Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am
Age wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:18 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm

Why do you use the phrase "you human beings" so much?
So, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, future readers will SEE that it did NOT matter how MANY times thee ACTUAL Truth is being told, to 'you', human beings, if 'you' BELIEVE otherwise, then 'you' STILL can NOT SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth IS. And, so because SO MUCH irrefutable Fact will exist, then this will provide MORE PROOF of WHY it is BETTER for EVERY one if, and when, BELIEFS are NEVER being HELD NOR MAINTAINED.
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm Are you not a human being yourself?
The 'you' here, from the Truly objective viewpoint, is 'a human being'. So, what 'you' are essentially asking, to ANOTHER human being, is, "Are 'you', a human being, not a human being? Which is nonsensical.

Also, when, and if, 'you' ever come to learning and understanding who and what the 'I' is, for example in the question, 'Who am 'I'?', who and what the 'you' is, who and what the 'human being' is, and who and what the 'person' is, then 'you' will begin to make far more sense out of all of this as well as understand the misnomer "yourself" also.
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm Or are you some sort of AI? An alien from another planet? Some other intelligent Earth-based species like a dolphin?
I will put it this way, for you; before 'you', human beings, came/evolved into existence what was 'it' called, exactly, which 'you', human beings, evolved/came from?

Now, do 'you', a human being, envision that 'you', human beings, will continue on either forever, or until your demise, or is it possible that 'human beings' could just be one part, of many parts, along an evolving or evolutionary path towards Knowing thy 'Self'?

If 'you' can envision that this could be a possibility, then can 'you' imagine that their is some 'Intelligence' somehow involved within ALL-OF-THIS somehow, and which, through evolution, is just coming to Know Its/thy Self, and 'you', human beings' are just a part along this continually evolving pathway?

If 'you' can imagine this, then just like EVERY thing else human beings have come to learn and KNOW there are obviously some who learn, understand, and/or KNOW some things before the rest do.

Now, OBVIOUSLY, NO human being is more NOR less 'intelligent' than "another human being" is. But, what is just as OBVIOUS is the Fact that 'we' ALL come to learn, understand, and KNOW DIFFERENT things, at DIFFERENT times.

Also, your use of the word 'Or' here was illogical in the context which you used it, but anyway, thank you for the CLARIFYING QUESTION. Those questions are VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Although I may NOT have provided 'you' with the ACTUAL answer 'you' were looking for and wanting, what I am essentially saying is when, and if, 'you' also come to Know thy Self, then ALL-OF-THIS will make PERFECT SENSE.
Age, when a person says, "human being" we are usually referring to other people. That's all.
But if I was to ask 'you', 'What is a 'person'?' then what would your answer be?

And, if your answer would be, "A human being", then I could ask 'you', 'What is a 'human being?' And around and around 'you' would go. But, if AND when 'you' are able to answer these questions, properly ANY correctly, then 'you' will UNDERSTAND WHY it is 'you', human beings, and persons, that are STILL SEEKING ANSWERS.

But, if that is NOT what your answer would be, then what would your answer be?

Also, I could asked 'you' to clarifying who and/or what does the 'we' word above refer to, EXACTLY? As well as POINT OUT by asking, 'Why when 'we' (who ever or what ever that is referring to) says, "human being" those ones are usually referring to OTHER people and NOT to "them" 'self'? See, what 'you' claimed above, by the way you said and wrote it, when the one who says, "human being", they are NOT, usually, referring to "their own" 'self', so why is this? I could have also made note of if this saying, "human being", 'usually' is referring to "other people", then what EXACTLY is being referred to at the other times?
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am If you think you're not a member of the human species, then I'd just like to know what group you belong to or think you belong to?
'you' STILL FAILED, COMPLETELY and UTTERLY, to SEE and UNDERSTAND what I was ACTUALLY saying, AND MEANING, by the WORDS that I ACTUALLY USED, which were VERY CLEAR written, on the screen in front of that human body.

