. When in doubt, send in the cruse missiles and the politicians can claim "I've done something" without much push back or perhaps even without much consideration.No, I don't think technology development should stop. I do not even think technology development can be stopped. As long as people are free, people will invent things - from wheels to cannons to missiles. Even a screw driver can be misused for bad things.People needs to be smarter and with more forethought. Instead, I sense we are letting immediate conveniences "auto piloting" us over the cliff. Where will all these AI stuff leads? Time will tell...

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pm
content: Quote from: golden_labels on June 23, 2022, 04:22:11 pmWhat an odd statement. But you need to define "technological progress" first. Good luck.Quote from: golden_labels on June 23, 2022, 04:22:11 pmOh yeah. This is exactly Elon Musk's reasoning, as far as I have understood him. He's kept defending his projects with this very argument.Of course, unless you make some additional statements along with this, it's completely... flawed. One of those additional considerations might be something like, uh, ethics? (If that still means anything to anyone?) Or common sense. (Ditto?)Indeed, without any ethical consideration, anything would go. Since developing a deadly poison that could kill the whole humanity, or even any living being on Earth, is something definitely doable, that means I would be perfectly entitled to do it, just because otherwise someone else will? Really?Good thing you added that the whole thing "is going to be a horrible philosophical mess". I'm not convinced that this is really philosophical at all. Some common sense should definitely help. If not, we're doomed and no philosophy is going to save us.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2022, 09:57:50 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmI do not need any luck. The concept of technology is understood well enough. The concept of new developments occuring is the definition by itself, assuming one understands the three words involved:new,development,to occur. You may split hair if you wish over the exact bounds, but that will have zero relevance to the matter discussed.Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmBecause Elon Musk said something as an argument to defend his poor ideas, I am wrong because I referred to it in an unrelated statement? Aside from trying to argue that something is wrong only because a given person said that, how do those two things relate?Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmAnd what ethics, which are normative, have to do with a descriptive statement?Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmYou have invoked an extreme case to discuss something of a very different scale, using it as those were comparable situations. But, ignoring that: yes, progress in that particular, arbitrarily chosen technology may be slow or non-existent. But you can’t just choose some specific items and make statements about different items. There is very little incentive to develop a chemical weapon that would destroy life on Earth. That’s not true for machine learning technologies, including weapons.Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmIt’s already a subject of philosophy, which contradicts your opinion.Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 23, 2022, 06:40:52 pmPhilosophy is not going to save us. But “following common sense”, which is philosophy, will. Eee?And that is one of the examples of why it will be a “philosophical mess”. “Common sense solves it” and similar arguments.The concept is well known in philosophy, psychology and sociology, as a thing perceivable by humans. But it actually being “common” or being a viable method of solving anything is not taken seriously anymore. Yes, of course it is natural to believe that one’s common sense is right and will help. The problem is that the common sense of 7bn other people is different than yours. And even for a single person it’s fuzzy and very fluid. You were expecting me to define “technological progress”, yet brought up something that is just a nebulous blob, half of which is nothing more than an effect of congitive biases.Finally, to lighten up the mood:.