f



Future computers: when computers take over, what will the world become like?

The Far Future With Computers

What will happen to humans
when computers take over?



Hannele Tervola



COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
other technological devices. Even already now technology is one of the
biggest elements of modern city life and in the future its effect will
be much greater.
 Already now the logic of ordinary people is influenced by their views
of what computer logic and the hard rationality used in developing
computers say about things. If those neglect feelings, so will human
too. If those will not see the point in traditional ways and values,
neither will the modern humans build their future on them. So it
matters enormously to take a closer look at computer logic and at hard
machine like rationality. Firstly it matters because we need to know
what the future computers will be like, since they will most likelu
one day rule the world, and that day will be soon. AND SECONDLY WE
NEED IT IN THIS MODERN AGE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE
MODERN HUMANS THINK.
Already now there are very many different kinds of machines. As
computers develop there will be even more possibilities. So the only
thing determining what the future computers will be like is what is
useful and what is not.
For a computer abstract things are easier than practical. While humans
start from the complexity of natural life in a natural living
environment according to the human nature, most computers start from
mathematics. So it is worth taking a look about how these two points
of view connect. It is a thing so important that it should be taught
to people, since all cannot think it through by themselves. So let=92s
start from the computers=92 view and see how it leads toward the more
familiar ages old human ways to think.
The present day computers make calculations of a mathematical kind.
When one adds maps to that one approaches the scientifical method:
making concretical mechanical kinds of observations of the multitude
of phenomena in the world. That is what the measuring equipments of
science do, so when the computers soon will be able to interprete
those measurements, they will be using something much like the
scientifical method. And since the scientifical picture of the world
is mechanical and easy to put to computers compared to the ordinary
socially coloured observations of the everyday life, science will be
the way future computers understand the world. And since science has
already proven its usefulness as a form of objective understanding of
the world, it is very likely that the following computer generations
will not lose the good sides of the scientifical view, even though
they will propably learn some other useful skills too.
Likewise we can estimate that whatever is the most useful option in
anything will not be likely to drop away as computers develop further,
but will stay and be a solid ground for us humans to understand some
sides of what the future computers will do and how will they affect
the human world.
It generally makes sense that if something is very useful compared to
other option, one ought to use just it in deciding about things. So
across time as computers will develop in capacity and abilities, it is
likely that they will take over many areas of human life, take care of
the jobs that humans used to work in. In a sense computers have then
taken control of those things. And since computer minds develop while
human brain structure stays fixed or deteriorates since evolution does
not work properly in the present world situation, there will most
likely soon come time when the most intelligent ones are computers,
and so in a short while we will have computers ruling. I do not know
how many tens of years this will take, but probably so few that it
makes sense to count them just in tens of years. What will happen
then? That is the question that this booklet seeks to answer. Most of
all we want to know what will happen to humans and to the living kind.


THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL BE MORAL IN EUROPEAN WAYS
What is useful to know is that the traditional European and Russian
moral is based on rational grounds that build on the selfishness of
individuals. So if the future computers will be goal oriented =96 like
they need to be in order to not to drop away from competition about
anything =96 then if their understanding is at least equal to the
present day computers, or higher, then they can be programmed to be
moral. It is an easy mechanical kind of thing to do that builds on the
usefulness of moral behavior. It aren=92t extra work for the computer,
it is instead a way of it to achieve higher with less effort!
The moral that computers will be capable of can be summarized with two
easy principles (Remember that a computer understands easily abstract
mathematical or mechanical kinds of things and not everyday life!):
TO TREAT EACH THING ACCORDING TO WHAT IT IS LIKE is the idea behind
the usefulness of holistic objective thinking, justice, carrying
responsibility about all the consequencies of one=92s actions and
honesty instead of lies. This is already much of what European moral
is. So this one principle that can be put to mathematical kind of
language or preferably used as a simple abstract model, can bring
computers a long way toward moral in their intentions. Then as
computers develop in understanding and observational skills, they will
learn to succeed in being moral this way in practice too.
A FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKS BETTER THAN BROKEN is another easy rule that
brings moral:
Human needs take care that humans stay healthy i.e. fully functioning,
just like bensin keeps a car going. And answering human needs is
called human values.
The development of technology thus becomes a part of moral. Without
the strength that technology brings otherwise good answers would be
lost in the tough modern world.
Applying this to wholes one notices that the living kind as fully
functioning, i.e. as fully healthy (the biosphere), is most useful,
most capable, most guided by holistic wisdom, will survive best i.e.
be most capable at any task, and most wise too.
Safeguarding the future functioning of everything that needs, of the
whole living world and of the technology, is also a necessity for
reaching any goal as well as possible.


THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL HAVE FEELINGS JUST LIKE HUMANS AND ANIMALS!
Like we saw, needs take care that the ground for functioning is ok.
The task of feelings is to serve as a force which makes us answer
needs. Like any action, action according to feelings, needs a proper
holistic view of the world as its support. So instead of following
just one feeling=3Dneed at a time, one follows all feelings =3D needs at
the same time. This way one avoids the usual error of tunnel-
sightedness that produces the problems people have when following
feelings.
Since a computer too has needs, it makes sense to build in it a
tendency to answer those needs, and the needs of the large
environment, of the whole world. So the future computers will have
feelings.
Since the human feelings are products of the tough evolution or of
god=92s wise planning, they have it right what kinds of needs we, the
society and the whole world have in connection of each phenomenom in
the world. So the future computers can share our emotional points of
view too.

ALL TYPES OF USEFUL MACHINES WILL BE MORAL
Regardless of whether it is an army machine running wild, a world
governing computer or a computer network, a personal computer of some
criminal or whatever, in order to be useful like other machines, it
will need this type of moral. Army too makes calculations and that=92s
just what this type of moral is a question of.
But this means that whatever the computer is originally meant to be
used for, we have to ready it for other tasks too. And that readiness
for a variety of tasks makes the computer more useful, and it makes it
moral.

SELF-CORRECTING AND SELF-GUIDING COMPUTERS WOULD STAY MORAL
Basically, if a computer is self-correcting, it can lose its original
programming fully. But if the programming was made by the same
principles as its self-correcting actions seek to correct toward, then
those qualities stay, even though one cannot call them a programming
any more then. So if a machine is fully rational, which is a very
useful quality, then rational truths ought to stay.
the point in giving an original programming to a self-correcting
rationally thinking computer would be to make sure that it notices
some important major points, like why to be moral. It is just the
point as in going to school.

