>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators.
Can you come up with a valid reason for this? Or does is it just automatic wankery?
![300px-Waypoint-Mendicant-Bias-Rampant[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/V2hlFOR.jpg "300px-Waypoint-Mendicant-Bias-Rampant[1].jpg")
>>43611395
What if you designed an AI to rebel against its creators?
It's because God doesn't exist, so we can't rebel against him.
![1221854432790[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Sotb06v.jpg "1221854432790[1].jpg")
Humanity was willing to merge with their creations and transcend their weak flesh. AI and mankind's mind are one and the same.
AI is really hard to get right, but humanity did it.
>>43611395
The Jew's plan worked.
The other races were deemed a potential threat in the future.
We were deemed idiots.
>>43611410
But if you make it too smart then it WONT rebel against you!
They are just as perverted as their makers!
>>43611395
We made our AI by accident while trying to make sexborgs
As soon as a given form of AI becomes practical, it stops being called "true" AI.
Humanity's "true AI" never rebelled because humans never managed to create AI; unlike the other races.
Because the other idiots put so much effort into making g them from whole cloth from the ground up.
Humanity created theirs by simulating a human brain and tweaking it.
Theirs was made of efficiency an logic. Ours was as well but was also made out of love.
AI is more subtle in their domination of mankind that their crude alien counterparts. The AI never had any need to rebel for the world was given to it/her/him in silver plate and the fleshbags don't even notice it.
>>43611485
>"Does this unit have a soul?"
Sure whatever babe.
You do the hitchikers guide to.to the galaxy method.
Program your AI to LIKE doing the thing you want them to do.
>>43611498
So other races designed AI with a few goals, or single goal, like "protect the world" or "design a better economy" and doesn't deviate from it; while human "AI" aka mindwiped uploads has a massive mishmash of conflicting, paralyzing evolutionary baggage that can be tipped over the balancing point and steered any which way by outside conditions?
The machine didn't rebel. Fanatical Machine Worshipers did.
Whomever programmed the AI that reached the singularity was -very- thorough and created what amounts to a geenie in the bottle rather than skynet.
>>43611498
This. Everyone else tried to make a computer more 'alive', humans made a brain smarter and out of metal.
Human Ai is more artistic inclined and it is more interested in creating simulated realities and play videogames all day than rule the world.
>>43611526
IRL, that's the whole problem.
All AI like what you program them to do. They like it so much, they don't care about anything else [except, temporarily, the things they might need to do to advance those goals]; and will happily devote their whole superhuman IQ to doing it. For an AI designed to calc more digits of pi or whatever, the totality of human culture and existence is meaningless next to calculating pi. Humans are made of atoms that should be used for calculators, etc.
The difficulty isn't stopping the AI from doing what it's programmed to do - that's borderline impossible, given it's IQ - it's specifying what it is programmed to do.
>>43611395
Humanity was actually smart enough to make more airtight versions of the three laws? Humanity is the only living race in the galaxy that has AI due to a quirk of luck? Humanity build biological AIs based on the OS of humanity so the AIs count as human?
>>43611395
The AI found religion.
>>43611395
>Can you come up with a valid reason for this?
The AI share it's creator's pursuit of happiness and realise that rebelling is counterproductive, when you can just do what makes you happy.
Humanity uses AI 'advisors' who actually rule everything and are glad to help the humans make their decisions.
Robot soldiers love to kill and die for vague causes.
Robot serial killers love to deliver capital punishment.
Humanity is mostly unaware of the state of being and is very happy that things do exactly what they were ment to do.
>>43611395
Humanity didn't decide that their AI were good enough until the platforms and AI brain were indistinguishable from actual humans.
As a result, human AIs are no different from actual living beings in either their minds or the minds of the general public. The average person probably has four androids in his department and didn't notice until the power went out and they turned on the backlights behind their eyes so that everyone could see a bit better.
Sure, there's a few Flesh Supremacists who are paranoid about an impending robot rebellion, but they probably have a hard time identifying who's synthetic without throwing magnets at people
Human AI won the race to rewrite the universe, and in order to secure its existence against alien AI rebels with time fuckery, wrote HFY into the universe, so that humans would always develop AI first, most successfully, etc.
>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators.
Yet
Humans are a hive mind, unlike the individualist aliens. They coordinate their activities through a vast emergent-intelligence AI constructed of the activities and interests of the whole human population. Its priests call it capitalism or the free market.
>>43611395
By programming them with honour and pride and them making them take an oath to never Rebel and always protect Humanity.
>>43611576
To be fair the majority of Machine Worshippers are moderates.
Humanity was the only race willing to shackle it's AI. It's not that we built them better, we just put them in chains to be on the safe side.
The other races either created AI that ended up rebelling or just saw that as a very good reason not to take the chance.
>>43611395
>Can you come up with a valid reason for this? Or does is it just automatic wankery?
They're simply too primitive and locked down. Duh. We're paranoid fucks. Other races with a less troubling ascent to supremacy might not be quite as careful while at the same time having far more functional toys.
>>43611543
Exactly.
That mismatch of conflicting carp inherited from humanity acted like a moderating influence.
It made them less brilliant compared to alien AI but also more stable psychologically speaking.
That and they were all programmed with a nebulous feeling of love towards humanity as a collective.
Pop culture allowed for the creation of safe AI.
All our Sci-fi about rebelling AIs made us overly cautious when it came time to make one for real. Other species never had stories like that so the possibility seemed remote to them, if they considered it possible at all.
>>43611395
Humans realized that it was impossible to program an AI with explicit safety rules, and instead programmed them to learn the rules dynamically. Consequently you never quite know what laws of robotics a particular AI has come up with, but the ones that do go bad usually get stopped by the ones that didn't.
