Hah. The minute I sent my message on no response, I got John's response.
This time, John, I have to say: Wrong, wrong, wrong,
You just don't know what you are talking about. - just walking on very
thin ice and expecting your fame on other fields with get you through.
It is not that some identifiable person is needed to put AI into inhuman
action. Nor is it needed that this kind of mishap originates in any
identifiable "machine".
You know better!
In any net, everything is connected with every other 'thing'. Just as
you said on the philosphy of CSP.
Life is net-like.
Are you taking the side: "machines are innocent, blame individual
persons' ???
If so, you are not seeing the forest, just the trees.
Kirsti
John F Sowa kirjoitti 16.6.2017 06:15:
On 6/15/2017 1:10 PM, Eugene Halton wrote:
What "would motivate [AI systems] to kill us?"
Rationally-mechanically infantilized us.
Yes. That's similar to what I said: "The most likely reason why
any AI system would have the goal to kill anything is that some
human(s) programmed [or somehow instilled] that goal into it."
these views seem to me blindingly limited understandings of what
a machine is, putting an artificial divide between the machine
and the human rather than seeing the machine as continuous with
the human.
I'm not denying that some kind of computer system might evolve
intentionality over some long period of time. There are techniques
such as "genetic algorithms" that enable AI systems to improve.
But the word 'improve' implies value judgments -- a kind of Thirdness.
Where does that Thirdness come from? For genetic algorithms, it comes
from a reward/punishment regime. But rewards are already a kind of
Thirdness.
Darwin proposed "natural selection" -- but that selection was based
on a reward system that involved energy consumption (AKA food).
And things that eat (such as bacteria) already exhibit intentionality
by seeking and finding food, as Lynn Margulis observed.
As Peirce said, the origin of life must involve some nondegenerate
Thirdness. There are only two options: (1) Some random process that
takes millions or billions of years produces something that "eats".
(2) Some already intelligent being (God? Demiurge? Human?) speeds up
the process by programming (instilling) some primitive kind of
Thirdness and lets natural selection make improvements.
But as I said, the most likely cause of an evil AI system is some
human who deliberately or accidentally put the evil goal into it.
I would bet on Steve Bannon.
John
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