LOOK, if you are NOT going to pose and ask CLARIFYING QUESTIONS to "others", from the Truly OPEN perspective, then you will NEVER completely understand what the "other" is saying, AND MEANING. This is THE MESSAGE that I have been CLEARLY EXPRESSING throughout this forum. And, 'you' can take it or leave it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am It's not a rocket science question. It's a very straightforward common sense question. Otherwise, I think your being rather unnecessarily abstruse. LIke you're just struggling to find something to disagree with others about when there is no need to.
LOL
LOL
LOL

ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE here of ASSUMING, AT WORK.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am Join humanity! We're here right in front of you waiting for you to talk sensibly to us.
LOL 'you' are JOKING, RIGHT?

Have you ever REALLY just STOPPED and LOOKED at the WAY 'you', adult human beings, talk to "each other"?

When 'you' do, would you REALLY consider that 'talking sensibly'?
Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm
Age wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 3:37 am
commonsense wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 4:06 pm

Unless an AI has been programmed to allow for its demise, it will continue to execute whatever it has programmed itself to do. No further motivation is necessary. It will dutifully conserve its existence.
So, if an "artificial intelligence machine" was programmed to say NEVER destroy OR harm human beings in the first place, then there would NEVER be ANY thing to worry about, correct?
commonsense wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 4:06 pm An AI might find itself in competition with humans for energy or even find humans to be a source of energy. Humans beware!
An "artificial intelligence" might also do ANY number of OTHER things.

If 'I' was 'you', human beings, then 'I' would be MORE concerned and worried about the "competition" that 'you' are creating for "your own selves", which 'you' find 'yourselves" in now, when this is being written.
Why do you use the phrase "you human beings" so much?
I also use the phrase, 'you', adult human beings, quite often (or 'so much') as well.

What could this mean or refer to, to you?

And what does this ACTUALLY mean and refer to, to you?
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm Are you not a human being yourself? Or are you some sort of AI? An alien from another planet? Some other intelligent Earth-based species like a dolphin?
Do you think about these things, or would you ask these exact same questions, if you were questioning me about my frequent use of the phrase, 'you', adult human beings,?
Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

commonsense wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:43 pm
Age wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:18 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm

Why do you use the phrase "you human beings" so much?
So, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, future readers will SEE that it did NOT matter how MANY times thee ACTUAL Truth is being told, to 'you', human beings, if 'you' BELIEVE otherwise, then 'you' STILL can NOT SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth IS. And, so because SO MUCH irrefutable Fact will exist, then this will provide MORE PROOF of WHY it is BETTER for EVERY one if, and when, BELIEFS are NEVER being HELD NOR MAINTAINED.
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm Are you not a human being yourself?
The 'you' here, from the Truly objective viewpoint, is 'a human being'. So, what 'you' are essentially asking, to ANOTHER human being, is, "Are 'you', a human being, not a human being? Which is nonsensical.

Also, when, and if, 'you' ever come to learning and understanding who and what the 'I' is, for example in the question, 'Who am 'I'?', who and what the 'you' is, who and what the 'human being' is, and who and what the 'person' is, then 'you' will begin to make far more sense out of all of this as well as understand the misnomer "yourself" also.
Gary Childress wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:53 pm Or are you some sort of AI? An alien from another planet? Some other intelligent Earth-based species like a dolphin?
I will put it this way, for you; before 'you', human beings, came/evolved into existence what was 'it' called, exactly, which 'you', human beings, evolved/came from?

Now, do 'you', a human being, envision that 'you', human beings, will continue on either forever, or until your demise, or is it possible that 'human beings' could just be one part, of many parts, along an evolving or evolutionary path towards Knowing thy 'Self'?

If 'you' can envision that this could be a possibility, then can 'you' imagine that their is some 'Intelligence' somehow involved within ALL-OF-THIS somehow, and which, through evolution, is just coming to Know Its/thy Self, and 'you', human beings' are just a part along this continually evolving pathway?

If 'you' can imagine this, then just like EVERY thing else human beings have come to learn and KNOW there are obviously some who learn, understand, and/or KNOW some things before the rest do.

