Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion

Jim, will get back to you soon ok for accurate answer

This is how artificial intelligence will become weaponized in future cyberattacks https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-is...
Real-time, autonomous decisions are only some of the techniques AI can bring to the table.

Iain wrote: "I just hope they have fail-safes in place, i.e. the human element and don't totally rely on A.I. ..."

I think "they" have given up on humanity...and so their last resort is AI!

"they" probably includes Prince Philip who called us all "useless eaters" don't forget :)

Iain wrote: "Mate, there will come a rubicon moment and we will merge with A.I. and gradually be subsumed in our own folly in the grand pursuit of the god-like stature of singularity. ..."

Sounds utopian as then we'll evolve beyond useless eaters, I assume? Or did I miss something evil in the process?

AI & Brain Implants https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2...

In the first half, Professor Bart Kosko discussed the latest in artificial intelligence, brain implants, noise, and the concept of a 'digital soul.' Deep brain implants, which are usually simple stimulators, are used to treat such conditions as Parkinson's, epilepsy, and depression. While they're considered medically safe, they have a wireless component and could be susceptible to hackers, he warned. In 5-10 years, we'll be able to boost memory through implants, he reported, such that someone could turn on the device during a lecture to retain more information. A recent DARPA experiment has demonstrated a 'proof of concept' behind this technology, he added. He estimates that in 15-20 years, we should be able to implant actual content.

Outlining the way a "digital soul" could work in principle, he cited how a tiny part of the brain could be removed and reproduced in something like an electronic chip and then reinstalled back into the brain. Ultimately, this "back-up" could create a more durable medium for the mind, he noted. Kosko also addressed different aspects of noise in our lives. As we tend to live in overstimulated environments, he recommends that people go on occasional "noise fasts," retreating to a quiet place and unplugging from devices, which helps to reset our hormonal and cognitive systems.

And more broadly, how can we draw the line between that all and censorship? After all, AI requires diligent specificity.

Can AI be used to stop species extinction? Can AI robots be sent out into the likes of the Amazon to constantly be looking for the last of endangered species?

I dunno, I know nothing much about AI, but just wondering if AI could be crucial in saving the planet?

Or...To go the dystopian way, will it ruin the planet?

I guess it could go either way!

Iain wrote: "Was thinking of how A.I. could assist here the world of slander, online-bullying, copyright, hazing and all the rest?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22......"

Imagine if AI is even more politically correct than humanity is now!!

Dark Pools: The Rise of Artificially Intelligent Trading Machines and the Looming Threat to Wall Street

Making sense of Microsoft's approach to AI https://www.zdnet.com/article/making-...
Microsoft has a master plan for trying to get more customers to jump into the AI waters. Here's an attempt to explain how containers, accelerators, and APIs all figure in.

Learning about Human Learning Algorithms (a blog post by author/researcher Michael Pollan)
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...

Greg Egan's 'Permutation City' has some interesting thoughts on the future of digital thinking. There is much to worry about concerning AI for sure, Mr Hawking himself saw it as a grave threat. But maybe the sheer complexity of our 'ad hoc' world also needs AI, and it's not difficult to think of many positives as well as negatives that could arise from incorporating it. For so long, demonstrably, we have not made a very good job of too many aspects of our world for it just to be 'bad luck', after all. :) I haven't read all the posts here, so apologies if this content is repeated.

The problem with AI as with all human creations is, although we think we are so smart, time and again, we £uck up, because we underestimate the complexity of the world.
It's all very well to assume that our creation AI, will follow a positive path but once the cat is out of the bag, the law of unexpected consequences may make our creation a curse.
So many SF novels might be more true than we would like to believe

