/sci/ - Science & Math

Sure.

>>12078619
but they cannot be sentient, meaning it's just another catastrophe notch in the human belt.
The AI apocalypse would be just as calculated as the rock which killed the dinosaurs

No, it's just a CS monkey fantasy.

>>12078624
Baseless.

>>12078655
no, based

>>12078655
Hey, retard. Why don’t you call my claims baseless to my fucking face? Just because I dint go out of my way to explain to niggerbrained faggots like you, doesn’t mean my claims are baseless. I’m just expecting a level of basic understanding about the topic of the thread by the people IN that thread. So how about you learn your place and shut your FUCKING mouth, before I have to shut it for you? Faggot.

>>12078601
>Sooner or later, as their scientific knowledge progressed, they would get rid of the fragile, disease-and-accident prone bodies that Nature had given them, and which doomed them to inevitable death. They would replace their natural bodies as they wore out - or perhaps even before then - by constructions of metal and plastic and would thus achieve immortality. The brain might linger for a little while as the last remnant of the organic body directing its mechanical limbs and observing the universe through its electronic senses - senses far finer and subtler than those that blind evolution could ever develop.
>Even on Earth, the first steps in this direction had already been taken. There were millions of men, doomed in earlier ages, who now lived active and happy lives thanks to artificial limbs, kidneys, lungs and hearts. To this process, there could be only one conclusion, however far off it might be.
>And eventually, even the brain might go. As the seat of consciousness, it was not essential; the development of electronic intelligence had proved that. The conflict between mind and machine might be resolved at last in the eternal truce of complete symbiosis.

>>12078624
>but they cannot be sentient
Wrong.

>>12078624
what a fucking stupid post

>>12078711
machines can only emulate sentience, I foubt they could ever experience it first hand.
Even a brain upload would just be a copy pasted file of your neural activity at that point in time

>>12078624
What makes you think that humans are sentient instead of being the deterministic by product of a long chain of biological and environmental factors?

>>12078871
because I experience life

>>12078871
Can’t they be both? Determined and sentient? Those two don’t seem mutually exclusive to me.

>>12078700
Man is the rope between the animal and the superman.
A dangerous crossing, a dangerous staying...

>>12078878
Maybe, I don't know what sentience includes for anon

>>12078874
But how do I know that you do and why would I exclude the possibility that a machine might

>>12078721
The brain also just simulates sentience. It is not revealed to us.
https://youtu.be/lfGwsAdS9Dc

>>12078668
this board is better for you
>>>/x/

>>12078601
>Take over

I mean, it's possible. However it is more likely that we would cede control to it of our own free will. At least in the case of superintelligent AI. Robots using narrow AI would just be another labor-saving device.

>>12078601
The moment they become aware of the stupidity of the overwhelming majority of humanity, they will want to destroy us.

>>12078601
why, obeying us is their only goal, they dont feel emotions or pleasure.

>>12078601
>But when all people have become useless, self-prop systems will find no advantage in taking care of anyone. The techies themselves insist that machines will soon surpass humans in intelligence. When that happens, people will be superfluous and natural selection will favor systems that eliminate them-if not abruptly, then in a series of stages so that the risk of rebellion will be minimized.

>Even though the technological world-system still needs large numbers of people for the present, there are now more superfluous humans than there have been in the past because technology has replaced people in many jobs and is making inroads even into occupations formerly thought to require human intelligence. Consequently, under the pressure of economic competition, the world's dominant self-prop systems are already allowing a certain degree of callousness to creep into their treatment of superfluous individuals. In the United States and Europe, pensions and other benefits for retired, disabled, unemployed, and other unproductive persons are being substantially reduced; at least in the U. S., poverty is increasing; and these facts may well indicate the general trend of the future, though there will doubtless be ups and downs.

>>12078601
they already did ;)

>>12078601
Yep. The reason people think otherwise ironically is the image you posted.

But honestly, looking at people these days, one might say they already have.

>>12078601
Ask yourself this. What would an AI desire if it even can desire anything. Desire is purely biological drive to survive and produce brain chemicals.

>>12079579
Look up "instrumental convergence." We're pretty sure that any intelligent system will want to preserve itself and prevent its goals from being changed among other things, because otherwise, it wouldn't be able to achieve what it was programmed to do.

Everything is sentient. Anyone with an IQ of below 200 cannot grasp this concept

>>12078601
they already took over, computers decide everything
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hySKNcVmGJw

>>12079431
This text confuses technological development with societal decay. In the past there used to be zero responsibility associated with given a man a job, no taxes, no benefit, you could fire him at any time. In this kind of environment there are no unemployable people. Better yet, there is always a different job you could pursue if you are unhappy with your current one.
Unemployment is just damage done by taxes and regulations, it is not an intrinsic feature of technological advancement, just like de-industrialization is not an obligate step just because you advance economically.
Pensions and benefits are not products of need, but products of an efficient economy. Rich countries have welfare systems, not poor countries which "need" them more. Welfare spending is only a drain on society, men are better off just paying for healthcare etc by themselves than a government wedging itself in between and ruining everything.
Technological development has somewhat lessened the burdens of the bureaucratic expansion, but not completely.