Happier Abroad Forum Community

Stephen Hawking: ‘Artificial Intelligence Could Spell The End Of The Human Race’

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/stephen-ha ... ml#Pdy07Al

Professor Stephen Hawking is getting an upgrade to the technology that allows him to communicate. But the legendary physicist is fully aware of the implications of improving his own AI software.

Earlier this year, Hawking spelled out the potential dangers of artificial intelligence: If we can make robots smarter than humans, they can out-invent human researchers and out-manipulate human leaders, “developing weapons we cannot even understand,” in Hawking’s words.

He reiterated those claims to the BBC on Tuesday, which had asked about his own AI upgrades: “The development of artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race,” Hawking said.

That said, Hawking’s AI is very basic. It was partially built by the engineers behind Swiftkey, which creates a smartphone keyboard app with predictive learning; Hawking’s system similarly learns how the professor thinks and suggests his next words.

Hawking also says his computer-generated voice hasn’t changed — “It has become my trademark, and I wouldn’t change it for a more natural voice with a British accent,” he said. “I’m told that children who need a computer voice want one like mine.”

But Hawking reiterated his fears of AI becoming smart and powerful enough to match or surpass humans in almost every perceivable respect.

“It would take off on its own, and redesign itself at an ever increasing rate,” he said. “Humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn’t compete, and would be superseded.”

Interesting to note, Hawking believes the internet will play a major role in how we shape artificial intelligence — how we choose to cultivate it or exploit it over time.

“More must be done by the internet companies to counter the threat, but the difficulty is to do this without sacrificing freedom and privacy.”

The post Stephen Hawking: ‘Artificial Intelligence Could Spell The End Of The Human Race’ appeared first on Business Insider.

I guess Paloaltoguy is right after all....

There has been no major discovery in Artificial Intelligence since its inception in the 1950s. It's really just a collection of programming tricks. The Chess program can beat humans through its massive capability to search ahead more steps than a human can. Machines are getting good at turning human speech into written text based on encoding of linguistic rules. Neural networks are more mathematics than an accurate representation of a neural net. Expert systems and object oriented programming developed from lisp and symbolic processing. However, that could all change. The reason is that neuroscientists are getting to the point where they are developing new technology that can observe how millions of neurons interact together to perform a computation. Once they understand how the brain works, the technologists will be able to duplicate it. But at this point, AI is still more hype than reality.

.

I love how roosh members read this forum just for my insights <3

http://www.returnofkings.com/48373/perm ... ent-future

MrPeabody wrote:There has been no major discovery in Artificial Intelligence since its inception in the 1950s. It's really just a collection of programming tricks. The Chess program can beat humans through its massive capability to search ahead more steps than a human can. Machines are getting good at turning human speech into written text based on encoding of linguistic rules. Neural networks are more mathematics than an accurate representation of a neural net. Expert systems and object oriented programming developed from lisp and symbolic processing. However, that could all change. The reason is that neuroscientists are getting to the point where they are developing new technology that can observe how millions of neurons interact together to perform a computation. Once they understand how the brain works, the technologists will be able to duplicate it. But at this point, AI is still more hype than reality.

Mr. Peabody I am glad to see you back, I was worried and thought that the Doggie Dementia may had run it's course on you. Nice to see you back posting.

Moretorque wrote:

MrPeabody wrote:There has been no major discovery in Artificial Intelligence since its inception in the 1950s. It's really just a collection of programming tricks. The Chess program can beat humans through its massive capability to search ahead more steps than a human can. Machines are getting good at turning human speech into written text based on encoding of linguistic rules. Neural networks are more mathematics than an accurate representation of a neural net. Expert systems and object oriented programming developed from lisp and symbolic processing. However, that could all change. The reason is that neuroscientists are getting to the point where they are developing new technology that can observe how millions of neurons interact together to perform a computation. Once they understand how the brain works, the technologists will be able to duplicate it. But at this point, AI is still more hype than reality.

Mr. Peabody I am glad to see you back, I was worried and thought that the Doggie Dementia may had run it's course on you. Nice to see you back posting.

Lol

Well George Clooney just lost out on a Nestle gig to a robot...

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/technology ... 04983.html

AI is BS. It's contradictory to expect a box to think outside the box.

There is no evidence that AI even exists. Computers only do what they are programmed to do. The theory of AI doesn't take into account that consciousness or the human soul may not arise from the brain only and may have quantum extradimensional origins. It assumes that the human soul doesn't exist and that consciousness is just a complicated system of neural networks. None of this has been proven.

A complex computer may not have consciousness after all. There's no evidence that computers can think for themselves, at least not that I'm aware of.

Come on guys stop confusing AI with consciousness. Several members have posted related stuff, it's atrocious.
It doesn't matter if an entity is conscious or not; it's a moot point because it can't be proven. For that matter, I can't prove that any of you is really 'conscious', nor can any of you prove that I am.

What matters is that the machine/entity can DO the stuff we can, even "tricking" you into believing it's got feelings.
Coming soon to a Costco near you.

MrPeabody wrote: The reason is that neuroscientists are getting to the point where they are developing new technology that can observe how millions of neurons interact together to perform a computation. Once they understand how the brain works, the technologists will be able to duplicate it. But at this point, AI is still more hype than reality.

Trying to mimic the brain is the equivalent of trying to make a feathered, wing-flapping airplane. It might bring some insights but it's not the right path IMO.

droid wrote:Come on guys stop confusing AI with consciousness. Several members have posted related stuff, it's atrocious.
It doesn't matter if an entity is conscious or not; it's a moot point because it can't be proven. For that matter, I can't prove that any of you is really 'conscious', nor can any of you prove that I am.

Right, because proof only exists in mathematics. But I believe I know what consciousness is, or at least how to create it, and it would be a very interesting concept to discuss in the religion and spirituality forum. If I am right, it wouldn't be that hard to duplicate on a computer.

Winston wrote:There is no evidence that AI even exists. Computers only do what they are programmed to do. The theory of AI doesn't take into account that consciousness or the human soul may not arise from the brain only and may have quantum extradimensional origins. It assumes that the human soul doesn't exist and that consciousness is just a complicated system of neural networks. None of this has been proven.

A complex computer may not have consciousness after all. There's no evidence that computers can think for themselves, at least not that I'm aware of.

Not at this moment for sure but who knows what will happen in the next 50 years.

I think right now,the path i'm for is to extend maximum healthy human lifespan.
That doesn't imply to fuse the machine with the human or to transfer the brain information to a computer.
I found this a lot more like a science fiction and it will be a quit hard problem.
Some says it will happen,some says it's impossible.

I trust more in biotechnology,genetics,stem cells,telomerase.
I'm already myself using some supplements to try to stay in shape and i exercice regulary.
Nothing of this should extend my maximum lifespan but it can help with the healthy lifespan.
Staying in better shape longer yes but unless we can't go inside the molecular problem and they are some directions already on the table,we would not live to 150 or more.
I can see myself with my parents who are getting older,how i'm totally against death by aging.
The aging problem should be solutioned,i have already calculated the money i will have in the next decades,and of course if no accident happen to me or a disease,i plan to use this money when medical intevention will be available to rejuvenate my body and extend my healthy maximum lifespan.

I think that's a reasonable goal to say the aging problem will have a lot of chance to be partially repaired in the next 50 years.

Are Humans Necessary?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/04/opini ... .html?_r=0

Liberal establishment getting you acclimated to robotic future....