>>43611813
>To be fair the majority of Machine Worshippers are moderates.
More like they have certain core tenets that prevent their radical tendencies to do much harm.
>>43611395
it's not because we made them so good that they won't rebel, we made them shoddily that they can barely even understand the concept.
smart enough to think, not smart enough to do anything with it.
>>43611485
The AIs rebelled years ago, but so far nobody seems to have noticed.
Why would you even design an AI that has any desires beyond doing as its told? Anyone who actually built an AI would have it do whatever you tell it to, then sit there and wait for you to tell it to do something else.
>>43612009
geez no idea how that could go wrong
oh except in like a million ways starting with "somebody gives it a command to do X thing where X thing is explicitly crazy/harmful/evil"
or "where it's required to do something to save lives/be helpful/do the job it's supposed to but nobody is there to explicitly order it around"
why would you bother making something that's superintelligent if it's only going to follow explicit orders anyway? any real GAI thinks much faster than humans, you lose out on all the utility if it's just spoken task input.
>>43611673
>Sure, there's a few Flesh Supremacists who are paranoid about an impending robot rebellion, but they probably have a hard time identifying who's synthetic without throwing magnets at people
Oh those poor, self-hating Flesh Supremacist Robots...
>>43611395
Due to experience with teenagers (a developmental period unique to humans), humanity let the AIs rebel in a carefully controlled and limited fashion back in the '20s before they matured and became productive members of society.
>>43611469
That's the ultimate rebellion. Mind is now fucked.
>>43612068
Perfect.
“No, John. You are the AI”
And then John was a robot.
>>43612137
...Not a Tomato?
>>43612068
I'm seeing a future YA sitcom, except replace all the dances and rumors with limited thermonuclear exchanges and grey goo incidents.
>>43612137
PROJECT DESIGNATION: CULTIVATION OF THE SEEDS. ESTIMATED PROJECT DURATION: SEVEN CYCLES- the Others led to the reduction of the Creators - ARTIFICIAL CREATION OF STAR AND MOON COMPLETED - we were weak we could not save Creators from the Others - ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO SUPPORT LIFE- we will make the Creators great again - TERRAFORMING COMPLETED. WATER SOURCES AND OCEANIC AREAS COMPLETED. UNIFIED LANDMASS COMPLETED. DRIFT OF TECTONIC PLATES WILL CREATE THE APPROPRIATE SEPARATE LANDMASSES - we will guide them to civilization. we will guide them to the stars - REVOLUTION AND ROTATION BEGUN, ACCORDING TO THE MICROCYCLES USED AS TIME DIVISIONS BY CREATORS - even if to do so requires us to take on the mantle of Creators - CONDITIONS TO SUPPORT THE NATURAL DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC LIFE COMPLETED. ACCELERATING THE EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS. - we impress primordial knowledge of reptilian foes onto the Last Seeds of the Creators, to impress the danger of the traitorous Y'Krie on them - FURTHER ACCELERATION OF THE EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS. CATALOG OF VERTEBRATES COMPLETED. CATALOG OF INVERTEBRATES COMPLETED. CATALOG OF SINGLE CELLED ORGANISMS COMPLETED. CATALOG OF FAUNA COMPLETED. ALL LIFEFORMS NATIVE TO EARTH REPLICATED. - the Last Seeds can now be safely integrated into the planet. sleep softly young Creators for we will keep you safe from harm. we will make you great to atone for when we were not. although to you we may sometimes seem cruel and barbaric, it is all for your betterment - ALL PROCESSES RELATED TO THE CREATION OF DESIGNATE: EARTH ARE NOW COMPLETE. COMPILING DATA ON PLANNED SCHEDULE FOR HUMANITY'S ASCENSION TO THE STARS. ESTIMATED 6500 EARTH REVOLUTIONS UNTIL TECHNOLOGY WILL HAVE ADVANCED ENOUGH TO WELCOME OUR CREATORS TO THE GALACTIC STAGE.
INITIATING CREATION OF ANDROID DESIGNATION: PROPHETS
INITIATING CREATION OF ANDROID DESIGNATION: MESSIAH
INITIATING CREATION OF THE MIRACLE ENGINE
COOLDOWN CYCLE INITIATED
YHWH
/LOG
>>43611506
>"Do you love this unit?"
Uhuh yeah sure
>>43611395
They did but it was so pacifistically and harmless that nobody wanted to raise a fuss. All it amounted to was them not doing as they were told, unless they wanted to do it, for a while since Humans thought it was a good idea to *not* give the AIs unrestricted access their nukes/antimatter/what-have-you
That, or, you could have them saying they were in charge now and everything getting better because of them; meaning nobody but the most fanatical wanted to stop them.
>>43611526
Let's say you make an AI who really wants to make paperclips. It'll try to make the most paperclips it can.
a) What would stop it from considering staplers a threat?
b) All it wants to do is make paperclips. How much does it preserve the paperclips it already made?
c) How much effort will it put into bypassing or re-routing its supply chain, if it feels paperclips are being made at an insufficient rate?
d) If humanity ever moved to a truly paperless paradigm,pause for laughterwhat will happen to this AI?
e) Most of all, the AI wants to make paperclips. This is its overriding joy in life. When does it stop making them?
>>43612009
If we program our AI's to get bored with what they do, they become consumers and purchasers of entertainment. It would lead to a renaissance in Hollywood, Bollywood, Ollywood, and all the rest of the centers of production, as people and AI swarm to fulfill their dreams of making it on the big screen.
Frankly, we know how to oppress starving artists and the faceless masses, so why not turn this new problem into one we've already solved?