I mean no disrespect at all... I agree with what is said wholeheartedly, however, there is much missing from something that Stephen Hawking not only indicates in two of his books but admitted in his last conference, before his death. While what is mentioned in the original thread is a very big fear, Stephen Hawking thought that other intelligent forms of life existed and that was the biggest danger to the human race. In fact, in his later years of life, he was firm in avoiding questions that related to a higher power in such veracity that nobody had a clear understanding of his absolute viewpoints of a "maker, " or what he exactly believed existed in the universe. How could he? It is unknown. I personally have read his books and although they evolve slowly into more thoughtful and an accepting flow of the understanding that is beyond, I believe he thought that a maker was responsible for our planet. That is entirely my opinion. What isn't my opinion is his constant voice of doom that dwelled on other intelligent forms of life that might come in contact with earth. Of course, I haven't read his books in some time and I have not read all of his interviews. From the substantial amount of literature I have reviewed, I would say this is probably accurate. I do not disagree with the initial post.

What year you guys estimate singularity will occur, if at all?

I do lean toward what Max said above tho... This AI tech journey may reveal something surprising about humanity and consciousness... Maybe even that it cannot be replicated short of real human births... Just a thought that I believe deserves to be put into the mix at least...

Yes, I think (or guess) that maybe science might successfully replicate, or create an equivalent of, the human brain and then discover there's still nothing like human consciousness...Which could then create a deeper inspection as to what is human consciousness, if it doesn't reside in the brain...

Conversely, it'd also be funny (funny as in those tragic comedies) if human consciousness is very easily replicated or bettered and we are nowhere near as smart or clever as we thought!

Iain wrote: "PS: it's a kinda moot point in a way, but I've always thought it would be more interesting and surprising if we found out we were the only advanced species in the entire universe."

You are clearly not a betting person! I'd love to wager a significant amount of money that your wrong! :-)

Will AI replace YOU? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpMzl...

Iain wrote: "A.I. and so on certainly has its place, but it's the lack of regulation and the ironic but valid function of the free-market that will determine a positive or negative balance. Judging by historica..."

Fair point. I might suggest that the calculation of whether the sum of our collective fuckuppery as a human-AI amalgam will be greater or less, might be profoundly unfathomable. :)

Iain wrote: "No need to apologise. Each to their own. What I find interesting is that we as humans are constantly endevouring to become 'Gods', god-like or at least show a propensity to create in our own like? ..."

I think one could fairly argue the point that humanity is already being supplanted. Whether AI is a good idea or not (on which point I have no firm opinion) doesn't lend itself to analysis by anything other than a myriad of perspectives. Indeed we might need AI to consider the issue, and that point might be worth pondering other than as feeble quip. :)

Sex Robots Are Here, and They’re Incredibly Lifelike. But Are They Dangerous? https://www.thedailybeast.com/sex-rob...

Robots Are Killing People. How Worried Should We Be? https://www.thedailybeast.com/robots-...

Houston Lawmakers Aim to Block First U.S. Sex-Robot Brothel https://www.thedailybeast.com/houston...

Iain wrote: "Ultimately it'll be the man-in-the-middle who will pay the price . . .. ..."

You're a sick man, Iain!

Touché.

I seriously didn't realize they already had AI brothels tho. Thought it was firmly in the realm of science fiction like that Bruce Willis movie VICE.

It's insane how AI is even likely to put many prostitutes out of business!

Iain wrote: ""We might need AI to consider the issue".

Let's hope by then these questions don't arise at so advanced a juncture in AI it becomes more a question of the human's relative worth in its natural con..."

I agree, it needs serious consideration. And I can see many potential dangers and benefits of AI. But underlying some of my thoughts on the matter is the suspicion that the modern world has grown to complex for us to manage. It seems there is some evidence, at least, over recent history we are not up to the job. Perhaps we just need to admit we badly need help at a senior management level (leaving all the other aspects of AI aside for now), but then have a very , very, rigorous job interview for the prospective helpers. :)

AI will not be the same as a human brain, therefore its possible or likely that the intellect of AI will be different in nature. Can there be different styles/types of intellect? That in itself is a question I can only suspect an answer to, only having experience of this particular intellect I am using now. :) Furthermore, I am not sure I know enough to say definitively that AI could not surpass human intellect or creativity. One (of many) reasons why I don't consider I know enough to decide this issue, is that in creating AI its possible that it would be more accurate to consider we were ''seeding'' a non-human intellect, which will then learn and develop in ways that are difficult to predict to say the least (certainly by me anyway). But thinking this way, the idea that we couldn't ''create;' a mind more intelligent/creative than our own, seems arguable at least. It might be more accurate to consider that we would simply be beginning a process by which an intelligence, of some kind, would develop.

