Author: KarinsDad
Date: 15:01:22 03/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2000 at 17:05:07, John Coffey wrote: [snip] >I think that this thread is missing the point of my original post. Computers >are labor saving devices (among other things.) People have often feared labor >saving devices thinking that they will replace workers. Instead the >introduction of these devices has helped humans in every way. Now some people >are afraid that computers will replace us in the decision making process. Not >likely. They will provide us with better information so that we can make the >decisions. When computers do make decisions, it will be the ones computers can >do best. (Will traffic flow better if this light turns green right now?) >Humans likewise will do what they can do best. > >John I did not miss your points. Your point of people fearing labor saving devices is based off of previous occurances in history which may or may not apply to this subject. Your point of computers making computational only decisions and people making the "real" decisions is naive. Having an extremely intelligent computer means nothing unless you connect input and output devices to it. What if the output device is a query system in the office of the President of the United States? The President asks the super intelligent system, "How do we handle this problem in this third world country?" and the program responds, "Well, typical embargo techniques will not work with this country for reason x, therefore, your only choice is to bomb the capital of that country until it submits.". The program is more intelligent than 1000 men (or even a million men) combined, so it will not make any mistakes that a person can detect. The President has been assured that this computer knows what it is talking about and the program eventually gets the President's complete trust. Or, what if nano-technology takes off and such a super intelligent computer was in charge of a manufacturing facility with this technology in place? It could build anything it wanted. What if a super intelligent computer was put in charge of nuclear missiles? Once one country puts such a control on their missiles, other countries would have to follow suit or be left behind (regardless of any manmade controls to the contrary, a super intelligent computer would figure out a way to trick humans into launching if it wanted to). People do not fear labor saving devices because they may take over their kitchen. People fear labor saving devices because they may cause them to lose their job. The fear associated with super intelligent computers is totally different and as follows: Company 1 has a super intelligent computer to determine business decisions. Company 2 cannot compete unless it also has a super intelligent computer making decisions. Company 1 notices that company 2 is catching up, so they upgrade to a more sophisticated super intelligent computer system. Etc., etc., etc. Marketing pressures force the continued creation of bigger and better systems in order to compete. Now, apply that to governments. The U.S. Post Office would need such a computer to compete with UPS. The U.S. Air Force would need such a computer to compete with foreign countries. And even if there was a scare, it would not matter. No level of sanctions by governments on the creation of super intelligent computers would prevent companies with billions or even trillions of dollars at stake from doing it in the background. Look at the oil companies today. They wash their tankers out in the middle of the ocean, even though that breaks international law. They don't care. It is cheaper to pay the fine than it is to use a proper clean up facility. And, governments will not care if a computer has the intelligence of a man (sling shots are legal). So what? But what happens when one computer has the intelligence of a thousand men (guns are legal, but licensed) or a million men (surface to air missiles are illegal for individuals, but still attainable on the black market) or a billion men (nuclear weapons are usually unattainable, even on the black market)? Then, the governments will try to step in, but it may be too late. And the idea is not one of being afraid of computers which are manually programmed. Yes, there can be a mistake in the program which causes a major problem, but it can usually be diagnosed and corrected. The idea is being afraid of computers which not only perform magnitudes more calculations per second than every person on the planet combined, but are also capable of learning and modifying their own software. A 10 Thz toaster is still just a toaster. A 10 Thz brain is something to think about (no pun intended). And how quickly could a computer with the intelligence of 100 men be used to create a computer with the intelligence of 1000 men? 6 months? 2 years? And how quickly could a computer with the intelligence of 1000 men be used to create a computer with the intelligence of 10000 men? Etc. I do not doubt that the introduction of super intelligent computers will help out mankind in the short term. The problem is in what devices of these levels of power may do in the long term. KarinsDad :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.