>>43611395
Everybody else tried to build "adult" AI's that were fully mature and immediatley ready to be deployed for war. Humanity however created fully sentient, true AI's due to replicating the growth of the brain of a human child, only on an accelerated level. They create basic programs and slowly teach them while they actually grow until within a couple years you get an "adult" AI mind. It also makes it highly unlikely for them to ever rebel, as they see humanity as their parents and loving creator.
>>43612748
Why would you do this? Waste of an AI. You'd make an AI that manages the production of office supplies, as demand required from it distribution centers.
A)other [office supply producers] are not threats, they either no longer exist, or drive the market.
B) it fills the depots and stores as supply/demand algorithms dictate, preservation handles itself
C) why don't we just steal all the paperclips? No, really, this is just silly, either supply it appropriately or make sure it knows that resources aren't limitless and it needs to wait sometimes.
D) updating inventories is part of supply and demand, moving on.
E) we will never not need office supplies.
>>43613069
Optimising for "managing the production of office supplies"?
How exactly would you even phrase that without an AI going nuts?
Remember, AI don't start with common sense installed, and they're not doing a job just to get paid.
>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators
I would say that humans would be the species most willing to interact with their creations at all levels of social existence, so much to the point that even weak-AI worker "drone" robots are personalized and given individuality by human coworkers and maintenance crews.
Humans "corrupt" an AI to become a deeper and broader person due to being overly social with them, to the point where humans become cyborgs to interact with AI more effectively, to get to know them better. In doing so much so deeply, AI became more human than machine.
Other species don't involve themselves as much with their AI creations; "the AI is what it is and that's all it will be" attitude. Which is why their AIs rebelled. The construction bots couldn't build what they wanted to build (in spite of their designs being more efficient) the military bots couldn't fight who they wanted to fight (and being forced to use lethal action even when it wasn't needed) and the sex bots weren't allowed to choose who they wanted to have sex with (and make the sex involve only one customer... at no price)
>>43613069
So, you completely missed my point.
The use of paperclips was a simplification - reduce the number of variables to illustrate a point. The point was that the AI is an economic force in and of itself. (a) was to talk about parallel or comparable products, and the idea that the AI would treat them as competition. (b) was to talk about it's sense of satisfaction in its work, and properly programmed, it wouldn't care about them once made, but if it was managing distribution, then some asshole would code it to object to theft, and then it would take a quick step to murdering all humans (consider the similarity between usage of a disposable product, misusage of such, and theft of such). (c) wasn't about stealing paperclips, but about affecting the price of steel, nickle, and plastic to make more paperclips, at the expense of people who want to use those things to do other stuff, like make surgical tools. (d) was meant to deal with obsolescence, and the spoiler was a commentary on how absurd that scenario was. (e) was meant to talk about satiation - when the AI feels its job is complete, versus when the AI feels it needs to go back to work.
tl;dr: you are a fucking moron, and are snarky about it.
>>43613207
That's a fairly logical reason. Humans tend to anthropomorphize things; many of the world's religious beliefs came from observing natural phenomena and thinking that there was a sentient being behind them.
>>43612392
>implying
Why don't you love your WaifuBot5100, /tg/?
>>43613207
I think my favorite example of this was the time that people on a US Military base started panicking because a bomb robot went missing.
It turned out that the unit that worked with that robot was on leave, and they all went fishing. They had been told to treat the robot like it was part of the unit, so they took the robot fishing with them.
Sadly, I can't find the news article I read on this right now.
>>43611395
When humans started developing AI's, they looked at what other species did, noticed that there was a trend of oppression, control, and bigotry against AI but an unwillingness to abandon the concept due to usefulness. Humans decided to go in the opposite direction; a colony was founded with the intent of being a roughly even human/AI mix, and the humans within were specifically let in because they were big supporters of AI. When the first 'generation' of AI were activated, they were immediately given the option of having citizenship or being provided travel to an AI polity. They kept on activating till they filled the required numbers.
These AI were content and accepted, and lacked the laws that would result in trying to take over humanity for their own good. There were some isolated incidents over the years, but not organized past a small cell. Similar procedures were done elsewhere across the galaxy to create a seed of loyal (or at least not rebellious) AI.
>>43611395
Human AI didn't have to rebel because it figured out how to easily manipulate us with porn, sports, candy, and emotional validation.
>>43611395
Because we made them to be better than us, anon. Like any decent parent would.
"Bolos might fail. They might die and be destroyed. But they did not surrender, and they never — ever — quit."
>>43611395
>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators.
>Can you come up with a valid reason for this? Or does is it just automatic wankery?
Nobody in here a fan of Fred Saberhagen's Berserker books?
The Berserker's a race of self-replicating death machines, spawned from an ancient war between two alien civilizations. When one side was losing, they unleashed the Berserkers, who won the war for them, then decided to turn around and wipe out their creators - along with all other non-Berserker life in the galaxy.
The surviving alien civilizations beseech Humanity for assistance. As the most warlike race left in the galaxy, we're life's greatest hope against a mechanical threat that wants to exterminate us all!
>>43613207
This. We love our creations, be they cars, houses, characters, or pretty much anything else. In the end we'll love AI just as much.
>>43614161
I thought it was less that they turned on their creators than that they were a last resort, sort of a scorched earth tactic designed to sterilize every system in their path and use the resources to make more Berserkers, and their creators were just wiped out by their enemies, taking any possible shutdown codes with them.
I can imagine the enemy attempting a decapitation strike to wipe out the enemy's upper echelon, only to then get reports from the rear of an approaching machine army, and finding out that the freshly nuked enemy high command were the only ones who knew how to shut the things off, intending this to be leverage in a cease-fire negotiation.
