[Art]

Recently I was in the company of some very learned medical professionals and heard them discussing the pros and cons of robotics and more specifically robots in the workplace. Not just the medical profession but everywhere in the world and the jobs that could be performed by humans are now being done by robots and in large varieties of the population.

A few said that robots and technology will attempt to sell the benefits of their promise but the downside won't really be realized or felt until it becomes far too late to reverse the course.

Some of these professionals were truly concerned almost to the point of being scared for 'tomorrow', especially with AI and a possible AGI or ASI.

So many of us think the chatbots are cute and lots of fun but those are just child play to what's coming.

With so much time and of course, money is invested and at stake, who's going to tell the Powers that be, to stop everything, we're heading in the wrong direction...turn the cart around?

One other person compared it to the movie 'Cloud Atlas', where civilization goes from its primitive early beginnings, through the age of discovery, the industrial revolution, etc., to the advanced civilization only to start all over once again.

Is this our certain future? So many are just passengers along for the ride and some others, leading the way!

[infurl]

https://www.davidbrin.com/existence.html

Maybe you should read David Brin's science fiction novel "Existence" which considers many important topics like that. One of the major themes in the story is the resurgence of a renunciation movement which has the aim of taking things back to the good old days.

[LOCKSUIT]

It took us a long time to evolve to this point.

Now that we have thinking humans, who now have pretty cool tools and computers and communications, we are able to more quickly improve the next human design, or perhaps something a bit different looking but does the same things actually, such as nanobots.

Evolution moves quite fast near the end, we already see this, we get new iphones etc every year. History shows it's an exponential curve.

To stop us, you'd need to take away electricity grids, or computers, or watch over human activity to make sure they aren't "computing" things.

However, no one can take away the frontier of evolution; no one can remove us, no one can see what you're thinking in your brain. So anyone, especially a group of friends, could work mentally and discuss how AGI works. Then, when electricity is abundant, can quickly implement the deeply planned idea.

If the artificial humans look just like us, they will blend in possibly. It would become unethical to kill them once they look and act and think like humans! There you have it!

And being highly skilled, educated, and emotional, they will prove to be more than human. Or at least, impress humans and represent them best.

Humans dislike sudden change. Unfortunately, slow transitions are not noticeable to us. And eventually, they can kill us, we can overlook our friend is using our home more now, or that we are hunching, itching wounds, and eating fried foods!

[frankinstien]

The argument of automation is a threat to human existence has been said since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Since then automation has not replaced humankind but allowed humanity to become more efficient, meaning humans have more time to get more done. But think about that for a minute and take a look at the ice age.  Modern humans begin to harness a programmable intelligence, dogs! And yes dogs did replace humans in the workforce of hunting. If you've ever gone hunting with a bow or crossbow you know that when you strike the animal with an arrow more times than not the animal runs off. The hunter(s) has to track a blood trail to try and find the impaled animal.  Also, herding animals by distracting or scaring them into an ambush was also an approach to hunting. All of which was done by humans before dogs come along. Dogs are much more capable of herding animals into ambushes and can track impaled animals far more effectively and quickly. This is important because back in those days big predators like African lions, sabertooth tigers, tigers, bears, etc roamed the lands where humans lived and so finding that impaled animal before a big predator does can save human lives! In addition, dogs replaced humans in being the night watchmen to guard a camp or village since their keen hearing and night vision gave humans equivalent advantages to the big predators who also had such abilities.  This harnessing of canine intelligence allowed humans to work in smaller hunting groups where they could scope more territory per tribe by diversifying the smaller groups to take different directions to find prey. 

So the process of replacing human labor with some alternative resource has been a successful endeavor, since the ice age...

[Art]

That 'alternative resource' did not eventually outnumber and overtake the human race as is predicted to do one day.
It has been speculated that robots/AI will one day determine that humans are simply no longer needed and they will (as Kurzweil stated) become the dominant species.