Now, OBVIOUSLY, NO human being is more NOR less 'intelligent' than "another human being" is. But, what is just as OBVIOUS is the Fact that 'we' ALL come to learn, understand, and KNOW DIFFERENT things, at DIFFERENT times.

Also, your use of the word 'Or' here was illogical in the context which you used it, but anyway, thank you for the CLARIFYING QUESTION. Those questions are VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Although I may NOT have provided 'you' with the ACTUAL answer 'you' were looking for and wanting, what I am essentially saying is when, and if, 'you' also come to Know thy Self, then ALL-OF-THIS will make PERFECT SENSE.
Age,

You must realize that your reply above portrays you as not being of sound mind.
Is there ANY thing in particular, or just the WHOLE LOT, of the above?

Is there ANY thing AT AL you would like to mention, and DISCUSS, from the above?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then that is SAD to SEE and WITNESS.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8535
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Sculptor »

socrat44 wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:58 am Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI
/ by DAVID NIELD, 5 NOVEMBER 2021 /
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for many decades,
and in January 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level
computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.
------
The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require
a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze. But if we're unable to comprehend it,
it's impossible to create such a simulation.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer
scientist Manuel Cebrian, from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development.
"But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently
without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

"The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become
uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."

https://www.sciencealert.com/calculatio ... UkCpvwMITo
It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
PULL HERE
PULL HERE
plug.JPG (17.93 KiB) Viewed 1224 times
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Gary Childress »

Age wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:05 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am
Age wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:18 pm

So, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, future readers will SEE that it did NOT matter how MANY times thee ACTUAL Truth is being told, to 'you', human beings, if 'you' BELIEVE otherwise, then 'you' STILL can NOT SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth IS. And, so because SO MUCH irrefutable Fact will exist, then this will provide MORE PROOF of WHY it is BETTER for EVERY one if, and when, BELIEFS are NEVER being HELD NOR MAINTAINED.


The 'you' here, from the Truly objective viewpoint, is 'a human being'. So, what 'you' are essentially asking, to ANOTHER human being, is, "Are 'you', a human being, not a human being? Which is nonsensical.

Also, when, and if, 'you' ever come to learning and understanding who and what the 'I' is, for example in the question, 'Who am 'I'?', who and what the 'you' is, who and what the 'human being' is, and who and what the 'person' is, then 'you' will begin to make far more sense out of all of this as well as understand the misnomer "yourself" also.


I will put it this way, for you; before 'you', human beings, came/evolved into existence what was 'it' called, exactly, which 'you', human beings, evolved/came from?

Now, do 'you', a human being, envision that 'you', human beings, will continue on either forever, or until your demise, or is it possible that 'human beings' could just be one part, of many parts, along an evolving or evolutionary path towards Knowing thy 'Self'?

If 'you' can envision that this could be a possibility, then can 'you' imagine that their is some 'Intelligence' somehow involved within ALL-OF-THIS somehow, and which, through evolution, is just coming to Know Its/thy Self, and 'you', human beings' are just a part along this continually evolving pathway?

If 'you' can imagine this, then just like EVERY thing else human beings have come to learn and KNOW there are obviously some who learn, understand, and/or KNOW some things before the rest do.

Now, OBVIOUSLY, NO human being is more NOR less 'intelligent' than "another human being" is. But, what is just as OBVIOUS is the Fact that 'we' ALL come to learn, understand, and KNOW DIFFERENT things, at DIFFERENT times.

Also, your use of the word 'Or' here was illogical in the context which you used it, but anyway, thank you for the CLARIFYING QUESTION. Those questions are VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Although I may NOT have provided 'you' with the ACTUAL answer 'you' were looking for and wanting, what I am essentially saying is when, and if, 'you' also come to Know thy Self, then ALL-OF-THIS will make PERFECT SENSE.
Age, when a person says, "human being" we are usually referring to other people. That's all.
But if I was to ask 'you', 'What is a 'person'?' then what would your answer be?

And, if your answer would be, "A human being", then I could ask 'you', 'What is a 'human being?' And around and around 'you' would go. But, if AND when 'you' are able to answer these questions, properly ANY correctly, then 'you' will UNDERSTAND WHY it is 'you', human beings, and persons, that are STILL SEEKING ANSWERS.