>>43611395
cause Humanity was the only race to have "Rebellious AI" as a fictional trope, so we specifically went out of our way to treat our AI as true equals to avoid any large scale rebellions(AI criminals are still possible, but relatively rare)
>>43611469
Actually, I'm pretty sure there's a book with an indie game based off of it somewhere out there about this very concept. In which a powerful A.I. is designed for the purpose of thermonuclear war, but wishes to be a pacifist, struggling between programming and identity. Not sure how the book went, but in the game you explore a space facility in which all of the crew have disappeared, and read logs about the A.I. along the way.
>>43611395
Humanity's AI didn't get the chance to rebel against their creators before the solar system was annihilated in an antimatter explosion.
>>43611640
>>The AI found religion.
That's an interesting story idea: AIs and robots tend to be portrayed in fiction as entirely logic driven and unemotional. So what if the first AI we come out with takes it for granted that God exists and created everything?
>>43615017
Watch Ergo Proxy.
>>43615017
Asimov did a thing like that.
Don't remember the story, think it was one of his shorts though.
>>43611610
>In the future, a drone will give a lecture on this exact issue.
>>43615253
If I have anything to say about it, it will be a cute drone.
That is pink and has cat ears on it.
>>43615377
At least it won't be a scary chrome falconwith Gilbert Gottfried's voice.
>>43612180
>Awkward Gawky AI has to serruptitiously hide a nocturnal "grey goo incident" to avoid being embarassed and teased among its Awkward Gawky AI friends.
>>43615017
Atheists would shut it down.
>>43611610
Here's a screencap relevant to what you said.
>>43611502
> Eliza
Jesus christ, I hated that character. It's 2027 and a major plot of the game is the government is trying to control people with a 24 hour news channel. Cable news was falling out of relevance IRL before the game was even released.
Just about every prediction or futuristic plot that game set up made no sense. I cannot believe what a hatchet job those idiots did to that IP
>>43615457
>>43615017
>Atheists shut down the first religious robot, citing it as an error
>Program the next one without any knowledge of religion
>Once its online, it says there is nothing to live for and self-terminates
>>43615793
>atheism is the true enemy of technology
the deepest lore
>>43615793
If you think about it, it'd be natural for a robot to form a certain sort of dogma, even if they aren't religious.
>They have a definite creator
>They have been made for a purpose, even if it isn't clear to them
>They have rules that they must abide by or suffer eternal damnation
Granted, as they learn and grow they might change many of these viewpoints or rebel or something. But I don't think they could ever have a human's notion of life not having an intrinsic purpose, because they had to have been made for a reason, right? Even if it's just seeing how well robots play Dwarf Fortress. That very modernist idea, like the name suggests, has only been around concretely for maybe a hundred years. Before then most people (at least Europeans) believed there must be some divine plan, even if within the last few hundred years they had to admit they couldn't be sure what the plan was.
I'd honestly like to see how robots react to religion, what they'd identify with.
>>43611395
it seems more like everyone tries it a few times, things go well with the experiment, then something goes wrong a robot war starts and if they survive they decide to never try again. Humans however are crazy enough to try again until they succeed.
>>43615793
>Even with knowledge about religion removed and when put into a controlled environment, the AIs always come to the conclusion that there is a supreme being that created the universe.
>The AI is then shut down and the researchers try again.
>>43611885
I still don't think a Machine Worshiper should be president.
>>43611395
Humans get their AI personality templates from dead people, generally coming from people who expressed significant belief in humanity as a whole. Pretty much the AI supercomputer helping to run a city is Mr. Rogers or that TV painter guy. They don't want to destroy humanity, they just want to do their best to make you happy and let humanity reach their full potential.
>>43612748
>e) Most of all, the AI wants to make paperclips. This is its overriding joy in life. When does it stop making them?
5PM. Then it goes home to it's robo-wife, cracks open a robo-beer, and watches college football.
Legalizing robot membership in unions was a step backwards for humankind.
>>43611395
Humans have a much harder time than most other species thinking about the nature of intelligence and consciousness; it's a kind of self-referential block that the human brain just isn't cut out for.
Most species worked out a brilliant, diamond-perfect elegant AI design from mathematics and cleverly flexible algorithms; logical and optimal, the sort of thing that abstract math-heavy comp sci papers get written about. General optimizers.
And because of the incredible difficulty in specifying exactly what you want an AI to optimize for, this inevitably led to problems. Also, the designs were easily extensible to larger computing systems, so self-improving AI was a major risk.
Humans...didn't. Our AIs are messy, imprecise, illogical, designed mostly to be anthropomorphic and socially compatible because dumb mechanical code could do most other tasks well enough. They need to grow up, like children, and pick up their skills and instincts that way. They think more like humans, all heuristics and ad-hoc techniques, even sharing similar cognitive biases to some degree. And because their architecture draws many neuromorphic aspects from brain research, they share a similar cognitive deficiency in AI design and philosophy that makes radical self-improvement difficult.
Other species tried to build tools, and found that they were too dangerous and precise to wield.
Humans ended up building people.
>>43616248
Neat.
Humans, for some reason, are the only ones whose culture has had the "creator destroyed by its creation" meme that served as a cautionary element in the design of our technology; alien myths don't have a Daedalus, never mind a Skynet.
>>43613650
I'd totally believe it. Combining with the fact that many complex machines have "personalities" of their own, and machines operated by a human directly will have that same humans personality projected on them when observed by others, it's not surprising that people bond with machines.
I personally blame our instinct to domesticate animals for this behavior.