Hmmm

Also, the idea of free-will is definitely not a simple ''given'' anymore. It's very possible that free-will is much less prevalent in out lives than we have been told. This is an area under active study recently. The results are certainly contestable, but it is certainly, now, considerably contestable that we have individual free will to the degree that has traditionally been a mainstay of our beliefs for so long.

I didn't have time to read every post here sadly, its an interesting discussion, so apologies for not replying directly to posts. But these are a few thoughts I had after reading what I could.

Scire wrote: "Can there be different styles/types of intellect? ..."

I feel we are in danger of anthropomorphism, in that AI won't be human and what makes us different (and our intellect real) is consciousness. Some of the biggest hallmarks of high intellect in humans are I would guess adaptation, creativity, the element of surprise, comedic thinking, not to mention translating real life experiences into whatever we do. Look at all the creativity that's required for the very best criminals who can repeatedly outwit the most technological security systems, for example, or remain at large for years when on the run from the likes of Interpol.

So unless they can figure out how to mass produce consciousness, and to do that scientists first need to figure out what the hell is consciousness, then I think whatever AI's equivalent of intellect is, it won't be competition for human creativity or our unique ingenuity...just as we won't be competition for AI (or even the best supercomputers right now)...Maybe the whole implied debate here of AI vs Humans is all apples and oranges? Maybe if we look back thru history there has always been great fears of new technologies...

The other thing that potentially factors into intellect, i sense, is emotions...Our emotional selves may be highly complex and sometimes emotions influence our intellects? (just guessing here)

So how does AI compete without emotions? How does it understand the need for building strong communities, or holding together family units, as just two random examples, without empathy and life experience?

I'm not dismissing all the incredible things AI is already doing, but just wondering if people are dismissing how complex the human intellect actually is when they predict AI will soon overtake humanity in every single field in every single way.

Yes I agree that fail-safe mechanism could be true.

And you also raise another interesting point I hadn't thought of, Iain, and that's where you said "What if it is impossible to for us to reduce our state to mere fathomable calculations and algorithms that we can understand?" I just realised that AI is reliant on us building it and knowing how to outdo ourselves...But do we understand ourselves well enough yet -- in particular emotions, the brain and especially what is consciousness -- to be able to reduce intellect to simple calculations and algorithms?

If AI is being slightly over-exaggerated, then is this another example where the likes of tech-heads scientists and others have gone too mechanical and failed to consider philosophical angles?

Yes. I think It's an "all of the above" scenario, Iain

Not that this relates to AI (unless Americans need AI to translate our accents as they listen!), nor is there any "underground knowledge" in this, but thanks for having me on your boxing podcast, Iain. It was fun.

BOXER VS PUNCHER: TYSON FURY VS DEONTAY WILDER (On The Ropes Podcast #1 27-11-2018 ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fo_s...

p.s. For any boxing fans, you can subscribe to Iain's YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK9I...

Who defines dissident?
If we mess with the “Bell curve” of statistics, then as we remove the edges, more of the outside edges of the distribution will fall into the “dissent” definition until as each iteration follows, ..... the statistical curve will cover such a narrow range of view that all creativity will be lost and the human race will die out because they will no longer have sufficient

Terah Lyons, who worked on AI policy in the Obama (and, briefly, Trump) White House, heads a group called the Partnership on AI, which counts major technology companies (including China’s Baidu) and non-profit groups (like the American Civil Liberties Union) as members. AI is experiencing what she calls a “Tower of Babel moment.” The partnership hopes to bring together all the interested parties to make sure AI is used responsibly. It’s a tall and exciting order. http://fortune.com/2018/11/29/google-...