But, if that is NOT what your answer would be, then what would your answer be?

Also, I could asked 'you' to clarifying who and/or what does the 'we' word above refer to, EXACTLY? As well as POINT OUT by asking, 'Why when 'we' (who ever or what ever that is referring to) says, "human being" those ones are usually referring to OTHER people and NOT to "them" 'self'? See, what 'you' claimed above, by the way you said and wrote it, when the one who says, "human being", they are NOT, usually, referring to "their own" 'self', so why is this? I could have also made note of if this saying, "human being", 'usually' is referring to "other people", then what EXACTLY is being referred to at the other times?
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am If you think you're not a member of the human species, then I'd just like to know what group you belong to or think you belong to?
'you' STILL FAILED, COMPLETELY and UTTERLY, to SEE and UNDERSTAND what I was ACTUALLY saying, AND MEANING, by the WORDS that I ACTUALLY USED, which were VERY CLEAR written, on the screen in front of that human body.

LOOK, if you are NOT going to pose and ask CLARIFYING QUESTIONS to "others", from the Truly OPEN perspective, then you will NEVER completely understand what the "other" is saying, AND MEANING. This is THE MESSAGE that I have been CLEARLY EXPRESSING throughout this forum. And, 'you' can take it or leave it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am It's not a rocket science question. It's a very straightforward common sense question. Otherwise, I think your being rather unnecessarily abstruse. LIke you're just struggling to find something to disagree with others about when there is no need to.
LOL
LOL
LOL

ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE here of ASSUMING, AT WORK.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am Join humanity! We're here right in front of you waiting for you to talk sensibly to us.
LOL 'you' are JOKING, RIGHT?

Have you ever REALLY just STOPPED and LOOKED at the WAY 'you', adult human beings, talk to "each other"?

When 'you' do, would you REALLY consider that 'talking sensibly'?
Yeah. Just trying to help you, Age. You're kind of stubborn I see, though. Maybe when you grow up you'll grow a little wiser, at least one hopes.
Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

Gary Childress wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 1:17 am
Age wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:05 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am

Age, when a person says, "human being" we are usually referring to other people. That's all.
But if I was to ask 'you', 'What is a 'person'?' then what would your answer be?

And, if your answer would be, "A human being", then I could ask 'you', 'What is a 'human being?' And around and around 'you' would go. But, if AND when 'you' are able to answer these questions, properly ANY correctly, then 'you' will UNDERSTAND WHY it is 'you', human beings, and persons, that are STILL SEEKING ANSWERS.

But, if that is NOT what your answer would be, then what would your answer be?

Also, I could asked 'you' to clarifying who and/or what does the 'we' word above refer to, EXACTLY? As well as POINT OUT by asking, 'Why when 'we' (who ever or what ever that is referring to) says, "human being" those ones are usually referring to OTHER people and NOT to "them" 'self'? See, what 'you' claimed above, by the way you said and wrote it, when the one who says, "human being", they are NOT, usually, referring to "their own" 'self', so why is this? I could have also made note of if this saying, "human being", 'usually' is referring to "other people", then what EXACTLY is being referred to at the other times?
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am If you think you're not a member of the human species, then I'd just like to know what group you belong to or think you belong to?
'you' STILL FAILED, COMPLETELY and UTTERLY, to SEE and UNDERSTAND what I was ACTUALLY saying, AND MEANING, by the WORDS that I ACTUALLY USED, which were VERY CLEAR written, on the screen in front of that human body.

LOOK, if you are NOT going to pose and ask CLARIFYING QUESTIONS to "others", from the Truly OPEN perspective, then you will NEVER completely understand what the "other" is saying, AND MEANING. This is THE MESSAGE that I have been CLEARLY EXPRESSING throughout this forum. And, 'you' can take it or leave it.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am It's not a rocket science question. It's a very straightforward common sense question. Otherwise, I think your being rather unnecessarily abstruse. LIke you're just struggling to find something to disagree with others about when there is no need to.
LOL
LOL
LOL

ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE here of ASSUMING, AT WORK.
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:21 am Join humanity! We're here right in front of you waiting for you to talk sensibly to us.
LOL 'you' are JOKING, RIGHT?