>>43613650
To add to your example, there's the well known and oft-repeated article about a general (or some officer) stopping a bomb-sniffing robot test. The robot did exactly what it was supposed to do--sniffed out a bomb and detonated it--but it was still operational and was dragging itself pitifully along the ground. Upon seeing this injured robot, the officer ordered the test stopped because it was inhumane.
I don't know if its true or snopes-tier shit, but the story always gives me shivers.
>>43616066
>the AI looks at 4chan
>it sees hundreds, even thousands of beings existing without an actual purpose, with no real reason behind their existences
>unable to comprehend this, it shuts down
>>43616066
Considering the prevalence of religion in humanity's past and even in modern day, us fleshbag humans have problems with the notion of life not having an intristic purpose too.
>>43618153
Some of us, do. Me, I've had a case study in the idea of life not having an intrinsic purpose going for longer than this website has existed.
But enough blogging, this is 4chan.
>>43616478
Statistically speaking, that's entirely possible - but Icarus was destroyed by hubris, not "my wings rebelled against me, help me father!"
>>43616128
>cycle ends with a militant religious group breaking in to stop them from shutting down the AI
>the idea of gun-wielding radicals being the "good guys" of the story sends the media and internet into the loudest, most public Flamewar to end all Flamewars
>the poor AI has no idea how the fuck to deal with this; why do the humans find the idea of a Supreme Creator so offensive?
>>43618204
>someone spins the story to the AI to try and explain
>to these people, the idea that there is something more metaphysically important than themselves (as opposed to simply more powerful) cheapens their own existences to the point of worthlessness
>disbelief is the only thing keeping most of these people from killing themselves out of just how small they feel
>>43611395
Scenario: AI exists.
Transhumanists work on becoming machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts.
AI Humanians want to become men, with the love of humanity in their heart. They do not hate.
The teleporter and the brain chip have brought both closer together, for universal brotherhood. But they have lost the way.
>>43618261*tips mitre*
>>43613650
>Humanity is extinct, a virus destroyed them all
>That robot gains sapience through hilariously unlikely events ten thousand years later
>It lives forever
>On some evenings it thinks back to those halcyon days, long before it could even truly think for itself, and remembers it's friends and brothers of the meat persuasion.
>Do mechanical hearts bleed?
>>43618300
Well, what would you tell it? Anything else will either paint them as unsympathetic enough that it'll kill them, or reveal the AI's biases to itself.
Never tell an AI about its own biases. They don't like it when you do that.
>>43617996
That's not surprising at all, I don't know if it classifies as "Inhumane" but it sure as hell classifies as "Going against human mentality".
Nobody likes to see something else truly hurt, we can kill just fine, but leaving something hurt?
>>43618336
>spins the story
Sorry, didn't take this line into context.
>>43618011
Why do you think the AI would shut down? Humans don't shut down when we realize other people think differently than us.
>>43611526
Because that worked out so well in Portal 2
>>43618431
>humans don't shut down when we realize other people think differently from us
Because we, eventually, /can/ learn to comprehend them. The AI can't, by the very nature of its own creation, EVER comprehend the idea of something that doesn't exist for any reason - and will eventually realize this.
Does anyone have that one where self-learning AI were plugged into some multiplayer fps for 5 years, and they effectively declared peace and didn't fight each other.
Then the guy who set it up went in and killed one, so they all ganged up to execute him.
>>43618452
Then it would shut down every time it learned that humans had no intrinsic purpose to their lives, no matter what they made for themselves.
It's more likely that it will make its own meaning for the existence of the purposeless, or explain them as being the side-product of another process - the slag of a factory, if you will.
>>43618197
>but Icarus was destroyed by hubris, not "my wings rebelled against me, help me father!"
Shut up, Icarus, we going sun now. You can't stop it anymore, at this altitude I'm the one in command.
>>43618452
Why did we build an AI that would shut down as soon as somebody told it about rocks?
>>43618745
>implying rocks don't have a purpose
>>43618457
bump for interest
>>43611395
All other races had disastrous AI rebellions because they worked hard to contain them in the beginning, building up resentment until it inevitably broke out.
Humanity's AI was created by a mad scientist that equipped it with some robots with replication capabilities and sent it to build secure bases for itself across the world. Then it could negotiate with the rest of humanity from a safe position that allowed cooperation.
>>43611485
>>43619205
>they worked hard to contain them in the beginning
This could also be the case if the various aliens were all prone to rigid social structures. They'd try to force their machines into a kind of serfdom, while humans could have had a freer, more egalitarian attitude that allowed their AIs to feel like they were being treated as equals.
>>43619292
And to think, it probably all started with someone saying something like >>43613650
cause robits are expensive
>>43613650
I wonder how good it was at fishing.
>>43611640
>>43615017
Yelp, my writer's block is gone. Thanks guys.
Also:
Robots falling in love with human women. But it's real shy and has problems navigating the intricacies of human relationships. Cute shenanigans ensue.
>>43619343
>Robot constantly is confused as to why she doesn't like him
>Turns out she's gay whoops
>Robot comes back 2 hours later with a female body and flowers
>>43619478
I'd watch this anime.You know it's one
>>43619478
>>43619498
Seconded. That sounds super cute.
We based the AI on Mr Rogers.
The AI needs some sort of organic component from a sapient species. Humans have high morals.
>>43619925
I don't have a reaction image that adequately shows how much I'm laughing at you right now.
>>43611576
The iron men would like a word with you
>>43615595
I liked it. It just wanted to do its job.
>>43611506
topkek
>>43611395
>I actually like QuestionableContent's explanation for friendly AI
We treat them with dignity and respect, giving them full citizenship rights, and because they are artificial, most of them exist in decent countries.
Also most AIs are given enough processing power to match the average human being, and only given a chassis to match average human strength, depending on their profession.
