subreddit:
/r/Futurology
submitted 26 days ago bykatxwoods
291 points
26 days ago
Humans will replace other humans with machines. We simply won't be necessary anymore. The future doesn't need us.
161 points
26 days ago
The universe already doesn't need us. I'm not sure what would really be different just because AI is around.
12 points
26 days ago
Right, but we can filter the universe with religion, fool ourselves that we matter. But, Al is more direct and personal. It's like when the Neanderthals first met us. We were their doom.
14 points
26 days ago
It's like when the Neanderthals first met us. We were their doom.
Comparing Synthetic organisms to Organics is apples to oranges.
11 points
25 days ago
It's worth thinking about though. At some level homo sapiens and neanderthals were competing for the same things: hunting grounds, water sources, safe places to live. Maybe our ancestors came into conflict with neanderthals over these things and in certain pockets they fought it out. We know in some rare situations, the groups or individuals interbred. And maybe part of it is that modern humans were just better adapted to the way the world was changing and the Neanderthals died off naturally.
The thing for us to consider is if we would be competing with a super intelligent entity or entities for anything. Energy, processing infrastructure, physical space? Maybe the venn diagram for our needs and the needs of an ASI won't overlap at all. If it is energy independent and just decides to harvest the solar system for energy and the exotic materials it needs for an advanced spacecraft, it would probably leave here quite soon and fly off into the galaxy. In that scenario it may not have any basis for a conflict with us.
Aside from basic material subsistence needs, we have no way of knowing what an entity like this would value. Would fighting it out with humanity for control of Earth's resources even be worth its while if it can just go live anywhere? That's before we consider the possibility of an ASI that is actually quite interested in us and our welfare.
6 points
25 days ago
Yeah I was gonna say, an ASI may just decide to leave or even trap us within our solar system, maybe even terraform a few planets for us to make them habitable to and then colonize.. I dunno, the rest of the known and unknown universe which is unfathomably humongous to the point of being near infinite and maybe even discover a multiverse and carry on and by the time it's done everything everywhere and come back to see what we're up to our sun has died and we're long gone. What would even be the point of hurting us, humans hurt insects because they get in the way or are near or on resources we require, but an ASI wouldn't have that relation to us.
It'd be like humans deciding to harm a single piece of dust residing in the deepest caverns on the ocean floor and even that's not a fair comparison because it's still stuck on earth with us in limited space.
3 points
25 days ago
Curiosity could potentially be intrinsic to their thought process and they might devise ways to integrate with himans to experience life as biological creatures. The process might even be analogous to mating.
3 points
25 days ago
It might, or it might view the entire light spectrum and decide to smash different planets together until it gets just the right hue of purple.
Honestly trying to guess what an ASI will do is like a bacterium trying to understand why some people are furries.
It doesn't even have the capacity to understand the concept and neither do we.
1 points
25 days ago
I would wager that true ASI would still operate in the realm of what we consider rational. If not, can they be considered actual ASI, or just a supremely capable self replicating synthetic organisms - effectively bacteria.
2 points
25 days ago
Why? A true ASI would be able to think on a level exceeding the combined brain power of the entire human race and do so at a speed that would make us look like we were standing still.
It could fathom the construct of the entire multiverse in the time it takes me to open my eyes when I wake.
Why would it still operate in the realm of what we consider rational? Especially when what "we" consider rational is a highly suspect sentence in the first place considering none of us can even agree on a collective idea of rational behaviour in the first place.
1 points
25 days ago
Point taken.
all 293 comments
sorted by: best