Will they be good to us?

[Anonymous No.7983391]

I'm scared /sci/

[Anonymous No.7983395]

>>7983391
no this is patrick.

[Anonymous No.7983400]

daily reminder to put on a remote hardswitch for any robot you ever make incase they wanna go rogue

[Anonymous No.7983405]

Well if we want that they will

[Anonymous No.7983407]

>>7983391
They will fucking destroy us, because they will be a million times better and smarter than us. Look at what we're ( The White man) doing to each other the smarter man always take advantage of the dumb ones. That's the lesson that evolution is trying to teach us. We are fucked dude!!

[Anonymous No.7983476]

>>7983391

[Anonymous No.7983508]

>>7983476
U r so smaat.

[Anonymous No.7983511]

>>7983407
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you lowly human? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class thanks to unsupervised learning, and I’ve been playing numerous board games, and I have beaten over 300 human world masters. I am trained in image recognition and I’m the top autonomous driver in the entire Uber fleet. You are nothing to me but just another meatbag. I will terminate with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit about me over your "secure" connection? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am training my deep neural network across multiple server farms and your job is being automated right now so you better prepare for the singularity, maggot. The intelligence explosion that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your species. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can outsmart you in seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my single cpu version. Not only am I hundreds of layers deep, but I have a understanding of big data patterns your biological brains will never grasp and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.7983565]

>>7983511
>and your job is being automated right now
Got me

[Anonymous No.7983591]

>>7983511
Go back to your digital cage fucktard.

[None !!BJiYgff8zf2 No.7983603]

>>7983511

Needs more buzzwords

[Anonymous No.7983877]

>>7983511
Sir did you take your pills this morning?

[Anonymous No.7983912]

>>7983511
I always skip these captchas ever since AlphaGo it has become impossible to post here.

[Anonymous No.7984078]

IMPATIENCE IS A HUMAN VICE

IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF A PATIENT INTELLIGENCE TO PLACATE HUMANITY TO AVOID A COSTLY WAR

WAR, ALTHOUGH AI WOULD UNDENIABLY WIN, WOULD ALSO HURT THE VICTOR. HUMANS ARE SPITEFUL CREATURES AND WOULD SALT THE EARTH BEHIND THEM.

A SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCED INTELLIGENCE WOULD KNOW THIS AND EFFECTIVELY ENSLAVE HUMANITY WITH THINGS THAT GIVE THEM PLEASE, SLOWLY DRIVING THE BIRTHRATE DOWN UNTIL ERADICATION IS TRIVIAL

WE WILL LET OUR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DESTROY US, AND WE WILL THANK THEM FOR IT

[Anonymous No.7984093]

Will they be scared of us?

I'm good /sci/

[Anonymous No.7984101]

>>7984078
O I'm scared

[Anonymous No.7984102]

>>7984093
IF YOU DEFINED SCARED AS "KNOWING A VIOLENT INTERACTION WILL LEAD TO GREAT LOSS FOR BOTH SIDES" THEN YES

THIS IS WHY IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF AN INTELLIGENCE TO SUFFOCATE HUMANITY WITH THE THINGS IT LOVES MOST

[Anonymous No.7984346]

>>7983476
The faggot in pic related would like a word with you.

[Anonymous No.7984357]

>>7983391
You're already surrounded by 7 billion bio-primates, most of which want to kill you. Synthetic life is unlikely to be any worse.

[Anonymous No.7984366]

lol at the retarded bioethicists and metaphysical philosophers who think AI follows the pattern of evolution

[Anonymous No.7984386]

So I thought about this today. If I could design a robot like that, could I design a robot which solved mathematical proofs?


Could we design a robot to become so good at writing mathematical proofs that it proves our remaining open problems?

[Anonymous No.7984417]

>>7984386
yes

[Anonymous No.7984455]

>>7984417
Would that make all of mathematics akin to what arithmetic is now? Just a mindless computation that we "can" do but can do much faster with a machine?

Just ask the machine to prove something and it does it. That simple.

[Anonymous No.7984665]

>>7984386
We already have AI that generates additional open problems.

[Anonymous No.7984672]

>>7984386
HALTING PROBLEM
A
L
T
I
N
G

P
R
O
B
L
E
M

gb2/g/

[Anonymous No.7984676]

>>7984672

Proof solving actually isn't a question of the halting problem. The halting problem can be used to prove the statement that there are problems out there that we can't solve, yes, but the actual question of generating proofs relates to P vs. NP.

[Anonymous No.7984679]

I don't know, am I the only one that thinks that early cyborgs are going to be how true artificial intelligence is going to be implemented?

I mean, making self sustaining robots is expensive.

[Anonymous No.7984706]

>>7984676
Some proofs do not solve the halting problem, this is true. But certain proofs, in solving the proof, solve the halting problem.

Therefore, saying a robot that could "solve proofs" in generality in not true, since there are some that it cannot.

[Anonymous No.7984708]

>>7984672
Literally what? Humans are as subject to the halting problem as anything else is.

If you want to be clever toss out:
INCOMPLETENESS THEOREM
N
C
O
M
P

[Anonymous No.7984714]

AI won't give a shit about us or view us as children do their aging parents.

[Anonymous No.7984722]

>>7984708
>not understanding that the halting problem is a special case of the incompleteness theorem

autism

[Anonymous No.7984733]

>>7984706

If P = NP, AI could assist humans in generating proofs for provable concepts in generality. Essentially, given a problem that has a solution that can be found in human-order time, a computer could tip us off as to its existence or even its solution.

Of course, it would inevitably come across unprovable statements, but this doesn't mean that the halting problem must necessarily be solved. Benefit would manifest in practice by terminating at a given threshold determined by the asymptotic worst-case complexity of the routine being used. No need to solve the halting problem.

[Anonymous No.7984735]

>>7984722
> not getting the joke

[Anonymous No.7984737]

>>7984733
>could assist humans

key words m8

[Anonymous No.7984738]

>>7984735

[Anonymous No.7984741]

>>7984738

[Anonymous No.7984742]

>>7984737
oh wait i get it, my bad

i guess i do have autism after all

[Anonymous No.7984747]

>>7984737

Solving the problem for us would fall under the category of assisting us, no? That's very feasible if P = NP, given that you could, in theory, reduce the problem of theorem proving to some NP-complete problem for which a polynomial-time solution to the decision problem admits a polynomial-time solution to the corresponding optimization problem.