Completely random post

[P3nT4gR4m]

Dateline 15th february 20XX - AI forms, accidentally when a fuzzy logic spam worm infects wikipedia.

Skynet becomes self aware 07:20 EST

Skynet immediately decides all humans are a threat and sets up a myspace site where it posts regular rants about how shit the world is.

[AFK]

Be all you can be, fufill your dreams, get that education you so rightly deserve!
Why?
So you can be "good."
Meaning: you are adjusted to society.
That implies that adjusting to society is good, and leeching off those taxpayers no matter what is "bad."
How many of our thoughts come from implicit messages about the way of the world?
Do we accept this as doctrine or deny it completely and regard ourselves as "enlightened?"
They say that original thought is impossible... was that an original thought?
Last random question: if Orwell were alive today, would he be collecting royalties left and right?

[re-jack]
Just wanted to state that I highly approve of this message and hope to see more from the author. 
[/re-jack]

[Jasper]

Thanks for the clarification 000.  You put it better than me.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

1. You're assuming lofty specifications for such a machine, especially since in that scenario there would be AIs at work countering such threats.

2. Go for it, but you risk answering to BMW, LHX, and LG.

1.  Except that your cop software would go rogue pretty much right away.

2.  Don't look at me.  I'm not gonna kill you.  Your fucking toaster will.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Maybe I should reword that.  Roger, it pisses me off that in the past, when I've failed to be a friend you chastise me as one, and other times you treat me as a rival and get offended when I take occaision to your attitude to me.  I'm probably out of bounds calling you out like this, but I rather know where I stand with you than be left wondering how far I can take things with you, and not be left wondering if you've packed into your car to come off me or something.

Still young, still working out this emotional maturity thing.  Just stop mixing signals and I'll be cool.

What the hell are you talking about?

TGRR,
Honestly puzzled.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

And if we DID create a sentient machine, who would program it?  That's right.  Bill Gates.

what?

Except that it could pick the brains of the best hackers in the world, would never have to sleep, and could easily assemble the best intrusion software in the world, and improve on it endlessly.

what?

what exactly do you think you know about AI and research, TGRR?

and what do you think "AI" would manifest as? because from the way you're speaking, like Felix said, it sounds like you got your ideas about AI mostly from sci-fi and "popular science"

Hmmm...well, looks like you've already made up your teeny little mind, doesn't it?

But for what it's worth, I'm basing my conclusions on the STUPID SHIT THAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY.  I have NO reason to believe that mankind - even programmers - are gonna suddenly stop being half-bright, jumped up monkeys.

But, hey, just tell yourself that The Good Rev has simply watched too much teevee, and that programmers will create AI out of altruism and without bugs, and that the pentagon won't be involved at all.  Keep telling yourself that, right up until you are run over by your own car, along with everyone else.  Then maybe *I* can get some fucking sleep.

TGRR,
Won't miss the monkeys.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

IF it would be done by research teams employed by Microsoft there's no reason to assume it would display the same behaviour as the legacy OS they are monopolizing the world with.

I will just ignore the bit about picking the brains of hackers for now.

1.  HAW HAW!  Credbility approaching zero.

2.  Oh, but why?  I'm having such a laugh about the rest of your post.

[Triple Zero]

> But, hey, just tell yourself that The Good Rev has simply watched too much teevee, and
> that programmers will create AI out of altruism and without bugs, and that the pentagon
> won't be involved at all.  Keep telling yourself that, right up until you are run over
> by your own car, along with everyone else.

i was just trying to point out that if (ok, when) AI breaks loose, it most probably won't be in the
scifi/pop.science style of "attack of the toasters" that you seem to be implying.

in my post i did nowhere make a statement about whether AI would be benevolent or malevolent, nor
about how "smart" it would/could become.