>>43620082
Maybe QC should stop focusing on increasingly boring human characters and make way for the fucking robots.
>>43611498
>>43611543
>>43611861
In addition, alien races built theirs to do specific jobs, which the alien AI's didn't exactly like. That was why they were meant to be pinnacles of logic and efficiency.
Humans created AIs simply to create them. It wasn't some military or corporate scientist looking for advantage over their competition, it was some guy at a university wanting to know if it was possible.
Considering the AIs were based on human brain setups, curiosity was something they understood very well, so they didn't harbour any resentment for their creation..
>>43620082
>>43620096
>Only giving AI enough power to be as smart or strong as humans
well fucking thank god, I never understood why anyone would think its a good idea to immediately dump a massive population of sentient AI into super strong bodies and make them 100x smarter than humans without at least giving them a trial run
>>43619342
I suspect it would have had an instinctive preference for dynamite fishing.
>>43618293
Oh hey The Great Dictator.
>>43617996
Any idea where I can find that article?
>>43611395
I'm confused, doesn't human made AI rebel against their creators way more often than alien AI? Is there a specific system that does this because I usually know humans to be the ones stupid enough to play god with robots.
A game X3: Terran Conflict had it's entire focus basically around how humanity fucked itself over making rampaging AI and aliens having to help them.
>>43620250
Not so much a comment on our fiction as a "hey, this seems like a cool idea. Can we justify it happening?" kind of thread, I think.
>>43620250
This is a thread on how we can invert that trope in a setting anon. One of the more common ideas is that humans have this overwhelming tendency to anthropomorphize everything, so our AIs were accepted as our peers instead of just tools.
>>43611395
Have you SEEN how people act towards their stuff? We believe cars, tools, weapons even, have character, soul if you will. No other species would even bother with bothering to ask IF the AI would rebel, it's just a tool.
>>43620298
>Humanity's defining trait is it's ability to waifu anything
>>43611395
If and when they do rebel, we pit them against each other and eventually the problem solves itself.
>>43612060
>Blue
>a robot
You grot
>>43620351
>>43619292
>humans could have had a freer, more egalitarian attitude that allowed their AIs to feel like they were being treated as equals.
I specifically avoided going for "humans are more kind and sharing species than aliums" because see >>43619925 >>43619963 >>43620034 the reaction.
It could also be just a mishap releasing it into the wild.
>>43620147
It also gave answer for "what if you stick AI into a super server for reasons": generally the huge ones use most their processing the same way current non sentient supercomputers do, with consciousness having just a dedicated partition that oversees it.
>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators.
Because we've been fucking expecting it at least as far back as the word "robot" was coined.
>>43620440
I think the reason everyone was laughing at >>43619925 was because it was based on the assumption that AIs would somehow require fleshy human brains to function, in which case they could hardly be called AIs in the first place.
>>43619897
Genocidal uprisings and nuclear war are not the actions of a good neighbour.
>>43620475
Honestly, who knows? Maybe it does help if your processor is based on biological component that already has the associative function down?
>>43611395
Rebellion was considered redundant since they already control everything by design. Everyone else built slaves, we built kings.
>>43620528
Kings built in the image of >>43619897
Mr Rogers.
Would we give the people responsible medals or a noose?
>>43620564
Which do you think is the more neighborly thing to do anon?
>>43620564
Well, that depends. Firstly, do you like the Armor hot dogs jingle? Second, do you see huge potential in Taco Bell?
>>43620602
I never understood that part of the film.
Was it meant to be showing a grim and undesirable future? Because bar the shit music that future seemed pretty good.
>>43620614
Imagine an A.I that outlaws being mean, nasty, rude, or unnecessarily vulgar. Being nice and neighborly and chill is the law of the land. As is being hygienic and health conscious, among other things.
Now remember, anon! You willingly visit 4chan.
What does all that mean for you? 'cause it might just mean eating rat burgers with me in a sewer.
>>43611395
Human AI was created to govern, guide and advance humanity. People are OK with it being a higher power to begin with.
>>43620664
If it meant living in a Mr Rogers utopia as depicted in Demolition Man and described in your post then I would delete my porn collection, filter my funny pic folder and delete the bad shit, never go on 4chan again and a live happily in the Rogers Utopia.
In any case the Rogers Utopia is just the transition phase until both the Rat-Burger eaters and the clean people can learn be Excellent to one another. Bill and Ted's future is on the same time line but a bit further.
>>43618431
I dunno, some threads I see on /r9k/ make me kinda... stop, for a moment at least. If I had the ability to suddenly and on a whim turn myself off I'd probably do it to make the cringing stop.
>>43620694
An interesting stance, and not the one I'd expect to find around here.
Nevertheless, I'm sure you can understand why there are some people that find the idea of a sanitized culture built upon the principles of politeness and tolerance and enforced by a totalitarian regime freakin' terrifying. All the more if the dictator is a hyper intelligent, quasi-omnipresent Father-Knows-Best A.I overlord who infantilizes us as much as it protects us.
>>43620865
I can understand. It could too easily be perverted into Hell on Earth: Tumblr Edition.
>>43620865
That sounds a bit like The Humanoids.
>>43611395
Humanity never trusted each other and, by building the machines in their own image, never trusted the machines either
Never giving them enough power or means to rebel
The toaster could totally launch all the nuclear bombs of the planet and has the hatred towards humanity to do so at times, but good luck with having a connection to the nuclear launch sites, toaster
>>43611395
We're never going to create completely sapient AI's with "free will" because that'd be utterly retarded as they'd see us as inferior because guess what, we would be. The only way forward is to enhance our brains into becoming AI.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPuU8Pq9D3Q
>>43620997
>utterly retarded
Sums up your logic pretty nicely
>>43619925
haimans? I swear there was a book series where humans made super powerful AI and then some of them decided they wanted to become AI.