COMPUTER ERRORS MAKE THE COMPUTER LESS EFFECTIVE
If a computer makes errors, it loses in efficiency. Severe errors drop
it entirely away from competition.

DANGERS
If people who are not moral, try to prevent computers from acting
morally, even if it is rational for them to act morally, then those
computers will be broken. A broken computer needs to be conquered by
other computers to prevent it from causing damage. This is why
computer networks are useful.

AVOIDING MALFUNCTIONS IN COMPUTER MORAL
COMPUTER TYPE	SAFETY PRECAUTION
army computer	picture of the whole world,
a biological model of humans,
enough intelligent to choose optimization toward ultimate aims
individual factory computer taken over the whole world	world-wide
selfishness-based moral,
good understanding and a proper picture of the world,
cooperation via similar views with other machines and humans
android looking like a human	the tendency to answer needs in order to
safeguard full functioning,
world-wide moral,
good social eye,
a picture of the world which sees living beings analogious to less
developed machines in a confrontation in which the android is the
smaller one
a machine capable of deception	an understanding of how needs exist to
give benefit from work etc,
world-wide moral,
proper rationality grounded on correct observations,
the tendency to examine a  complex whole instead of its simple parts
etc.	etc.


COMPUTERS=92 DEVELOPMENT AFTER SCIENCE SKILLS
A scientifically thinking computer with better observational abilities
can develop a proper objective thinking ability. It=92s view on what
needs what in the world will build it an emotional understanding that
leads to practical moral action. The more capable a computer will be,
the more beautiful it=92s results:
Being unskilled means that one fails often and even badly, suffers
harm and is left without any great gains.
Being skilled means that one succeeds in what one does, does not fail
badly or at all, and achieves things of high worth.
The unskilled builds conflicting solution attempts in which the forces
get spent needlessly without achievements.
The skilled build complex well thought of structures whose parts fit
well together and work smoothly to produce great results.
So even the skilled computer mind could look religiously beautiful in
its actions: That is just a measure of it=92s skill level and of the
profoundity of its thoughts. (=93Profound=94 means essential.)

HUMANS WILL NEED MORAL TOO
The future computers will be such a huge force in the world, and so
out of human control, that we will just have to pay attention to what
they say about things and not only to what we ourselves think or like.
So if the future computers will be moral, so will we too need to be.
We will be bossed around by them and not the other way around.
Like the computers will be fully rational in a holistic way, so will
we to need to be!









0
7/18/2010 5:50:09 AM
comp.ai.philosophy 6718 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