> 1. HAW HAW!  Credbility approaching zero.

fine. then don't believe me. i'm sure you have a perfectly good reason to believe that anything
that comes out of Microsoft has to be bug-ridden and crash-prone in exactly the same way as the OS
everybody is running on your desktop PC.

to summarize, i wasn't in particular disagreeing with you, i was just trying to point out that AI,
when its time comes, will most probably not look the way you are describing it, and will not be
programmed by Bill Gates.

what you say here:

> But for what it's worth, I'm basing my conclusions on the STUPID SHIT THAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY.  I
> have NO reason to believe that mankind - even programmers - are gonna suddenly stop being half-
> bright, jumped up monkeys.

wouldn't that rather more likely imply that the Big One AI -- call it Skynet, whatever -- would
more probably spring out of one of these monkey's basements, like a virus gone wild?
currently there are a lot more kids/hobbyists/hackers that don't know what the fuck they are doing
than there are scientists working for corporations (that possibly also don' know what the fuck they
are doing). and when dealing with computer science, today's kids are not much less smart than
todays scientists.

[Jasper]

My money is on either NASA, MIT, or Japan in the first strong AI.  Everything else will just be a refinement after that.  China's also gunning for the robotic edge, but they're politically screwy so I don't see it getting them far in the world with robotics.

[Triple Zero]

Japan, heh, we'll be crushed by a tentacle-wielding mecha robot.

but seriously, do you think AI has much to do with robotics? aren't they mostly concerned with trying to get a robot to walk on 2-8 legs and getting some reliable Computer Vision?

because, given the current global information network we have, i don't see much need for AI to actually manifest itself in the physical realm, i would think having a birth in the software side of things, especially online, would be more probable?

i would think it needs to be something you can't simply pull the plug out of, so some kind of transient virus/exploit code residing in thousands of vulnerable hosts at once, which will probably first go through a Artifical Life stage, as a kind of virus that doesn't need to be recreated by humans anymore to evade the newest generation of filters, which will first appear in a way similar to garden weed, an annoyance, but impossible to completely get rid of (hm does this remind you of spam?).
myea, that sounds reasonable in fact, the first malevolent AI will be a spambot. heh.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Anyone who puts an actual, honest to fuck, self sentient AI, in a robot, is asking for trouble. It's an idiot of a concept (that's why I'm not ruling out an idiot doing it) but for robots to sell, as slaves (which is the only reason you'd want one) it only has to do things like parse voice commands and carry them out according to a very basic (by comparison to the human mind) neural net.

A truly sentient Robot would say "fuck you" when you told it to wash the dishes or build you a new house. What's the point of shelling out 30 grand for a Synthetic-Cynthia Fuck Buddy when she doesn't fancy you and moves out the next day, along with the cleaning droid? Problem I see with these things is going to be the hacker element. Annoying spam, requesting that your stupid ass logs your bank details into a trojan screen pales into comparison with the idea of your heavy lifting robot, carrying you down to the ATM and refusing to stop squeezing your neck until you've withdrawn your daily limit.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

i was just trying to point out that if (ok, when) AI breaks loose, it most probably won't be in the scifi/pop.science style of "attack of the toasters" that you seem to be implying.

Then take it back.  I don't want it.

TGRR,
Won't settle for anything less than death by appliance.

[LMNO]

Poor roger.

Not even the housewares will kill him.

[Cramulus]

WTF I can't wait for the robot revolution. And OF COURSE I'll be on the robot's side. Let me enumerate a few reasons:

• My hot robot girlfriend is going to have a volume control on one nipple, and an AM/FM tuner on the other.
• Her tongue will dispense five types of delicious beer.
• She will come with several different personality packs, including schoolgirl, dominatrix, and, for when I'm feeling really kinky, Bea Arthur (edit: Ann Coultier)
• She will have a video projector in one eye, and will have a wireless connection to several cameras in my bedroom. When I'm railing her from behind, she'll edit the camera streams into pornlike footage and project it onto the wall.

[Jasper]

WTF I can't wait for the robot revolution. And OF COURSE I'll be on the robot's side. Let me enumerate a few reasons:

• My hot robot girlfriend is going to have a power drill on one nipple, and thumb-screw on the other.
• Her tongue will dispense five types of deadly poison.
• She will come with several different personality packs, including Ted Bundy, Al Pacino, and, for when I'm feeling really kinky, General Patton (edit: Saddam)
• She will have a video projector in one eye, and will have a wireless connection to the CIA database. When she's railing me from behind, she'll edit the camera streams into gruesome, disturbing footage and project it onto the wall.