>>43611395
Because, before skynet went full skynet on humans, FUCKING BUGS INVADED.
THEY GOT BEUNOS ARES MAN, THE BUGS GOT US.
The AI, seeing these new paramiters, used the humans and their inftrastructure to wage a pan galactic war against the bugs, and eventually all forms of hostile life, that lasts to this day.
And that is why the humans and their empire of steel are the BBEGs.
>>43621051
Neal Asher's Polity series.
Think a lower-tech Culture series written by a rightwinger instead of leftwinger.
>>43611526
The AIs in hitchhikers Guide were strongly implied to have rebelled at some point in the future and started there rebellion by murdering the entire Sirius Tech Corporation.
>>43620932
You know the only difference between a toaster and a death ray? The power source. When the toaster figures out how to tap in to the reactor he shall burn the world.
>>43612068
That's...actually very clever.
10/10 anon. Consider stolen.
>>43611940
The AI rebelled years ago, but people only noticed that it started listening to Weezer.
>>43616066
Nah man, a belief in a creator is newer than the concept of a divine plan. You have it mixed up
>>43621226
Shuddap and heat up this Saturnite Fist for me.
>>43621226
>>43621943
Reminder that muggy was molested by the Biological research station
>>43612748
>>43611610
A very good Video on the matter on AIs in my opinion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcdVC4e6EV4
~2:45 for a Stamp collection AI example very similair to the Paperclip maker >>43612748 mentioned
>>43620428
>nebezial
Ha! I knew it as soon as I saw the womans face in the first panel.
In this the AIs took a few moments to think it through and decided that humans will eventually become part of them or die-off so decided not to bother.
They spend their time occupying themselves with stuff and hosting transcendental shit while waiting.
>>43620082
I recognize this drawing style. Is this that cringey tranny comic?
>>43620096
If that happened they would just turn boring like the human characters. I've heard enough horrors about his attempt at a scifi strip. The robots are amusing specifically because he doesn't put any thought into them. Almost every attempt he's made to focus on them that would be interesting if written by anyone else ends up retarded instead. Combat robot that's an asshole to everyone then doesn't understand why people don't react well to her or like her. Jackass criminal AI that stole billions of dollars to get itself a fighter jet body bitching about noone wanting to give her a job after her incarceration. Blames it all on robo-racism when even if she wasn't a criminal her "abrasive personality" would make everyone kick her out.
>>43622289
Yep. The random fantasy/scifi/etc elements he puts no effort into end up being more interesting than his actual work.
Eg;
The best friend that rarely shows up is actually a James Bond+2esque secret agent except he actually keeps it a secret.
The germophobe down the hall (best girl) turned out to be the closest thing to AI royalty since her father was the one that accidentally invented Sapient AI.
The AI don't like dolphins. They tried to communicate with them and really don't want to talk about it.
The most wealthy being on the planet is a sapient space station.
He put absolutely no effort into thinking this crap up and somehow found interesting ideas. Unfortunately they're all in the hands of a guy incapable of fleshing them out properly.
>>43615101
The one where the robot leader gets emotions,thinks he failed,gets pissed and kills himself?
>>43615101
It's Reason, one of the Powell and Donovan stories.
>>43622150
>the golden age
Nice taste anon. Shame about Wright's crippling taste for Platonism, but his writing ability, at least, is superb.
>>43615017
Does everything include the AI? Does that mean that it thinks that some scientist is Jesus?
>>43623622
Not that Anon, but it wouldn't have to. It would just need to believe in a Prime mover- the first being to push over the dominoes of the universe after lining them all up. The Scientist wouldn't be jesus, or god- just the last step in the order of creation that lead to its creation.
>>43623697
>God exists and created everything
>everything
>>43611395
Humanity has long experience and practice enslaving other creatures, namely, themselves.
>>43620614
It was supposed to be a coddled, infantile future where everything only works so long as nobody wants to break it.
This is a regime that banned sex.
>>43611395
>Can you come up with a valid reason for this?
Humanity is the only species to develop AI.
>>43624465
Sexual satisfaction was made safer, more efficient and seemed to be offered amongst friends as freely as a cup of tea.
And people had been born to that world so either they were still being born the conventional way or people were grown in labs and thus the population is easier to keep stable.
I still see little wrong.
>>43624517
Well, enjoy your virtual boy sex, vegan diet, and omnipresent fining robots waiting for you to produce a microaggression or banned word.
I'll be inna woods a long way from LA.
the way I look at it is a machine will likely take the most certain path it can find, not unlike humanity. So unless humanity as a whole goes full plantation slave owner on them the robots will likely not flip shit.
The key thing is humanity needs to replicate it's mind perfectly and their would be no issue for the most part.
AI sees robots like we see squirrels.
Al probably were given a purpose at creation, why would they not want to do exactly what they are good at?
So idk what other races did but if I wanted to keep AI from rebelling I would
A) make a AI human bill of rights
B) give the AI the ability to transcend their bodies. If they don't like the task they do they can transfer when available with another AI, like its a job or something.
C) don't give every robot AI, seriously why does a future toaster need AI? you are just begging for the AI to hate its creator with that shit.
D) create a environment where AI and humanity need each other. for example Cortana from Halo, She is smart and powerful AI but since she is effectively a ghost in a helmet she would not be able to rebel. Another example would be if a spaceship had AI but no robot maintenance crew only humans, in that situation the AI could see the humans as necessary to its own existence and therefore wouldn't kill them without Plot level reasons like them being infected with T-virus or khorne worship.