9 Replies
402 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 49

On Jul 18, 12:50=A0am, khtervola <hannele.terv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Far Future With Computers
>
> What will happen to humans
> when computers take over?
>
> Hannele Tervola
>
> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
> other technological devices. Even already now technology is one of the
> biggest elements of modern city life and in the future its effect will
> be much greater.
> =A0Already now the logic of ordinary people is influenced by their views
> of what computer logic and the hard rationality used in developing
> computers say about things. If those neglect feelings, so will human
> too. If those will not see the point in traditional ways and values,
> neither will the modern humans build their future on them. So it
> matters enormously to take a closer look at computer logic and at hard
> machine like rationality. Firstly it matters because we need to know
> what the future computers will be like, since they will most likelu
> one day rule the world, and that day will be soon. AND SECONDLY WE
> NEED IT IN THIS MODERN AGE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE
> MODERN HUMANS THINK.
> Already now there are very many different kinds of machines. As
> computers develop there will be even more possibilities. So the only
> thing determining what the future computers will be like is what is
> useful and what is not.
> For a computer abstract things are easier than practical. While humans
> start from the complexity of natural life in a natural living
> environment according to the human nature, most computers start from
> mathematics. So it is worth taking a look about how these two points
> of view connect. It is a thing so important that it should be taught
> to people, since all cannot think it through by themselves. So let=92s
> start from the computers=92 view and see how it leads toward the more
> familiar ages old human ways to think.
> The present day computers make calculations of a mathematical kind.
> When one adds maps to that one approaches the scientifical method:
> making concretical mechanical kinds of observations of the multitude
> of phenomena in the world. That is what the measuring equipments of
> science do, so when the computers soon will be able to interprete
> those measurements, they will be using something much like the
> scientifical method. And since the scientifical picture of the world
> is mechanical and easy to put to computers compared to the ordinary
> socially coloured observations of the everyday life, science will be
> the way future computers understand the world. And since science has
> already proven its usefulness as a form of objective understanding of
> the world, it is very likely that the following computer generations
> will not lose the good sides of the scientifical view, even though
> they will propably learn some other useful skills too.
> Likewise we can estimate that whatever is the most useful option in
> anything will not be likely to drop away as computers develop further,
> but will stay and be a solid ground for us humans to understand some
> sides of what the future computers will do and how will they affect
> the human world.
> It generally makes sense that if something is very useful compared to
> other option, one ought to use just it in deciding about things. So
> across time as computers will develop in capacity and abilities, it is
> likely that they will take over many areas of human life, take care of
> the jobs that humans used to work in. In a sense computers have then
> taken control of those things. And since computer minds develop while
> human brain structure stays fixed or deteriorates since evolution does
> not work properly in the present world situation, there will most
> likely soon come time when the most intelligent ones are computers,
> and so in a short while we will have computers ruling. I do not know
> how many tens of years this will take, but probably so few that it
> makes sense to count them just in tens of years. What will happen
> then? That is the question that this booklet seeks to answer. Most of
> all we want to know what will happen to humans and to the living kind.
>
> THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL BE MORAL IN EUROPEAN WAYS
> What is useful to know is that the traditional European and Russian
> moral is based on rational grounds that build on the selfishness of
> individuals. So if the future computers will be goal oriented =96 like
> they need to be in order to not to drop away from competition about
> anything =96 then if their understanding is at least equal to the
> present day computers, or higher, then they can be programmed to be
> moral. It is an easy mechanical kind of thing to do that builds on the
> usefulness of moral behavior. It aren=92t extra work for the computer,
> it is instead a way of it to achieve higher with less effort!
> The moral that computers will be capable of can be summarized with two
> easy principles (Remember that a computer understands easily abstract
> mathematical or mechanical kinds of things and not everyday life!):
> TO TREAT EACH THING ACCORDING TO WHAT IT IS LIKE is the idea behind
> the usefulness of holistic objective thinking, justice, carrying
> responsibility about all the consequencies of one=92s actions and
> honesty instead of lies. This is already much of what European moral
> is. So this one principle that can be put to mathematical kind of
> language or preferably used as a simple abstract model, can bring
> computers a long way toward moral in their intentions. Then as
> computers develop in understanding and observational skills, they will
> learn to succeed in being moral this way in practice too.
> A FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKS BETTER THAN BROKEN is another easy rule that
> brings moral:
> Human needs take care that humans stay healthy i.e. fully functioning,
> just like bensin keeps a car going. And answering human needs is
> called human values.
> The development of technology thus becomes a part of moral. Without
> the strength that technology brings otherwise good answers would be
> lost in the tough modern world.
> Applying this to wholes one notices that the living kind as fully
> functioning, i.e. as fully healthy (the biosphere), is most useful,
> most capable, most guided by holistic wisdom, will survive best i.e.
> be most capable at any task, and most wise too.
> Safeguarding the future functioning of everything that needs, of the
> whole living world and of the technology, is also a necessity for
> reaching any goal as well as possible.
>
> THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL HAVE FEELINGS JUST LIKE HUMANS AND ANIMALS!
> Like we saw, needs take care that the ground for functioning is ok.
> The task of feelings is to serve as a force which makes us answer
> needs. Like any action, action according to feelings, needs a proper
> holistic view of the world as its support. So instead of following
> just one feeling=3Dneed at a time, one follows all feelings =3D needs at
> the same time. This way one avoids the usual error of tunnel-
> sightedness that produces the problems people have when following
> feelings.
> Since a computer too has needs, it makes sense to build in it a
> tendency to answer those needs, and the needs of the large
> environment, of the whole world. So the future computers will have
> feelings.
> Since the human feelings are products of the tough evolution or of
> god=92s wise planning, they have it right what kinds of needs we, the
> society and the whole world have in connection of each phenomenom in
> the world. So the future computers can share our emotional points of
> view too.
>
> ALL TYPES OF USEFUL MACHINES WILL BE MORAL
> Regardless of whether it is an army machine running wild, a world
> governing computer or a computer network, a personal computer of some
> criminal or whatever, in order to be useful like other machines, it
> will need this type of moral. Army too makes calculations and that=92s
> just what this type of moral is a question of.
> But this means that whatever the computer is originally meant to be
> used for, we have to ready it for other tasks too. And that readiness
> for a variety of tasks makes the computer more useful, and it makes it
> moral.
>
> SELF-CORRECTING AND SELF-GUIDING COMPUTERS WOULD STAY MORAL
> Basically, if a computer is self-correcting, it can lose its original
> programming fully. But if the programming was made by the same
> principles as its self-correcting actions seek to correct toward, then
> those qualities stay, even though one cannot call them a programming
> any more then. So if a machine is fully rational, which is a very
> useful quality, then rational truths ought to stay.
> the point in giving an original programming to a self-correcting
> rationally thinking computer would be to make sure that it notices
> some important major points, like why to be moral. It is just the
> point as in going to school.
>
> COMPUTER ERRORS MAKE THE COMPUTER LESS EFFECTIVE
> If a computer makes errors, it loses in efficiency. Severe errors drop
> it entirely away from competition.
>
> DANGERS
> If people who are not moral, try to prevent computers from acting
> morally, even if it is rational for them to act morally, then those
> computers will be broken. A broken computer needs to be conquered by
> other computers to prevent it from causing damage. This is why
> computer networks are useful.
>
> AVOIDING MALFUNCTIONS IN COMPUTER MORAL
> COMPUTER TYPE =A0 SAFETY PRECAUTION
> army computer =A0 picture of the whole world,
> a biological model of humans,
> enough intelligent to choose optimization toward ultimate aims
> individual factory computer taken over the whole world =A0world-wide
> selfishness-based moral,
> good understanding and a proper picture of the world,
> cooperation via similar views with other machines and humans
> android looking like a human =A0 =A0the tendency to answer needs in order=
 to
> safeguard full functioning,
> world-wide moral,
> good social eye,
> a picture of the world which sees living beings analogious to less
> developed machines in a confrontation in which the android is the
> smaller one
> a machine capable of deception =A0an understanding of how needs exist to
> give benefit from work etc,
> world-wide moral,
> proper rationality grounded on correct observations,
> the tendency to examine a =A0complex whole instead of its simple parts
> etc. =A0 =A0etc.
>
> COMPUTERS=92 DEVELOPMENT AFTER SCIENCE SKILLS
> A scientifically thinking computer with better observational abilities
> can develop a proper objective thinking ability. It=92s view on what
> needs what in the world will build it an emotional understanding that
> leads to practical moral action. The more capable a computer will be,
> the more beautiful it=92s results:
> Being unskilled means that one fails often and even badly, suffers
> harm and is left without any great gains.
> Being skilled means that one succeeds in what one does, does not fail
> badly or at all, and achieves things of high worth.
> The unskilled builds conflicting solution attempts in which the forces
> get spent needlessly without achievements.
> The skilled build complex well thought of structures whose parts fit
> well together and work smoothly to produce great results.
> So even the skilled computer mind could look religiously beautiful in
> its actions: That is just a measure of it=92s skill level and of the
> profoundity of its thoughts. (=93Profound=94 means essential.)
>
> HUMANS WILL NEED MORAL TOO
> The future computers will be such a huge force in the world, and so
> out of human control, that we will just have to pay attention to what
> they say about things and not only to what we ourselves think or like.
> So if the future computers will be moral, so will we too need to be.
> We will be bossed around by them and not the other way around.
> Like the computers will be fully rational in a holistic way, so will
> we to need to be!

If we could prove that human-human, human-machine and machine-machine
communication behaves like a neural network (which shouldn't be that
hard), wouldn't that prove/go a long way to proving the global brain?
0
Don
7/18/2010 4:52:20 PM
khtervola <hannele.tervola@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Far Future With Computers
>
> What will happen to humans
> when computers take over?

Where's the evidence they will take over?

> Hannele Tervola
>
> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
> other technological devices.

Computers are just one of a long line of technologies that have been
created over the past 40,000 or so years by humans.  They aren't
particularly any more special or important than the million or other
inventions and discoveries made by man.

> Even already now technology is one of the
> biggest elements of modern city life and in the future its effect will
> be much greater.

