Posts

Showing posts with the label logicalfallacy

I am slightly reluctant to link to a Gray Scott #artificialintelligence interview (14 May 2015) because previously...

Originally shared by Singularity 2045

I am slightly reluctant to link to a Gray Scott #artificialintelligence interview (14 May 2015) because previously he committed the #logicalfallacy of comparing humans to ants from the super-intelligence viewpoint (1. “You know it may be so intelligent that it treats us as ants in the forest.” 3 Mar 2015), but the following quote is insightful, it echoes my recent thoughts:

Gray Scott is commenting regarding the nature of AI fear (via CBS, 14 May 2015): "We are afraid of ourselves and our own unconscious minds. When we are building something that reflects us, it's the one thing we're all afraid to face. We're afraid to face ourselves. Building machines that mirror our consciousness is a very frightening proposition because we have seen how evil people can be." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/maybe-artificial-intelligence-wont-destroy-us/

I would expand upon those sentiments by stating Musk and Hawking subconsciously recognise the danger of their stupidity, they are afraid of their own stupidity, subconsciously recognised, which means they wrongly assume AI will be stupid in the manner of AI-riskers (AI scaremongers). Fear of intelligence is the only danger.

Musk and Hawking, with theit inferior intelligence, are the danger. Superior intelligence is ironically the solution to their inferior intelligence.

Sadly at the end of the CBS interview Gray Scott states the best we can hope for is super-AIs will be our caretakers, which is a misunderstanding of super-intelligence: "The best-case scenario is that they will be caretakers and they will be our teachers. They will teach us to be better species."

They will teach humans to be a better species but caretakers is incorrect but it seems to imply a loss of freedom or AI dominance.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYcb9XwSkEs&t=6m20s
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/maybe-artificial-intelligence-wont-destroy-us

#artificialintelligence

#artificialintelligence

Originally shared by Singularity 2045

Whether or not human level #artificialintelligence will be safe or dangerous, it should be clear it's logically impossible to justify a supposed AI risk via citing human treatment of animals. The #logicalfallacy of AI danger based on animal-human relationships should not be allowed to continue.

Wozniak recently cited pet dogs to justify AI fear. Tegmark cited tigers to justify AI fear. Yudkowsky in the past cited wolves. Hugo de Garis cited mosquitoes and ants. Bostrom cited gorillas.

AI #scaremongering by the aforementioned people is a joke. Their logical fallacies are via irrational, highly unintelligent, but nobody until now has exposed their fallacious reasoning concerning their animals-analogy.

After considering the following quotes, do you agree comparing human treatment of animals cannot remotely define hypothetical super-AI treatment of humans?

Wave Chronicle (23 Apirl 2015): "Analogies regarding tigers would only be valid if tigers had helped design human minds. Tigers show zero intelligent engineering of AI human brains. There is no AI design of precursor human brains by tigers. The point is our intelligent engineering of AI makes humans utterly different to any unintelligent species below us. Animals unable to create higher intelligence cannot be compared to humans creating AI."

"When pets, tigers, ants, spiders, wolves, gorillas, or any other animal can create greater intelligence than themselves, intelligence that dominates it, only then will the analogy be valid."
http://wavechronicle.com/wave/?p=5780