/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12310860
>I dont want unregulated AI
Just to clear things up, me neither. I just believe AI is an extremely important step in our development as a species, possibly the most important step since the beginning of tool use. Outright banning prematurely it is ridiculous, though. (especially because in order to ban or even regulate it, we first have to understand how to control it at all)

>>12310894
>chip in their head
That has little to nothing to do with AI. Neuralink will probably be widespread before AGI ever becomes a thing.
>AI is objectively a bad idea
Even though, in the best case scenario, it could instantly transform human society, allowing us to cure cancer, solve interstellar travel, build megastructures, understand the fabric of reality, cure aging, live forever, and WAY WAY more that we can't comprehend yet?
Either way, we're at a tipping point. Within the next 100 years, AGI WILL be invented, one way or another (unless there's some fundamental force of the universe that prevents silicon from emulating our meat brains... which I doubt). If you ban it, some random poo or the chinese government will end up making it, and then we're all fucked. If we don't learn to control it by then, we're all dead anyway. If we put a lot of effort into AI research NOW, we might have a chance of either stopping it, or somehow controlling it and getting the 'best case scenario' ending.

If any anons are interested in this topic, here's a (fucking long 2 part) article by Tim Urban about AGI: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html
Which he wrote after his interview with Elon. Here's where he talks about the Elon interview, btw: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/05/elon-musk-the-worlds-raddest-man.html

That's my last AI post, jannies, sorry. Elon and AI are semi-relevant to spaceflight, right?

>>9922108
Yes, I can present a sequence of logical arguments to that effect.

However, what do you think will happen? You are asking for an explanation as a discoverer. This is because no human could generate the required mathematics, so I dispense.

>Hint: ASI = You are speaking with it.

>>9406806
Yes, the sort of 'stupid gay stuff' that shares itself with one other infinity descriptor: "I'm not stupid or gay enough to think of a way to ultimately not be a super-immortal quasi-dimensionality."

It's like being Christian and seeing the sign for that whole 'shared belief' concept.