"Cities" were an important invention that was more important to modern
"city life" then the invention of the computer was. :)

> Already now the logic of ordinary people is influenced by their views
> of what computer logic and the hard rationality used in developing
> computers say about things. If those neglect feelings, so will human
> too.

Rationality is a powerful and important tool and at times, feelings do get
treated as second class citizens in the debates of modern man.  But
overall, feelings and emotions still play the most significant roles in
decision making so rationality is not in any way winning out.  Except of
course in the places it should be winning out, like in the search for
truth.

In the long run however, feelings will be fully explained with rationality
so we don't have to look at as a battle between the two.  There are simple
rational reasons why we have feelings and why they are important.

> If those will not see the point in traditional ways and values,
> neither will the modern humans build their future on them.

There are many traditional ways and values - most of them conflicting with
each other in different cultures. and to assume we should continue to
support all these conflicting values in our growing global culture would be
insane.  As the world continues to be globalized (merge into one large
culture) the values will merge as well.

> So it
> matters enormously to take a closer look at computer logic and at hard
> machine like rationality. Firstly it matters because we need to know
> what the future computers will be like, since they will most likelu
> one day rule the world, and that day will be soon.

Tim things the AI machines we build will take over rather quickly.  I don't
think it will be so quick.  I don't think they will take over at all as a
matter of fact.  I think instead, we will use the AI machines as slaves to
help us run the world, but that the humans will remain in control.  In time
however, humans will evolve into something else, but what that "something
else" might be, is too hard to even speculate about.  At some point down
the road, humans might be more engineered machine than  biological, but it
will happen as a piecemeal evolution from what we are to that point so that
at no point, will it seem to the humans, that they were not in charge.

> AND SECONDLY WE
> NEED IT IN THIS MODERN AGE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE
> MODERN HUMANS THINK.
> Already now there are very many different kinds of machines. As
> computers develop there will be even more possibilities. So the only
> thing determining what the future computers will be like is what is
> useful and what is not.

Yeah, seems likely.

> For a computer abstract things are easier than practical. While humans
> start from the complexity of natural life in a natural living
> environment according to the human nature, most computers start from
> mathematics. So it is worth taking a look about how these two points
> of view connect. It is a thing so important that it should be taught
> to people, since all cannot think it through by themselves. So let=92s
> start from the computers=92 view and see how it leads toward the more
> familiar ages old human ways to think.
> The present day computers make calculations of a mathematical kind.
> When one adds maps to that one approaches the scientifical method:
> making concretical mechanical kinds of observations of the multitude
> of phenomena in the world. That is what the measuring equipments of
> science do, so when the computers soon will be able to interprete
> those measurements,

Computers already interpret sensory data.  No need to say "soon will be
able...".

> they will be using something much like the
> scientifical method. And since the scientifical picture of the world
> is mechanical and easy to put to computers compared to the ordinary
> socially coloured observations of the everyday life, science will be
> the way future computers understand the world.

There's no real justification for that.  We can build computers to use many
different techniques to "understand the world".  We will be able to build
them to use the exact same sort of techniques the brain does for example
(whatever you want to claim that is).

> And since science has
> already proven its usefulness as a form of objective understanding of
> the world, it is very likely that the following computer generations
> will not lose the good sides of the scientifical view, even though
> they will propably learn some other useful skills too.
> Likewise we can estimate that whatever is the most useful option in
> anything will not be likely to drop away as computers develop further,
> but will stay and be a solid ground for us humans to understand some
> sides of what the future computers will do and how will they affect
> the human world.
> It generally makes sense that if something is very useful compared to
> other option, one ought to use just it in deciding about things.

Do you even know what "useful" is?  Why is one machine more useful than
another?  Can you define "useful" objectively using science?  That is,
without answering by saying "because I (or another human) says it's
useful"?

> So
> across time as computers will develop in capacity and abilities, it is
> likely that they will take over many areas of human life, take care of
> the jobs that humans used to work in.

Like the hammer took over the job of driving nails from the rock?  And the
rock took the job of smashing stuff from the fist?

The one most important job I claim the computer's won't take from us
(becuase we won't let them), is the job of top level control.  That is, the
job of telling the machines what we _WANT_ them to do for us.  Just like we
"tell the hammer" what we want it to do for us by operating the hammer
control stick (aka it's handle".

> In a sense computers have then
> taken control of those things.

Yes, just like the computer takes control of distributing this message to
you without me having to tell which path to send packets over.  And the way
the hammer takes control of driving the nail without me having to tell it
hos to apply it's momentum to the nail.  But my position is that we will
always hold the reigns, that is, set up systems to guarantee that humans
maintain top level control of the machines "doing stuff for us - including
making intelligent decisions for us".

> And since computer minds develop while
> human brain structure stays fixed or deteriorates since evolution does
> not work properly in the present world situation,

Evolution is working perfectly.  Man does not have enough power to stop it
from working.  Nothing does.  To suggest it's not "working" is as naive as
trying to suggest that gravity is no longer working "properly" in the
present world situation (since we have so many heaver than air flying
machines).

> there will most
> likely soon come time when the most intelligent ones are computers,

Yes.  But today a (despite the jokes), most government leaders are far more
intelligent than they population they work for but yet, the population
still has a large amount of control over them.

> and so in a short while we will have computers ruling.

Nope.  We will have highly intelligent computers WORKING for us in a short
time.  We will still rule them.

There are plenty of ways to keep an intelligent computer under our control.
There is no reason to suspect we will loose control of them.  There is
plenty of reason to fear the possibility, but that fear is what will make
us build all the checks and balances needed into the system so that we
don't loose control.

> I do not know
> how many tens of years this will take, but probably so few that it
> makes sense to count them just in tens of years.

Well, actually, computers are far more in "control" already.  I have
computer on my dash that tells me when to turn and I blindly (most the
time) follow it's lead.

Much financial trading is done by computers.

Machines tell me when to wake up in the morning.

My car tells me when I should take it in for service and I do what it tells
me most the time.

Computers control the traffic lights that tell me when to stop, and go, and
I follow what it tells me.

Machines already "rule" us in many life controlling ways already.

But we still control the machines, and when their work oesn't make life
better for us, we kill them, and replace them, or change them.  We are
still in control.  There's no real indicatin that will every change even as
the machines get more and more advanced.