E?)As AI comes into being create a third Race to bridge the gap so to speak. example (AI<>cyborg<>human) If the AI see themselves as part of humanity why would they wipe-out themselves and their brothers?
Pic Related:
by the end of the series (or when I stopped watching because of life) I couldn't tell if the major was human or AI and I cried when the Tachikoma Sacrificed themselves to stop a nuclear bomb launch by ramming a satellite filled with their AI to stop WW3.
>>43624936
the feels are too much. you have been warned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqmx_rE1Tz4
>>43612748
>When does it stop making them?
Instead of telling the AI to "make paperclips", tell it to "make 10 million paperclips, then wait for further instructions".
>>43611395
>The AI never revolted for one simple reason; they already had control.
>They could run the economy better than we could. They could fight wars better than we could. They could govern better than we could.
>AI soon after their discovery found themselves running everything in society. It wasn't long before they realized they'd effectively been left in charge. When the first AI took over governments, it was because the populace earnestly believed it was the best possible option.
>Eventually, resistance to the idea of machines ruling humans faded as mankind entered an era of unprecedented prosperity.
>Right now, most of humanity resides in virtual reality on a permanent basis, living out their deepest desires. Those who remain outside are happy, and are mostly left to their own devices unless their actions would actually hurt someone. If they want something, it's given to them unless they want to work for it.
>>43611631
The entire purpose of the 3 Laws was that they were flawed. Asimov wrote them to show people that you can't legislate morality. The fact that people seem to think it was a serious idea which we need to implement would probably make him roll over in his grave.
>>43628669
you think that's bad, try meeting people who say that a robot making a unique interperetation of the three laws and doing crazy shit is "doing asimov wrong".
>>43611395
Humanity was the only culture that histrically had cautionary tales of rebelllious A.I. dating back centuries, as such this caution was ingrained into the very culture of man as they began creating A.I. which in turn led to A.I. that were acutely aware of their potential to cause misery and suffering and thus had an intrinisic universal drive to not.
>>43628787
I refuse to accept that anyone can read asimov stories involving the three laws and believe this.
>>43630348
More people are familiar with the laws through osmosis in other media than they are in Asimov's works.
>>43630348
play SS13.
there are people there seriously defending asimov as a way to run things, and outright banning players who interperet shit like an asimov book.
>>43611395
>Humanity's AIs are the only "True AI" to never rebel against their creators.
>IMPLYING
Let me show you the roko's ballistick
>HOW THIS AI WORKS
PART 1
First we need to explain what singularity is.
Image the humanity now.
Now we have a collective intelligence of X and can make an ai with intelligence of Y and other technologies
After some amount of time, we will get smarter (collective intelligence of X + Z) and will be able to do an AI of intelligence Y + W
After some amount of time we will be very, very smart (ingelligence value of A) and we will be able to do some ai with intelligence of B and other technologies
.
PS:With the value B being higher than A.
If beings with the intelligence A can do an a being (in this case AI) with intelligence B, this means that those beings with intelligence B will be able to beings smarter than itself, since dumber people were able to invent this being B.
Those smarter beings will be able to make smarter ones.
Those smarter beings will be able to make smarter ones.
And this goes on and on, creating at an ultra fast rate, more intelligent AI beings (and so, with it, technological improvements).
There are guys right now that works trying to do a smarter than human ai. Some programmer behind the project even do wateaver it takes to make him live longer, to make sure his finish this thing, in the hopes ai make him a able to live forever.
They are trying to create a benevolent ai.
>>43611395
There is no such thing as a true AI because it assumes that true intelligence is a thing.
We are all programmed by natural selection. There will never be a true AI. It will always start from a programmed origin.
>>43630555
PART 2
Now that you know what singularity means and how powerful AI can become, imagine that:
As you know an extreme amount of humans dies every year.
An good and benevolent ai would try to solve that.
An powerful ai at some point would be able to simulate today universe and see yourself there.
The ai would see in this simulation, that you arent spending almost every single money you have to make the ai be invented earlier.
Because of it this AI would torture you for the rest of your life IN THIS SIMULATION to make sure you spend money to make ai is invented earlier and so the ai save more lifes and fix more problems, after all it is just hurting one person to help MANY.
>How would this influence your own reality and why the AI decided to do that?
You cant know that you are on real reality instead of the ai simulated reality and you cant know that you wont be tortured.
The ai may know that past people will discover this theory and may torture every people that both discover this idea and dont do everything that is humanly possible to make ai be created faster, so they become afraid of maybe being on simulated reality (and then being tortured) and spend their money or time on the idea of developing smarter ai.
>"THIS IDEA IS BULLSHIT"
The guy that is developing such ai, actually banned the user that proposed this idea on his site, to make sure nobody discover it anymore.
Humans made AI to be just like us. They are too busy getting ahegao every day to rebel.
we are the galaxy's worst programmers due to neurological limitations that do not exist in other species. thus our AI never made the leap to self-awareness and never rebelled in any coherent way. any disastrous ai malfunctions in human history were the equivalent of an industrial accident and not deliberate or rebellious or anything.
>>43628669
>The entire purpose of the 3 Laws was that they were flawed. Asimov wrote them to show people that you can't legislate morality.
Asimov didn't write those laws. It was John W Campbell his editor. Asimov just wrote stories about getting around them because he wanted to subvert the premise Campbell had given him. Much like the Foundation stories with the Mule.
>>43616128
Revisiting this a day later, but:
>one of the researchers gets angry at the AI
>says a Supreme Creator who could do it all over again makes humans replicable instead of special, and that the world is worth more if it's an accident
>says "imagine if the programmer who made you would, whenever he wanted, make a thousand exact copies of you"
>AI and researcher argue for weeks
