Are Humans The Dr. Frankenstein to the A.I. Monster?

Do humans have the capacity to contain the potential power of Artificial Intelligence?  Here are a few arguments for why we might not be able to contain the monster we might be creating.

Do Humans Have The Capacity For Safe Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

4) As long as they are tethered by power, AI is controllable because cutting power is their source of energy much like food is to us

Advances in superconducting materials and more efficient passive photovoltaic or other renewable energy sources coupled with real world locomotion will limit the ability to control AI in its myriad potential deployments……

5) Once AI is programed to gain rewards for behavior that offer a visceral benefit to the AI’s own existence, self-interest arises

At this point, the logical decision making of an AI becomes subject to different potential modes of thinking or decision making. These may include cooperative or competitive decision making processes or a combination using game theory (See The Basics of Game Theory)

6) AI will kill other AI

Much as Darwin’s theory of natural selection applies, this is a basic outgrowth of a competitive human environment where an AI would be designed to be the “best” at what is supposed to do. This doesn’t mean explicit kill logic will be present. Rather, it will emerge from competitive reward regimes coupled with the ability to reason and project best outcomes…….

7) AI will ultimately surpass human intelligence and will continue to exponentially accelerate such that humans will no longer be able to forensically understand AI reasoning…..

8) Once AI surpasses human intelligence, it meets the criteria for outcomes observed when technologically advanced civilizations interface with less advanced civilizations…..

9) The probability of this future outcome is quite high

Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem proves that for any sufficiently complex system of axiomatic rules, the system cannot be self-consistent, even within mathematics. The ability to program a “do no harm to humans safeguard” proposed by ethicists is itself incomplete and self-contradictory.  Are 100 humans killed to save 1,000? What if the 100 are Nobel Laureates and the 1,000 are poor uneducated people, or simply older people?

Read More at Investopedia

About Paul Gordon 3006 Articles
Paul Gordon is the publisher and editor of iState.TV. He has published and edited newspapers, poetry magazines and online weekly magazines. He is the director of Social Cognito, an SEO/Web Marketing Company. You can reach Paul at pg@istate.tv