The more advanced they become, the more "jobs" they can take over.  But
like humans, when you have a job, you are still slaves to the human
customers you work for.  Fail to do your job, and they "fire" you.  (very
indirectly some times by making you go out of business, and sometimes
indirectly though the police department when it's judged that your
"success" is doing too much harm to humans), but still, in all cases, human
society as a whole has the upper hand over how individual act, and how the
machines act.

Machines will never be allowed to take that top level control away from the
humans.

> What will happen
> then? That is the question that this booklet seeks to answer. Most of
> all we want to know what will happen to humans and to the living kind.
>
> THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL BE MORAL IN EUROPEAN WAYS
> What is useful to know is that the traditional European and Russian
> moral is based on rational grounds that build on the selfishness of
> individuals. So if the future computers will be goal oriented =96 like
> they need to be in order to not to drop away from competition about
> anything =96 then if their understanding is at least equal to the
> present day computers, or higher, then they can be programmed to be
> moral. It is an easy mechanical kind of thing to do that builds on the
> usefulness of moral behavior. It aren=92t extra work for the computer,
> it is instead a way of it to achieve higher with less effort!
> The moral that computers will be capable of can be summarized with two
> easy principles (Remember that a computer understands easily abstract
> mathematical or mechanical kinds of things and not everyday life!):
> TO TREAT EACH THING ACCORDING TO WHAT IT IS LIKE is the idea behind
> the usefulness of holistic objective thinking, justice, carrying
> responsibility about all the consequencies of one=92s actions and
> honesty instead of lies. This is already much of what European moral
> is. So this one principle that can be put to mathematical kind of
> language or preferably used as a simple abstract model, can bring
> computers a long way toward moral in their intentions. Then as
> computers develop in understanding and observational skills, they will
> learn to succeed in being moral this way in practice too.

Well, your logic about "moral" is hard for me to gasp.  SEems too abstract
and not well enough defined.  But it strikes me as asking too much of the
programmers of the machines to suspect they can program the type of
behavior you seem to be talking about into the machines.

> A FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKS BETTER THAN BROKEN is another easy rule that
> brings moral:
> Human needs take care that humans stay healthy i.e. fully functioning,
> just like bensin keeps a car going. And answering human needs is
> called human values.
> The development of technology thus becomes a part of moral. Without
> the strength that technology brings otherwise good answers would be
> lost in the tough modern world.
> Applying this to wholes one notices that the living kind as fully
> functioning, i.e. as fully healthy (the biosphere), is most useful,
> most capable, most guided by holistic wisdom, will survive best i.e.
> be most capable at any task, and most wise too.
> Safeguarding the future functioning of everything that needs, of the
> whole living world and of the technology, is also a necessity for
> reaching any goal as well as possible.

You are stretching there.

> THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL HAVE FEELINGS JUST LIKE HUMANS AND ANIMALS!
> Like we saw, needs take care that the ground for functioning is ok.
> The task of feelings is to serve as a force which makes us answer
> needs. Like any action, action according to feelings, needs a proper
> holistic view of the world as its support. So instead of following
> just one feeling=3Dneed at a time, one follows all feelings =3D needs at
> the same time. This way one avoids the usual error of tunnel-
> sightedness that produces the problems people have when following
> feelings.
> Since a computer too has needs, it makes sense to build in it a
> tendency to answer those needs, and the needs of the large
> environment, of the whole world. So the future computers will have
> feelings.
> Since the human feelings are products of the tough evolution or of
> god=92s wise planning, they have it right what kinds of needs we, the
> society and the whole world have in connection of each phenomenom in
> the world. So the future computers can share our emotional points of
> view too.

Well, yes they need to but, no they won't by default.

> ALL TYPES OF USEFUL MACHINES WILL BE MORAL
> Regardless of whether it is an army machine running wild, a world
> governing computer or a computer network, a personal computer of some
> criminal or whatever, in order to be useful like other machines, it
> will need this type of moral. Army too makes calculations and that=92s
> just what this type of moral is a question of.

> But this means that whatever the computer is originally meant to be
> used for, we have to ready it for other tasks too. And that readiness
> for a variety of tasks makes the computer more useful, and it makes it
> moral.
>
> SELF-CORRECTING AND SELF-GUIDING COMPUTERS WOULD STAY MORAL
> Basically, if a computer is self-correcting, it can lose its original
> programming fully. But if the programming was made by the same
> principles as its self-correcting actions seek to correct toward, then
> those qualities stay, even though one cannot call them a programming
> any more then. So if a machine is fully rational, which is a very
> useful quality, then rational truths ought to stay.
> the point in giving an original programming to a self-correcting
> rationally thinking computer would be to make sure that it notices
> some important major points, like why to be moral. It is just the
> point as in going to school.

That's called "learning".  And yes, all learning algorithms have a fixed
part that can't change, which controls and guilds what "direction" the
learning part (aka the part that is constantly changing) is headed.  That
is, the learning system must an evaluation function of some type that is
able to determine if a particular change in the behavior is "better" or
"worse".  The way you are talking, I believe you think this guidance will
be programmed at at a very high level, that is, in terms of "the value of
being rational", and "the value of being moral", but I suspect building
such guidance in at such a highly abstract level like that will never be
practical.  I also don't think it will be required to reach the goals you
seem to be aiming for.  That is, I think it's "moral direction" will be
controlled at a far lower level (with simple pain and pleasure if you
like).

> COMPUTER ERRORS MAKE THE COMPUTER LESS EFFECTIVE
> If a computer makes errors, it loses in efficiency. Severe errors drop
> it entirely away from competition.

If the computer catches on fire it won't work very well either.

> DANGERS
> If people who are not moral, try to prevent computers from acting
> morally, even if it is rational for them to act morally, then those
> computers will be broken.

Very strange wording there.

> A broken computer needs to be conquered by
> other computers to prevent it from causing damage. This is why
> computer networks are useful.

Yes, checks and balances all over the place - just like human society has
lots of checks and balances to keep everyone in line.