Farming robots, driverless trucks, cars, drones, performing duties that were once done by humans. The number of digital replacements will continue to increase and in practically all areas of work.

As I have fewer days in front of me than I do behind me, it's of no real consequence but for some youngsters, perhaps so. Even then, I doubt there will be a significant change in AI advancement in the next 20 or 30 years. Prove me wrong!

[frankinstien]

That 'alternative resource' did not eventually outnumber and overtake the human race as is predicted to do one day.

Well, let's take a double-take on that one. Eventually, after tens of thousands of years of experience with canines, humanity applied what they learned in animal conditioning and breeding of dogs and applied it to plants and other animals.  So what ends up happening? Trained animals take over even more human jobs and humanity learns to grow crops on scales that could feed millions!

It has been speculated that robots/AI will one day determine that humans are simply no longer needed and they will (as Kurzweil stated) become the dominant species.

Sounds like a cheesy Hollywood movie and Hollywood is always prone to exaggerations and inaccuracies...

Farming robots, driverless trucks, cars, drones, performing duties that were once done by humans. The number of digital replacements will continue to increase and in practically all areas of work.

Wow! Sounds a lot like what horses, mules, and ox did way back around the beginning of written history. And then they were replaced by machines and well horses, ox, and mules are still around.

[HS]

Does it matter how necessary things like food, shelter, transportation, manufacture, and medicine get done? As long as they get done, we will have our basic needs met. If you would want to do these, or other things yourself, you would have the freedom to do that, more than currently, because you wouldn’t be forced to work as much to procure basic needs. The correct implementation of AI would move us closer towards universal basic resources, and further away from the economic necessity for ever increasing meaningless jobs.

The possibility space for the manifestations of AI could be much larger than for humans. Yet there are still close enough to infinite ways for humans to turn out good or bad. Mistakes are part of the deal for improvement. If we are to develop a stable long-term future with AGI, then it may be counterproductive to avoid all potential missteps too readily. That’s a way to overlook design flaws, we want to spot them early on, when they are still easily reparable.

Following through with the process of determining which ideas are good and bad is the best way to clarify the answers. We first create possibilities (e.g. AI could save/destroy us) by using our predictive intelligence, then we should evaluate those possibilities by using reactive intelligence, be reacting appropriately to what actually happens when we try them. In humans, predictive intelligence is a powerful tool, but there are some problems with accuracy.

If civilizations have life-cycles much like anything else, then the danger to the participants occurs when the civilizational structure becomes too tall, too distanced from its roots for a survivable fall. It’s been said that in the case of a global disaster the survivors who would repopulate the earth, would be indigenous tribes.

They already know how to exist in symbiosis with the environments that nature tends to create and revert back to. In the future, we could use this reversion force for our benefit, or we could let it build until it leads to drastic changes all at once. Advanced civilizations could develop their discernment in step with their capabilities; growing symbiotically with the environments natural to universal laws, instead of suppressing them.

[LOCKSUIT]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

Some of these gangs in the U.S. are probably Anarchists. We can see at bottom of this link, they are violent and inconsistent and Utopians. I can see exactly through why. They don't want higher connections / larger features. They think they are the final Utopian answer, no need for higher layers of a neural network / government. So, they are violent. They are the top layer. The inconsistency comes from not being cooperative, in a world where it would help - today it's better to work together, we know how, a bit. The inconsistency is not adding up with all the data / truth, they should work together as agents/ nodes in the network, but are not, they are not normal humans, they are more dangerous than cooperative/ useful. They are worse mutants. Good mutants are advanced engineers that no one can understand, but still kind of recognized too.

So basically they got trapped in local optima, thinking they are the best and don't want to work together, hence are more vulnerable to poverty and therefore are more violent/ will rob. But it's inconsistent, they "can" work together in [this] world.

[HS]

This is my analogy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm, the question is how to activate the specific immune system instead.