[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 84 KB, 750x326, Etruscans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9752786 No.9752786 [Reply] [Original]

If at some point in the future more than half of all the intellectual work in the world is being done by conscious AI such as inventing new technologies, long term planning, policy making, creation of art and entertainment, etc., would that point mark the end of human civilization?

>> No.9754639

As long as man kind is in control then, I wouldn't consider it as the end of human civilization. Unless we were to share this planet with them as a other species we created? Then it's a sharing type thing, both parties working to achieve survival in the universe. But of course the Homo Sapiens would just be bystanders to a superior race.

>> No.9755258

Probably but you're thinking in too small of terms. Human-inhabited areas are always going to be dominated by human-designed and human-sized structures because that's how humans operate.

Where an "AI" (or really just a self-replicating machine) comes into play is far out in space where it's building solar fields, strip mines, mass drivers and other massive devices on it's own. But this isn't really civilization insomuch as it is a factory in space.

>> No.9755284

>>9752786
No, I doubt AI will be able to innovate.

>> No.9756082

>>9754639
>But of course the Homo Sapiens would just be bystanders to a superior race.
Any other homo sapiens besides me who think that might be a bad thing?
>>9755258
>Human-inhabited areas are always going to be dominated by human-designed and human-sized structures because that's how humans operate.
Why would it be human designed if AI can create more efficient, aesthetic, cheaper designs faster? And taking up more space wouldn't keep humans intellectually relevant.

>> No.9756146

>>9756082

>Why would it be human designed if AI can create more efficient, aesthetic, cheaper designs faster?

The Soviet Union tried that. Result: endless commieblocks that are constantly melting apart. Also because they were spaced too far apart for parking they have awful ped access.

>And taking up more space wouldn't keep humans intellectually relevant.

Not when it exists to serve them.

>> No.9756158
File: 436 KB, 1930x1276, 1523333476992.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9756158

>>9752786
Predictions for when AI will exceed human intelligence
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.08807.pdf

>> No.9756161
File: 281 KB, 1394x1490, 1523333592371.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9756161

>>9752786
More AI predictions

Also relevant:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=camNEJe6zEk

>> No.9756183

>>9755284
Found the popscience retard.

>> No.9756213

>>9752786
Yo guys can I pick a random function and publish papers about how this is how AI is gonna develop? It seems like that's a viable career path now.

>> No.9756456

>>9755284
Then how do humans innovate? Do you think creativity is somehow supernatural?

>> No.9756464

>>9752786
This will happen but not with machines, Biological AI is the future.

>> No.9756975

>>9756146
>The Soviet Union tried that. Result: endless commieblocks
That's why I mentioned aesthetics. I'm talking about an intelligence that can match that of the brightest humans and exceed it, and recognize why commieblocks suck.
>Not when it exists to serve them.
We build tigers their enclosures and serve them meat. Humans may not be physically restrained in this way but intellectually. You wouldn't be able to occupy any positions of competence in society even if you wanted, because there's an AI system in place that does it better. You may want to practice some art in your new-found spare time, but no one would ever be interested in seeing it, except maybe for your close friends and relatives, because there's an AI that can serve us a masterpiece version in a matter of seconds.

>> No.9756979

It would be a soft transfer of power as humans evolve beyond biological computing.

>> No.9756984

>>9755284
Of course it will. It will have the entire sum of knowledge at its disposal.

>> No.9757010

>>9756975
the quality of art is insufficient, the art would only be popular if people believed it came from a human

>> No.9757123

>>9757010
Why wouldn't artists use AI to aid them in the creative process, knowing that their artwork could be better? How would you know the difference between a story written by an AI and one written by a human? What would prevent people from lying about authorship, or saturating the market with art that came from AI? If you're attracted to smart quality entertainment wouldn't you naturally consume more non-human art?

>> No.9757125

>>9752786
>AI creating taseful, complex art
Doubt.png

>> No.9759083

>>9757125
why not?

>> No.9759086

>>9757123
>>9759083

i wonder if an A.I. could come up with a good story without having the same experiences as people though which is rich and takes many years and involves emotions which i think an A.I. might find difficult to relate.

>> No.9759102

not science or math

>> No.9759106

>>9759086
nigga did you even went to MoMA

>> No.9759127

>>9759086
You do realize that ai already produced haiku and classical music that not only is indistinguishable from its human made counter parts, but has even fooled the most prestigious classical musicians into thinking it was human over the human made pieces. This has been done. It's literally available for you right now with the click of a button on Google.


Move on.