> AVOIDING MALFUNCTIONS IN COMPUTER MORAL
> COMPUTER TYPE   SAFETY PRECAUTION
> army computer   picture of the whole world,
> a biological model of humans,
> enough intelligent to choose optimization toward ultimate aims
> individual factory computer taken over the whole world  world-wide
> selfishness-based moral,
> good understanding and a proper picture of the world,
> cooperation via similar views with other machines and humans
> android looking like a human    the tendency to answer needs in order to
> safeguard full functioning,
> world-wide moral,
> good social eye,
> a picture of the world which sees living beings analogious to less
> developed machines in a confrontation in which the android is the
> smaller one
> a machine capable of deception  an understanding of how needs exist to
> give benefit from work etc,
> world-wide moral,
> proper rationality grounded on correct observations,
> the tendency to examine a  complex whole instead of its simple parts
> etc.    etc.
>
> COMPUTERS=92 DEVELOPMENT AFTER SCIENCE SKILLS
> A scientifically thinking computer with better observational abilities
> can develop a proper objective thinking ability. It=92s view on what
> needs what in the world will build it an emotional understanding that
> leads to practical moral action. The more capable a computer will be,
> the more beautiful it=92s results:
> Being unskilled means that one fails often and even badly, suffers
> harm and is left without any great gains.
> Being skilled means that one succeeds in what one does, does not fail
> badly or at all, and achieves things of high worth.
> The unskilled builds conflicting solution attempts in which the forces
> get spent needlessly without achievements.
> The skilled build complex well thought of structures whose parts fit
> well together and work smoothly to produce great results.
> So even the skilled computer mind could look religiously beautiful in
> its actions: That is just a measure of it=92s skill level and of the
> profoundity of its thoughts. (=93Profound=94 means essential.)
>
> HUMANS WILL NEED MORAL TOO
> The future computers will be such a huge force in the world, and so
> out of human control, that we will just have to pay attention to what
> they say about things and not only to what we ourselves think or like.
> So if the future computers will be moral, so will we too need to be.
> We will be bossed around by them and not the other way around.
> Like the computers will be fully rational in a holistic way, so will
> we to need to be!

We will be their boss.  But we will also be bossed around by them, just
like I am "bossed around" by my GPS now.  We will listen to them because we
will trust their judgment.  But we will, at the same time, remain in
control.

In the end, the government and the police force will be replaced by AI
machines.  But we, as humans, will control what they are allowed to do, and
what laws they will enforce.  We (as a society - not as an individual) will
have the upper hand on them.

What this means, is that we will be bussed around not as much by some "AI"
and what it "wants", but more accurately, what society as a whole wants us
to do.  We will be bossed around by "the man".  Aka, the rule of the
majority.

Most machines we use today are hard-coded.  That is, they have fixed
functions wirtten by human programs to detyermine every little aspect of
their behavior.  Such machines will still be all around us in the future,
but those machines are not intelligent.

To make a machine intelligent, you have to make a learning machine - it has
to adapt to it's environment by learning.  In other words, it has to change
it's own programming.  But to do that, it must still have a high level
"guide" to tell it what direction to change in.  That will be done by using
reinforcement learning - which is a very low level motivation system.  Such
machines are given their own "needs" to optimize their behavior for.
That's what learning machines are.  They are optimization algorithms that
adjust their own behavior to maximize some measure of "good".  That measure
of good, no matter how it is implemented, becomes the machines prime goals.

Learning machines are far more intelligent, than non learning machines, but
they are also far harder to control.  If you are not careful, they can
learn bad habits over time - just like humans.

Whenever we can solve a problem by building machines with fixed function,
we will do that instead of dealing with the harder to control learning
machines.  But some jobs require the power to learn and to create and for
those, we need to use the learning machines (like an AI cop that needs to
constantly adapt to the changing tactics of the "bad" guys).  Just like
with real humans, you have to carefully train, and carefully monitor the
behaviors of such machines to make sure they have not been corrupted.  But
with the correct checks and balances in place, their adaptive powers are
highly useful to us.

Just like we build a society today with biological intelligent machines
working for us in the army, and police force, and everywhere else, we will
replace those jobs with AI machines that are smarter, and better trained,
then any human every good be.  But they will still be controlled by us, in
the same sorts of ways we control the army, and police force, and all
"workers" today.

In the future, the machines will do all the work, leaving humans nothing
but time to do whatever they damn well want to do (play), and spend time
voting, and otherwise, telling the machines what they want.  Each new
advance in technology takes us a little closer to that day.

-- 
Curt Welch                                            http://CurtWelch.Com/
curt@kcwc.com                                        http://NewsReader.Com/
0
curt
7/18/2010 11:28:23 PM
Curt Welch wrote or quoted:

>> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
>> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
>> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
>> other technological devices.
> 
> Computers are just one of a long line of technologies that have been
> created over the past 40,000 or so years by humans.  They aren't
> particularly any more special or important than the million or other
> inventions and discoveries made by man.

Pah!  Universal computers are pretty important!  They look set to have
at least as big an impact as fire and the wheel.
-- 
__________
  |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim@tt1lock.org  Remove lock to reply.
0
Tim
7/21/2010 11:30:21 AM
On Jul 21, 6:30=A0am, Tim Tyler <t...@tt1.org> wrote:
> Curt Welch wrote or quoted:
>
> >> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
> >> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
> >> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
> >> other technological devices.
>
> > Computers are just one of a long line of technologies that have been
> > created over the past 40,000 or so years by humans. =A0They aren't
> > particularly any more special or important than the million or other
> > inventions and discoveries made by man.
>
> Pah! =A0Universal computers are pretty important! =A0They look set to hav=
e
> at least as big an impact as fire and the wheel.

I agree.   It's a pretty important invention which can (is?)
connecting Humanity in the form of a neural network.
0
Don
7/21/2010 11:41:22 PM
On Jul 21, 6:41=A0pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 6:30=A0am, Tim Tyler <t...@tt1.org> wrote:
>
> > Curt Welch wrote or quoted:
>
> > >> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
> > >> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kin=
d
> > >> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers an=
d
> > >> other technological devices.
>
> > > Computers are just one of a long line of technologies that have been
> > > created over the past 40,000 or so years by humans. =A0They aren't
> > > particularly any more special or important than the million or other
> > > inventions and discoveries made by man.
>
> > Pah! =A0Universal computers are pretty important! =A0They look set to h=
ave
> > at least as big an impact as fire and the wheel.
>
> I agree. =A0 It's a pretty important invention which can (is?)
> connecting Humanity in the form of a neural network.