Have you ever REALLY just STOPPED and LOOKED at the WAY 'you', adult human beings, talk to "each other"?

When 'you' do, would you REALLY consider that 'talking sensibly'?
Yeah. Just trying to help you, Age. You're kind of stubborn I see, though. Maybe when you grow up you'll grow a little wiser, at least one hopes.
And whilst thee 'I' is evolving 'It' comes to KNOW 'Itself' MORE.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by commonsense »

Age wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:44 pm
commonsense wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:43 pm
Age wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:18 pm

So, when this is FULLY UNDERSTOOD, future readers will SEE that it did NOT matter how MANY times thee ACTUAL Truth is being told, to 'you', human beings, if 'you' BELIEVE otherwise, then 'you' STILL can NOT SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth IS. And, so because SO MUCH irrefutable Fact will exist, then this will provide MORE PROOF of WHY it is BETTER for EVERY one if, and when, BELIEFS are NEVER being HELD NOR MAINTAINED.


The 'you' here, from the Truly objective viewpoint, is 'a human being'. So, what 'you' are essentially asking, to ANOTHER human being, is, "Are 'you', a human being, not a human being? Which is nonsensical.

Also, when, and if, 'you' ever come to learning and understanding who and what the 'I' is, for example in the question, 'Who am 'I'?', who and what the 'you' is, who and what the 'human being' is, and who and what the 'person' is, then 'you' will begin to make far more sense out of all of this as well as understand the misnomer "yourself" also.


I will put it this way, for you; before 'you', human beings, came/evolved into existence what was 'it' called, exactly, which 'you', human beings, evolved/came from?

Now, do 'you', a human being, envision that 'you', human beings, will continue on either forever, or until your demise, or is it possible that 'human beings' could just be one part, of many parts, along an evolving or evolutionary path towards Knowing thy 'Self'?

If 'you' can envision that this could be a possibility, then can 'you' imagine that their is some 'Intelligence' somehow involved within ALL-OF-THIS somehow, and which, through evolution, is just coming to Know Its/thy Self, and 'you', human beings' are just a part along this continually evolving pathway?

If 'you' can imagine this, then just like EVERY thing else human beings have come to learn and KNOW there are obviously some who learn, understand, and/or KNOW some things before the rest do.

Now, OBVIOUSLY, NO human being is more NOR less 'intelligent' than "another human being" is. But, what is just as OBVIOUS is the Fact that 'we' ALL come to learn, understand, and KNOW DIFFERENT things, at DIFFERENT times.

Also, your use of the word 'Or' here was illogical in the context which you used it, but anyway, thank you for the CLARIFYING QUESTION. Those questions are VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Although I may NOT have provided 'you' with the ACTUAL answer 'you' were looking for and wanting, what I am essentially saying is when, and if, 'you' also come to Know thy Self, then ALL-OF-THIS will make PERFECT SENSE.
Age,

You must realize that your reply above portrays you as not being of sound mind.
Your ASSUMPTION was Wrong. But, anyway, I do 'now' realize that this is what has been portrayed, well to you.

Now, if absolutely ANY one wants to CHALLENGE me on ANY or ALL of the above, then please feel absolutely FREE to do so. That way who is ACTUALLY of sound or unsound thinking can be and WILL BE CLEARLY SEEN. Also, if absolutely ANY one wants to gain clarity and thus make better sense of the above, then also please absolutely FREE to just ask some clarifying questions, that is; from the Truly OPEN perspective, ONLY.

And, for those who say the above is from one of "not being of sound mind", then I just ask them to explain what a 'mind' IS, EXACTLY, which could even, purportedly, be of 'unsoundness'?

If ANY one is NOT able to do this or they do NOT do this, then it is them who is REVEALING who is Truly unsound.