What the hell? Literally hell apparently as Mr Musk views AI as “the devil.” And he sees this tech as a threat to humanity...

AI-infused humans: Elon Musk wants to create a hard drive for our brains https://swisscognitive.ch/2018/12/01/...

In recent years, Elon Musk has become one of the most vocal critics of artificial intelligence, issuing numerous warnings about the threat that powerful machines pose to the future of mankind.

Now the 47-year-old billionaire inventor and Tesla chief executive has unveiled a potential way for the meager human brain to compete with a superior force that Musk has compared to “an immortal dictator” and “the devil.”

Full article here:
https://swisscognitive.ch/2018/12/01/...

Thanks for having me on again Iain - And the way Fury got up from 2nd knocked up from second knocked down looked like proof of Musk's idea AI being infused with a man to me... That didn't look human!

Yeah, you can't replicate insane geniuses!

His dad, John Fury, is calling his son "The SON OF ZEUS!" after that performance...So maybe that explains what happened.

James wrote: "What the hell? Literally hell apparently as Mr Musk views AI as “the devil.” And he sees this tech as a threat to humanity...

AI-infused humans: Elon Musk wants to create a hard drive for our brai..."

I had aliens doing that in one of my novels. Plagiarism!!!

Iain wrote: "The part that's pertains the most to consciousness and AI starts at 1hr 11mins in

3 hr Discussion On Metaphysics (Sheldrake, Dennet, Tyson, Toulmin, Sacks, Gould, Kayzer)

http://www.youtube.com/w..."

Thanks mate, will check it out sometime.

Joe Rogan - Will A.I. Be Peaceful? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU9f-...

How about (trans)humans vs AI?

Is anyone who is predicting AI will supersede humanity in every way and therefore replace humans, factoring in transhumanism?

Transhumanism (abbreviated as H+ or h+) is an international philosophical movement that advocates for the transformation of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies to greatly enhance human intellect and physiology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhu...

So much fascinating thought here, I wish I could spend an hour and more pondering it now, but I must come back later :( What a rich seam of thought this is though and, very interestingly to me, the implications go far beyond the discussion of AI into areas that (imho) are well overdue for serious consideration by us humans (since we somewhat innocently began our very recent experiments involving the birth of cities, science, and a civilisation with an insidious backstory.) ;) All very heartening, back as soon as I can be!

sounds interesting. will check it out.
youtu.be/ORvJko4pqWQ
youtu.be/ORvJko4pqWQ via @YouTube

I don't think it's going to happen. Robots will be powerful but there is a God and it won't happen.

Yusuf_BigfootHunter wrote: "I don't think it's going to happen. Robots will be powerful but there is a God and it won't happen."

I don't think God is related to robots and AI - anymore than God is related to bigfoot. It's a neutral technology (albeit one that carries risks) and it's how humanity uses it that will determine if it's good or evil.

Could AI take control of human birth? https://theconversation.com/could-ai-...

And now for the flip side...

AS instead of AI...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artific...
Artificial stupidity is a phrase most commonly used as a humorous retort to the notion of artificial intelligence (AI). It is a derogatory reference to the inability of an AI program to adequately perform basic tasks.[1] The term has appeared in connection with other subject areas, mostly related to computing technology but also with respect to human behaviour.

Is Musk in danger of becoming what he's resisting?

Iain wrote: "So unless they can figure out how to mass produce consciousness, and to do that scientists first need to figure out what the hell is consciousness, then I think whatever AI's equivalent of intellect is, it won't be competition for human creativity or our unique ingenuity..."

I think its fair to ask, if we don't know what the hell consciousness is (and it seems likely this is true), and if (for this reason amongst others) we don't know the link between 'consciousness' and creativity... then how can we be in any way sure that AI cannot develop conciousness, or be creative? It also seems like we might have have little idea of how 'consciousness' might be engendered?