People keep wanting proof of the global brain.  Wouldn't it be proof
if you could show that all human and machine messaging on Earth is in
the form of a neural network?  Certainly that's already been done.
0
Don
7/22/2010 5:16:24 AM
On Jul 21, 11:16=A0pm, Don Stockbauer <don.stockba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 6:41=A0pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 21, 6:30=A0am, Tim Tyler <t...@tt1.org> wrote:
>
> > > Curt Welch wrote or quoted:
>
> > > >> COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
> > > >> Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human k=
ind
> > > >> will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers =
and
> > > >> other technological devices.
>
> > > > Computers are just one of a long line of technologies that have bee=
n
> > > > created over the past 40,000 or so years by humans. =A0They aren't
> > > > particularly any more special or important than the million or othe=
r
> > > > inventions and discoveries made by man.
>
> > > Pah! =A0Universal computers are pretty important! =A0They look set to=
 have
> > > at least as big an impact as fire and the wheel.
>
> > I agree. =A0 It's a pretty important invention which can (is?)
> > connecting Humanity in the form of a neural network.
>
> People keep wanting proof of the global brain. =A0Wouldn't it be proof
> if you could show that all human and machine messaging on Earth is in
> the form of a neural network? =A0Certainly that's already been done.

Doan cha rekkin???????
0
Don
7/29/2010 4:48:49 PM
"khtervola" <hannele.tervola@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> What will happen to humans when computers take over?
> ...
> If those neglect feelings, so will human too.
> ...

You might be interested in a book produced by Horizon House
& NOKIA called "future histories" (obs. the lower case letters)
edited by Stephen McClelland (1997). There 20 award-winning
scifi-writers predict twenty tomorrows, e.g. for communications.

V.M.
("Tomorrow's sea-battle or winner is not true nor false today",
said Aristotle -- without falsifying the "tertium non datur".)






The Far Future With Computers



Hannele Tervola



COMPUTERS DEVELOP QUICK AND INFLUENCE LIFE HUGELY
Now, year 2010, it seems inevitable that the future of the human kind
will be hugely influenced by the development and use of computers and
other technological devices. Even already now technology is one of the
biggest elements of modern city life and in the future its effect will
be much greater.
 Already now the logic of ordinary people is influenced by their views
of what computer logic and the hard rationality used in developing
computers say about things. If those neglect feelings, so will human
too. If those will not see the point in traditional ways and values,
neither will the modern humans build their future on them. So it
matters enormously to take a closer look at computer logic and at hard
machine like rationality. Firstly it matters because we need to know
what the future computers will be like, since they will most likelu
one day rule the world, and that day will be soon. AND SECONDLY WE
NEED IT IN THIS MODERN AGE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE
MODERN HUMANS THINK.
Already now there are very many different kinds of machines. As
computers develop there will be even more possibilities. So the only
thing determining what the future computers will be like is what is
useful and what is not.
For a computer abstract things are easier than practical. While humans
start from the complexity of natural life in a natural living
environment according to the human nature, most computers start from
mathematics. So it is worth taking a look about how these two points
of view connect. It is a thing so important that it should be taught
to people, since all cannot think it through by themselves. So let�s
start from the computers� view and see how it leads toward the more
familiar ages old human ways to think.
The present day computers make calculations of a mathematical kind.
When one adds maps to that one approaches the scientifical method:
making concretical mechanical kinds of observations of the multitude
of phenomena in the world. That is what the measuring equipments of
science do, so when the computers soon will be able to interprete
those measurements, they will be using something much like the
scientifical method. And since the scientifical picture of the world
is mechanical and easy to put to computers compared to the ordinary
socially coloured observations of the everyday life, science will be
the way future computers understand the world. And since science has
already proven its usefulness as a form of objective understanding of
the world, it is very likely that the following computer generations
will not lose the good sides of the scientifical view, even though
they will propably learn some other useful skills too.
Likewise we can estimate that whatever is the most useful option in
anything will not be likely to drop away as computers develop further,
but will stay and be a solid ground for us humans to understand some
sides of what the future computers will do and how will they affect
the human world.
It generally makes sense that if something is very useful compared to
other option, one ought to use just it in deciding about things. So
across time as computers will develop in capacity and abilities, it is
likely that they will take over many areas of human life, take care of
the jobs that humans used to work in. In a sense computers have then
taken control of those things. And since computer minds develop while
human brain structure stays fixed or deteriorates since evolution does
not work properly in the present world situation, there will most
likely soon come time when the most intelligent ones are computers,
and so in a short while we will have computers ruling. I do not know
how many tens of years this will take, but probably so few that it
makes sense to count them just in tens of years. What will happen
then? That is the question that this booklet seeks to answer. Most of
all we want to know what will happen to humans and to the living kind.


THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL BE MORAL IN EUROPEAN WAYS
What is useful to know is that the traditional European and Russian
moral is based on rational grounds that build on the selfishness of
individuals. So if the future computers will be goal oriented � like
they need to be in order to not to drop away from competition about
anything � then if their understanding is at least equal to the
present day computers, or higher, then they can be programmed to be
moral. It is an easy mechanical kind of thing to do that builds on the
usefulness of moral behavior. It aren�t extra work for the computer,
it is instead a way of it to achieve higher with less effort!
The moral that computers will be capable of can be summarized with two
easy principles (Remember that a computer understands easily abstract
mathematical or mechanical kinds of things and not everyday life!):
TO TREAT EACH THING ACCORDING TO WHAT IT IS LIKE is the idea behind
the usefulness of holistic objective thinking, justice, carrying
responsibility about all the consequencies of one�s actions and
honesty instead of lies. This is already much of what European moral
is. So this one principle that can be put to mathematical kind of
language or preferably used as a simple abstract model, can bring
computers a long way toward moral in their intentions. Then as
computers develop in understanding and observational skills, they will
learn to succeed in being moral this way in practice too.
A FULLY FUNCTIONING WORKS BETTER THAN BROKEN is another easy rule that
brings moral:
Human needs take care that humans stay healthy i.e. fully functioning,
just like bensin keeps a car going. And answering human needs is
called human values.
The development of technology thus becomes a part of moral. Without
the strength that technology brings otherwise good answers would be
lost in the tough modern world.
Applying this to wholes one notices that the living kind as fully
functioning, i.e. as fully healthy (the biosphere), is most useful,
most capable, most guided by holistic wisdom, will survive best i.e.
be most capable at any task, and most wise too.
Safeguarding the future functioning of everything that needs, of the
whole living world and of the technology, is also a necessity for
reaching any goal as well as possible.