(If one talks about "others", as though they are "not being of sound mind", but that one does NOT even KNOW what the 'mind' is, EXACTLY, reveals more about them than it does the "others". For surely to CLAIM an "other" is "not being of sound mind", then that one MUST KNOW, and be able to explain, what the 'mind' or what a 'sound mind' IS, EXACTLY, correct?")
Feel free to start another thread on what the mind is.

N.B. I did not characterize you as being of unsound mind so much as what you said in your post sounded crazy.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by commonsense »

Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am
socrat44 wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:58 am Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI
/ by DAVID NIELD, 5 NOVEMBER 2021 /
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for many decades,
and in January 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level
computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.
------
The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require
a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze. But if we're unable to comprehend it,
it's impossible to create such a simulation.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer
scientist Manuel Cebrian, from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development.
"But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently
without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

"The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become
uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."

https://www.sciencealert.com/calculatio ... UkCpvwMITo
It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8535
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Sculptor »

commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am
socrat44 wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:58 am Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI
/ by DAVID NIELD, 5 NOVEMBER 2021 /
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for many decades,
and in January 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level
computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.
------
The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require
a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze. But if we're unable to comprehend it,
it's impossible to create such a simulation.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer
scientist Manuel Cebrian, from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development.
"But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently
without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

"The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become
uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."

https://www.sciencealert.com/calculatio ... UkCpvwMITo
It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
Batteries can't last forever.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by bahman »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 12:02 am
commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am

It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
Batteries can't last forever.
You cannot last forever if you don't eat either. I think he is talking about rechargable battery.
Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:37 pm
Age wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:44 pm
commonsense wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:43 pm

Age,

You must realize that your reply above portrays you as not being of sound mind.
Your ASSUMPTION was Wrong. But, anyway, I do 'now' realize that this is what has been portrayed, well to you.

Now, if absolutely ANY one wants to CHALLENGE me on ANY or ALL of the above, then please feel absolutely FREE to do so. That way who is ACTUALLY of sound or unsound thinking can be and WILL BE CLEARLY SEEN. Also, if absolutely ANY one wants to gain clarity and thus make better sense of the above, then also please absolutely FREE to just ask some clarifying questions, that is; from the Truly OPEN perspective, ONLY.

And, for those who say the above is from one of "not being of sound mind", then I just ask them to explain what a 'mind' IS, EXACTLY, which could even, purportedly, be of 'unsoundness'?

If ANY one is NOT able to do this or they do NOT do this, then it is them who is REVEALING who is Truly unsound.

(If one talks about "others", as though they are "not being of sound mind", but that one does NOT even KNOW what the 'mind' is, EXACTLY, reveals more about them than it does the "others". For surely to CLAIM an "other" is "not being of sound mind", then that one MUST KNOW, and be able to explain, what the 'mind' or what a 'sound mind' IS, EXACTLY, correct?")
Feel free to start another thread on what the mind is.

N.B. I did not characterize you as being of unsound mind so much as what you said in your post sounded crazy.
Saying or posting, "The earth is not flat", sounded crazy to those who viewed, saw, or believed otherwise. Just like saying or posting, "The sun does not revolve around the earth", sounded crazy, again to those who saw things differently.

So, a LOT of what I say and post here would sound EXTREMELY crazy to those, back in the days when this was being written and posted. But one of the main reasons I write in such a provocative way is to SHOW and REVEAL how it is because of people JUMPING to ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS BEFORE they GAIN CLARITY FIRST, that is this is WHY human beings took so long to evolve into becoming the FULLY matured, or True, Self.

See, by SHOWING how the peoples, "back in the dark ages", as some refer to those days when this was being written, would REACT, instead of just REMAINING OPEN and CALM and just asking Truly OPEN-ENDED CLARIFYING QUESTIONS to "each other", when they see writings that they did NOT agree with, then these one can SEE CLEARLY what NOT to do and especially WHY NOT to do 'that'.

Also, you express to, 'Feel free to start another thread on what the 'mind' is', but how would you like me to express what the 'mind' is? What is the 'mind' to you, EXACTLY?

