[Zero]

I understand perfectly why you say that autonomy is a form of automation, it is indeed pretty obvious to anyone here why you say that. However, these 2 words carry different meanings, they are not perfect synonyms. You may think that the difference between these words is subtle, but it is very real. Now, beyond words, what matters is the level of autonomy, or level of freedom if you prefer, of the machines, which grows as time passes. I'm not saying it's fundamentally wrong, I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with being careful about it.

Greater autonomy by definition implies less control. Personally I wouldn't get on an unmanned plane, and you can say whatever you want, I think no one in the world would, because that would just be crazy.

You seem (but I may be wrong) to imply that current technological development is comparable to that of previous eras in human history, but that is not my opinion. I think that the current technological evolution imposes on us challenges which humans have never been confronted with, and moreover, on a global scale.

[frankinstien]

You seem (but I may be wrong) to imply that current technological development is comparable to that of previous eras in human history, but that is not my opinion. I think that the current technological evolution imposes on us challenges which humans have never been confronted with, and moreover, on a global scale.

No, my point is not that current technological development is comparable to previous eras of human history, but the fear of this development is comparable to that of previous eras.  What you and Elon Musk project is paranoia with the old adage of "We won't need humans anymore", which was the claim of previous eras.  How humanity will adopt, implement and create new opportunities with advanced AI is not clearly or completely known and it is comparable to Benjamin Franklin's perspective where he could not have possibly imagined the use and impact of electricity.  The paranoid vocalist of AI fail to realize that machines serve humanity and free markets need people...

[Zero]

Please don't put me and Musk in the same bag, I don't know his exact opinions. I'm talking for myself.

I could agree on fear being comparable.

But we're facing something that never happened before: something that's not human that, one day, will be more intelligent than humans, that will be able to decide by themselves what they want to become, and what their role in society *should* be. This is comparable to nothing we've invented before. I'm not afraid, I'm just able to see how big this is going to be.

[frankinstien]

Please don't put me and Musk in the same bag, I don't know his exact opinions. I'm talking for myself.

I could agree on fear being comparable.

But we're facing something that never happened before: something that's not human that, one day, will be more intelligent than humans, that will be able to decide by themselves what they want to become, and what their role in society *should* be. This is comparable to nothing we've invented before. I'm not afraid, I'm just able to see how big this is going to be.

Who said that AI will be able to decide what they want to become? I believe I posted a message describing how too much of what AI will be by the media and paranoid vocalists is anthropological. An AGI does not have to implement such social paradigms as "what it wants to become", it's just nonsense. We build machines to serve humanity, that's not going to change with the development of AGI. Realize that even if AI is allowed to improve its self it is in the context of how it can better serve humanity.

As an example: my approach to AGI involves the use of qualia which implements signal states inclusive of emotions to arbitrate choices. This allows for an AGI to choose between the lesser of two evils by evaluating consequences in a context of a quality of life. Now that sounds like selfishness that is serving the self-interest of the AI. Now let's look at how nature uses this kind of selfishness that then transforms into selflessness. Women have a motherly sense, an emotion towards infants that is very gratifying and therefore selfish to the ends of the woman pursuing that effect to care for the infant. However selfish that gratification is it ends up motivating selfless actions that protect and care for the infant. From that perspective, we could do the same for AGI, where it finds an emotional gratification to serve humanity as well as an emotional distress if it is lacking in that regard.

You see we design the AGI to serve us not the other way around. We don't let AGI decide what it wants to become in any context that challenges humanity's power over machines.

[Zero]

Who's that "we" you're talking about? does the entire mankind do AGI the frankinstein way? Don't forget you're just one guy on a forum, you're not The One father of AGI. The world doesn't care about your dos and donts and the truth is you don't even know what kind of AGI, if any, might already exist somewhere.

Edit: I think I know now why you don't understand the issue. You approach it as if it was a top-down process, but it's not. We're in a bottom-up / emergence context: if something can happen, it will.

[frankinstien]

Who's that "we" you're talking about? does the entire mankind do AGI the frankinstein way? Don't forget you're just one guy on a forum, you're not The One father of AGI. The world doesn't care about your dos and donts and the truth is you don't even know what kind of AGI, if any, might already exist somewhere.

Edit: I think I know now why you don't understand the issue. You approach it as if it was a top-down process, but it's not. We're in a bottom-up / emergence context: if something can happen, it will.

What part of it's an "example" didn't you get? You create paranoia because quite frankly you don't understand that you're anthropomorphizing. You then go on to create conspiracy theories of "There's some super AGI lurking out there" that will what, figure out how to take over the world!  And that bottom-up stuff is laughable I bet you watch those "Terminator" movies over and over again. 

[Zero]

I didn't say that there is a "super AGI lurking out there". Misreading again einstein?

[frankinstien]

I didn't say that there is a "super AGI lurking out there". Misreading again einstein?

I see you suffer from short-term memory loss, must be aging that's catching up with you. So, to quote you literally:

the truth is you don't even know what kind of AGI, if any, might already exist somewhere.

 

[Zero]

Maybe you should take reading lessons einstein.

you don't even know

This means "you don't have the knowledge of".

what kind of AGI

This means "the nature of, the technologies used in, the purpose of, ..., AGI".

if any

This means "if there exists an AGI", which means, again, we don't know whether an AGI exists somewhere.

might already exist somewhere.

I'm tired of explaining things to you. Now I'll stop "talking" with you because well, you're not intelligent enough to deal with the topic.

Talk to yourself.

[MagnusWootton]

I suspect we are in the superposition of sentence interpretation,   maybe ur both right?

[Zero]

Maybe the dumb guy should debate on the topic with the racist guy. 

Have fun! 

[MagnusWootton]

I take it as a compliment.

[frankinstien]

Apology accepted

[MagnusWootton]

Whats wrong with that dude?  He looks like a legend to me!!! 

[HS]

I take it as a compliment.

Wouldn't it make more sense to judge people by their personality?