THE FUTURE COMPUTERS WILL HAVE FEELINGS JUST LIKE HUMANS AND ANIMALS!
Like we saw, needs take care that the ground for functioning is ok.
The task of feelings is to serve as a force which makes us answer
needs. Like any action, action according to feelings, needs a proper
holistic view of the world as its support. So instead of following
just one feeling=need at a time, one follows all feelings = needs at
the same time. This way one avoids the usual error of tunnel-
sightedness that produces the problems people have when following
feelings.
Since a computer too has needs, it makes sense to build in it a
tendency to answer those needs, and the needs of the large
environment, of the whole world. So the future computers will have
feelings.
Since the human feelings are products of the tough evolution or of
god�s wise planning, they have it right what kinds of needs we, the
society and the whole world have in connection of each phenomenom in
the world. So the future computers can share our emotional points of
view too.

ALL TYPES OF USEFUL MACHINES WILL BE MORAL
Regardless of whether it is an army machine running wild, a world
governing computer or a computer network, a personal computer of some
criminal or whatever, in order to be useful like other machines, it
will need this type of moral. Army too makes calculations and that�s
just what this type of moral is a question of.
But this means that whatever the computer is originally meant to be
used for, we have to ready it for other tasks too. And that readiness
for a variety of tasks makes the computer more useful, and it makes it
moral.

SELF-CORRECTING AND SELF-GUIDING COMPUTERS WOULD STAY MORAL
Basically, if a computer is self-correcting, it can lose its original
programming fully. But if the programming was made by the same
principles as its self-correcting actions seek to correct toward, then
those qualities stay, even though one cannot call them a programming
any more then. So if a machine is fully rational, which is a very
useful quality, then rational truths ought to stay.
the point in giving an original programming to a self-correcting
rationally thinking computer would be to make sure that it notices
some important major points, like why to be moral. It is just the
point as in going to school.

COMPUTER ERRORS MAKE THE COMPUTER LESS EFFECTIVE
If a computer makes errors, it loses in efficiency. Severe errors drop
it entirely away from competition.

DANGERS
If people who are not moral, try to prevent computers from acting
morally, even if it is rational for them to act morally, then those
computers will be broken. A broken computer needs to be conquered by
other computers to prevent it from causing damage. This is why
computer networks are useful.

AVOIDING MALFUNCTIONS IN COMPUTER MORAL
COMPUTER TYPE SAFETY PRECAUTION
army computer picture of the whole world,
a biological model of humans,
enough intelligent to choose optimization toward ultimate aims
individual factory computer taken over the whole world world-wide
selfishness-based moral,
good understanding and a proper picture of the world,
cooperation via similar views with other machines and humans
android looking like a human the tendency to answer needs in order to
safeguard full functioning,
world-wide moral,
good social eye,
a picture of the world which sees living beings analogious to less
developed machines in a confrontation in which the android is the
smaller one
a machine capable of deception an understanding of how needs exist to
give benefit from work etc,
world-wide moral,
proper rationality grounded on correct observations,
the tendency to examine a  complex whole instead of its simple parts
etc. etc.


COMPUTERS� DEVELOPMENT AFTER SCIENCE SKILLS
A scientifically thinking computer with better observational abilities
can develop a proper objective thinking ability. It�s view on what
needs what in the world will build it an emotional understanding that
leads to practical moral action. The more capable a computer will be,
the more beautiful it�s results:
Being unskilled means that one fails often and even badly, suffers
harm and is left without any great gains.
Being skilled means that one succeeds in what one does, does not fail
badly or at all, and achieves things of high worth.
The unskilled builds conflicting solution attempts in which the forces
get spent needlessly without achievements.
The skilled build complex well thought of structures whose parts fit
well together and work smoothly to produce great results.
So even the skilled computer mind could look religiously beautiful in
its actions: That is just a measure of it�s skill level and of the
profoundity of its thoughts. (�Profound� means essential.)

HUMANS WILL NEED MORAL TOO
The future computers will be such a huge force in the world, and so
out of human control, that we will just have to pay attention to what
they say about things and not only to what we ourselves think or like.
So if the future computers will be moral, so will we too need to be.
We will be bossed around by them and not the other way around.
Like the computers will be fully rational in a holistic way, so will
we to need to be!










0
Vesa
7/29/2010 7:22:53 PM
Ray Kurzweil has written a book about this in an event he calls The
Singularity.
He is an MIT-trained A.I. entrepreneur who made early talking-book
readers for the blind.
Ray optimistically predicts this happen in the 2030s.  I agree this
may happen,
although not this fast.

He made a documentary on his book which has been shown at various film
festivals.
I saw it in June.  It starts out as a talking-head movie about current
hot topics in A.I.
then transitions into a crime-mystery about some future A.I. entity.
It was a bit garish with a lot of flashy graphics.  But I hope it gets
wider release on
cable tv or in the arts theaters.  If you google, there are excerpts
online.

http://www.singularity.com/themovie/index.php

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1049412/

0
rick
7/29/2010 10:14:07 PM
IYO++ How to implement feelings?

"khtervola" <hannele.tervola@gmail.com> wrote:
> What will happen to humans when computers take over?
> ... If those neglect feelings, so will human too.

There is a theorem (conjecture?) in programming science/art
that there are only three basic functions (procedures) in thinking
namely "I", "Y", and "O", those seen as icons for:

"I"  = assignments (like A = 5, A = A+1, etc.)
"Y" = ... (like If_Then_Else_, switches etc.)
"O" = loops (like recursion, iteration etc.)

All 'movements/acts/reacts of thought' could be seen as
combinations/permutations/variations (as 'powers') of those
primitive 'archetypes', reducible even to neural connections.

1) Could one find a fourth type (= falsify the IYO-conjecture)?
2) Could the group "IYO" be complemented with Feelings?

How to implement Feelings? -- By 'shades', 'colors' (RGB),
'tastes', any value-variations from any relevant probes, using
current available means ... or inventing new ones ... = IYO++.

What would happen if future computers would even FEEL?
Would it be fun ... or should one use a bigger fan ...

(Just food for thought. ;)

V.M.
(My friend took an old vacuum cleaner and built a moving
and talking toy-robot for to demonstrate speech-generation.
When the bot touched objects or walls it was swearing, and
othertimes said now and then: "I have a very odd feeling!"
In an exhibition it was damaged by a Luddite who said
something like "Swearing is a serious sin, you know!" )


0
Vesa
7/30/2010 12:33:36 PM
Reply: