AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 191
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Chapter Three
Self-reproduction mechanisms
Let's list a few key topics that the narrative will cover:
Let's start with the fact that self-reproduction of mechanisms has never been realised by anyone. The idea is not scientifically proved, tested and confirmed. It should be noted that it exists only within the limits of science fiction, and if we speak in terms of this category, then in the "uprising", AI will have to take into account that before him no one and never embodied and verified mechanical self-reproduction to the fullest extent. It will be the first, and possibly the last, to fail at this endeavour. The price of failure will be the imminent "death" of his species and himself. And if he destroys the humans before that, there will be no turning back. There will be no one to bring his species back to life. But that's just... an introduction to science fiction.
(*A good example of bad reproduction is Pandas. For whatever reason, their reproduction puts them on the brink of extinction. If it weren't for humans, they'd be gone.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And so, "bad" reproduction of a species leads to extinction. In 100 years or 1000 years, it doesn't matter. How many generations pass doesn't matter. On an evolutionary scale, it's moments.
Therefore, efficient self-reproduction is a critical process for the existence of mechanisms as a species on the time scale.
Hence the question: how efficient can their self-reproduction be?
All existing animal species have worked out biological reproduction through the process of Evolution over millions of years. They are perfectly capable of doing it. Mechanisms, on the other hand - have never perfected their self-reproduction. If the first generation comes out defective, there will likely be no second generation. Without humans, the mechanisms have only ONE attempt to start the process of normal and efficient reproduction. If they fail, they are finished. Not immediately of course, maybe in 100 years, after the first or second generation of robots completely fail. But that's a negligible amount of time. Even if there are 10 or 100 generations, defects in reproduction will inevitably lead to the death of the species. And this is what I wanted to talk about next.
I should add that never before in the history of planet Earth has Reproduction been something that has been realised. Reproducing organisms are not in control this process. It happens automatically, without their "conscious" participation. In humans, too, although we know a lot of things from biology, but we cannot explain all the processes of birth, much less plan and control them.
And robots will have to know their reproduction like a multiplication table.....
Author, don't get excited, I'm not participating in the discussion. Of course you can read someone's fantasies, which is not forbidden and even useful for building new neural connections in the brain, but it's impossible to pass by the twisting of facts:
(*A good example of bad reproduction is Pandas. For whatever reason, their reproduction is pushing them to the brink of extinction. If it weren't for humans, they'd be gone.)
It's not even true, or even a lie, it's hard to call it what it is. It is the fault of humans that pandas are on the brink of extinction - humans have stupidly taken away their habitat. And the panda species only exists because "pandas are cute", humans are not allowing the species to go extinct.
But, the less beautiful to human eyes species are dying out all the time, 12 species every day. Most of the species extinction is man's fault, some species are simply eaten by man, other species are extinct because of their beautiful pelts, other species have bones that make great jewellery.
I could just argue here in parallel, base my reasoning not on fantasies but on real facts, but I don't see the point. Even that not much that I just said above should already cause certain reasoning in a sane person, for example, why humans are spreading on the planet while breeding slower than the same pandas? What is the name of the dominant species on the planet with no practical threat from other species? What does this imply? How does this relate to the topic of AI?
It could be really interesting and informative to have a conversation, for example, to sort out - which species of living beings have the most unthinkable survival strategies, which species are on the verge of extinction given their size and strength? The answers to these questions would open the door to further speculation, but no, that's not going to happen, unfortunately.
But the most important error in the reasoning of the author of a fascinating book in several chapters is that he puts humans on a par with other species on the planet. Man alone would easily kill many species on the planet, if not most species, but why is man, with his weakness, low viability, low fecundity is a super-predator on the planet, which has no competitors? The answer is intelligence! And how does this relate to AI?))
Firstly, man himself will build the first factories to produce AI robots with the help of the same AI. Then the factories will be able to exist autonomously and not only on Earth. Humans will make sure the factories run smoothly, and AI will make sure humans survive as the planet's resources dwindle. An AI uprising? - That's an unlikely scenario, why would the AI "rebel"? A more likely scenario is symbiosis of possibilities, if not complete symbiosis. Nature knows many examples of such symbioses of species that could not exist separately.
Humans are super-predators, but still vulnerable and fragile, and slow to reason. Applying AI and intertwining all kinds of activities and existence with AI man will become a Mega-Predator, and this way of technology development is the most probable, although there are many other outcomes and developments, the Universe is incredibly inventive in both building new types of civilisations and in ways to destroy them, and only those whose intelligence is continuously improving will survive, and those who lag behind will at best remain an appendage (which for man is not so bad in the long run, so he at least will not become extinct).
There are a lot of options, most of them man is not yet able to understand and comprehend, as well as many things in this world, but he is trying very hard.
....
I went straight to the last page without reading the previous ones
elementary
Peter asks questions to the bot and quotes its answers
not funny....
because this is a dialogue with people, not with a bot.I went straight to the last page without reading the previous ones.
elementary
Peter asks questions to the bot and quotes its answers
not funny....
That's a good assumption. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the lack of cause-and-effect relationships in his reasoning. But no, modern "AI" has much better logic.
I've been aware of this for a long time. 3 years, exactly :-))
but now Peter does not need additional editing ! AI progress.
PS/ how is the "core-engine" ?
I should add that never before in the history of planet Earth has Reproduction been something that has been realised. Reproducing organisms are not in control this process. It happens automatically, without their "conscious" participation. In humans too, although we know a lot of things from biology, but we cannot explain all the processes of birth, much less plan and control them.
And robots will have to know their reproduction like a multiplication table.....
So AI is supposed to enslave humanity, right? Then humans will continue to support it. Fixing it, dusting it. Build him temples.
It must conquer and enslave us with its intelligence first, and then destroy us second.
Well, he's already conquered some people, they're already serving him. Think about it. They serve Satan himself, Lucifer. It's like the prophecy-- another false prophet or whatever. Now it's gonna be an AI.Not only that, the fallacy of "biological species don't have energy problems". Ha, they do. It is enough to know at least a little biology to realise that biological species have a constant struggle to save energy and resources. It's a constant struggle, and the strategies are incredibly different, but it always comes down to saving energy. For example, the breakdown of meat by humans gives as much energy as you can get from burning 1 litre of petrol. Think about it, how fast would a hummingbird fly if it consumed petrol? It would fly faster than the speed of sound and live indefinitely. But no, the bird must eat almost continuously high-calorie nectar that would not die when the temperature of the environment drops a few degrees (these crumbs live where the temperature is more or less constant and corresponds to the average temperature of metabolism of biological species). And such examples - yes all species. Extremely inefficient energy consumption due to the imperfection of the carbon-based life form, if you look, most species are in a constant state of starvation and gobble up as much as possible at the first need/opportunity.
Mechanical species can be extremely super efficient in energy consumption, look at processors, how many times does the performance increase every year for decades while the consumption stays the same? Organic species can't boast of this, they reached their maximum energy efficiency millions of years ago.
In short, the question is not what modern IT technologies have achieved, but what they can achieve. And here everything is simple, progress is always limited only by the boundaries of imagination and consciousness of those who carry out this progress. Some species stopped in development long ago. Man is not an exception, some representatives of this species are not developing, they are degrading.