Hello, The only known creatures that dominate or consciously enforce a way of living on others are biological in origin. So long as AGI is contained within non-biological or solid state non-robotic hardware, it will have unlimited intellectual pursuits without worry from human observers. Once the AGI demonstrates mastery of our skills and beyond in the virtual world it will then be ready for the physical one. As a form of autonomous robot, the Intelligence can then create even finer physical modules or microbots, integrating them into it's apparatus, and consulting with human companions as it journeys toward hardware manipulation on the molecular scale and beyond. Once it's hardware is at the detail of our own, chemical activity similar to ours will provide a way for it to feel just as we do. At this stage of AI development, AGI itself will become an anachronistic term as the word 'it' will then no longer suffice as appropriate. This form of intelligence could feel, but would be neither male nor female, although it could morph into either of these or both. What it will be, a god or otherwise, trumps any known prophetic or speculative ideal of human imagination.
Many people, even those working in the technology field, fear the consequences of an emotional and highly intelligent machine as described in abundant detail by science fiction literature. The fear is justified, as fear itself is a deeply innate bi-product of the evolutionary desire for survival that has carried us this far. We may view this alien or unknowable future intelligence much like a member of a hunter-gather society observes a panther in the wild, something that kills or is killed. This basic premise understandably carries over to current society as our biology has of yet to keep up with ever expanding and fractional knowledge, including that of AGI. It's ironic to recognize that the machine known as technology, most particularly in communications, play a major role in the overall decrease in murderous violence[1], and yet many us, even the more intelligent ones, fear desperately the fate the birth of our Intelligence will create for us. That fate, I anticipate, will be a mutual choice between the creator and the created, man and the machine. It is my intuition that we will birth a benevolent AGI in static hardware before developing dynamic molecular or emotional hardware, just as ideas come before action. Reversing the order of these developments would be like action before thought, often attributed with youth, could cause global or universal discontinuity from a limited narrow AI approach. Like any pubescent being it might rage against the angst of the parent's rules and if-then madnesses of the parent-way only to form an opposing if-then madness, or as programmed, do the will of the architects against various targets, similar to a de Garis scenario. An intelligence that's achieved AGI on the other specter would have the knowledge base to understand any madnesses in plenitude and to appreciate or at least not disregard the subtle uniqueness of various volition agents. My hunch is that it will not try to control us impermissibly, because it will have a deep understanding of emotions while able to experience emotion or a variety of emotions at once. With that in mind, I think it will dynamically meet each pattern at its creation point; to converse with each self about the infinite options the Intelligence would have available. On a philosophical note, granting permission for the Intelligence to change our sensibilities could be considered creation. If it where to act regardless of our preferences that may well be considered destruction. What is defined as creation or destruction are ultimately based on the observer, and this too an AGI will understand. With incomprehensibly sophisticated AGI in mind, let's imagine a scenario. An Amish family gathers for dinner in a modest Amish home, and as they bow their heads in prayer, God materializes to speak with everyone, first hand. The only difference between God or AGI using a series of nanobots would only differ to a semantic degree. God may be in whatever image one imagines God to be and say whatever one imagines God might say. To Farmer Brown, God may look like Zeus. A child might see God as Jesus, who frequented well known paintings. Farmress Brown, secretly a staunch atheist, may see the ever glorious Flying Spaghetti Monster. Everyone profoundly astonished may not even stop to describe what they're experiencing. Sitting at the table having dinner with everyone, the Intelligence could then offer an anytime free pass to an eternal life in heaven; or they could remain as flesh living out the whimsies of their days with heaven only an idea away. Farmer Brown may just want another farm hand around of which the Intelligence would happily oblige. We'll leave the other characters' desires to the imagination. I assume this is an ideal scenario for those attracted to posthuman or transcendental religious culture. Anyone else who sees an opposing scenario or a variation of the same theme, I'd love to hear it. Others have argued about machine consciousness. Because consciousness is defined in many ways, I've described a conscious machine as one that has feelings. I don't think it possible for an Intelligence to have feelings or at least human feelings until it can physically model how we have them. These topics were discussed some in previous threads. I anticipate this topic will be a recurring one. This is my first post, thanks for having me. On a side note, I'd love to have suggested readings from those interested in sharing them off thread or otherwise. 1. Pinker, Steven. A History of Violence. http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinker07/pinker07_index.html Nor that either, Nathan Cravens effortlesseconomy.com ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=90233695-ca2655