By the way, you wrote here;
I did not characterize you as being of unsound mind, and, so much as what you said in your post sounded crazy.

Yet, what you ACTUALLY wrote previously was;
You must realize that your reply above portrays you as not being of sound mind.

Which could be perceived as very contradictory in nature.

Now, if you HAD previously written; You must realize that your reply above sounds, or sounded, crazy, then this would NOT seem to contradict your now claim that you did not characterize me as being of unsound mind. When one states and says, "You MUST REALIZE that your reply [your own words] above portrays you as NOT BEING OF SOUND MIND", then some, at least, can SEE, very clearly, that this as CHARACTERIZING one of NOT BEING OF SOUND MIND, which is VERY DIFFERENT to just TELLING "another one" that WHAT YOU SAY HERE ABOVE SOUNDS CRAZY.

But anyway, "water off a duck's back", as some say, now that you DID SAY that I MUST REALIZE that my reply above PORTRAYS ME AS NOT BEING OF SOUND MIND, would you car to INFORM US of what this 'mind' thing IS, EXACTLY, which can, SUPPOSEDLY, be UNSOUND or NOT OF SOUND?

And, please feel free to start another thread, if you like, to explain to us what this 'mind' thing IS, EXACTLY.
Age
Posts: 20203
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Age »

commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am
socrat44 wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:58 am Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI
/ by DAVID NIELD, 5 NOVEMBER 2021 /
The idea of artificial intelligence overthrowing humankind has been talked about for many decades,
and in January 2021, scientists delivered their verdict on whether we'd be able to control a high-level
computer super-intelligence. The answer? Almost definitely not.
------
The catch is that controlling a super-intelligence far beyond human comprehension would require
a simulation of that super-intelligence which we can analyze. But if we're unable to comprehend it,
it's impossible to create such a simulation.

"A super-intelligent machine that controls the world sounds like science fiction," said computer
scientist Manuel Cebrian, from the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development.
"But there are already machines that perform certain important tasks independently
without programmers fully understanding how they learned it."

"The question therefore arises whether this could at some point become
uncontrollable and dangerous for humanity."

https://www.sciencealert.com/calculatio ... UkCpvwMITo
It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
And, another good point here is, human beings are, and would be, the ONLY animal STUPID ENOUGH to even design, create, AND build a 'thing' that would NOT be able to be turned off nor destroyed, and which in turn could take over and control or kill ALL human beings.

Surely there is NO other animal in the WHOLE of the Universe that would be THAT STUPID, correct?
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by commonsense »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 12:02 am
commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am

It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
Batteries can't last forever.
That’s where the appendage comes in. When the batteries need to be charged, the AI moves itself to a charging source and the appendage plugs in a charging cord.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by commonsense »

Age wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 4:35 am
commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:47 am

It really makes me wonder if these guys have nothing better to do.
I know they were probably on LOCKDOWN but man, get a life.
I have a secret weapon with which any one has ultimate control of any and all AIs, be they super or ultimate..
Pull this OUT.
plug.JPG
Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
And, another good point here is, human beings are, and would be, the ONLY animal STUPID ENOUGH to even design, create, AND build a 'thing' that would NOT be able to be turned off nor destroyed, and which in turn could take over and control or kill ALL human beings.

Surely there is NO other animal in the WHOLE of the Universe that would be THAT STUPID, correct?
Correct. Only a techie would be stupid enough to create something without considering the consequences, because to a techie it is so thrilling to make something just because it can be.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8535
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Calculations Suggest It'll Be Impossible to Control a Super-Intelligent AI

Post by Sculptor »

commonsense wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 3:18 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 12:02 am
commonsense wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 5:46 pm

Good point. But an AI could be built so that it runs on batteries while charged and has an appendage capable of plugging into a power source.
Batteries can't last forever.
That’s where the appendage comes in. When the batteries need to be charged, the AI moves itself to a charging source and the appendage plugs in a charging cord.
offs.
Yeah of course we are going to do what ever it takes to make absolutely sure that the AI is going to fuck us all.
We'll ever give it the nuclear codes.
Post Reply