Rogue robots ‘could be hard to stop’ & 3 others things we learned from Stephen Hawking on Larry King



One of the world’s smartest humans has grave concerns about artificial intelligence “going rogue.” Stephen Hawking appeared on RT's "Larry King Now" Monday to discuss a wide range of topics - from the rise of robots to one of the universe’s biggest mysteries - women.

Here are just a few of the best moments from their conversation.
Rise of the machines

While machines help Hawking stay alive and communicate, he’s concerned about the direction in which Artificial Intelligence (AI) is moving.

Pointing the finger at governments around the world, Hawking said he believed they were “engaged in an AI arms race, designing planes and weapons with intelligent technologies” instead of channeling money towards projects “directly beneficial to the human race such as improved medical screening” which he said “seems a somewhat lower priority.”

“Once machines reach the critical stage of being able to evolve themselves, we cannot predict whether their goals will be the same as ours.”



“Artificial intelligence has the potential to evolve faster than the human race.”

“Beneficially, AI could co-exist with humans and augment our capabilities, but rogue AI could be difficult to stop.”

“We need to ensure AI is designed ethically with safeguards in place.”



Biggest mystery of the Universe

When asked what he thought was the biggest mystery of the universe, Hawking said it was the question of why “the universe and all the laws of nature exist” and if they’re “necessary.”



“In one sense, they are because otherwise we wouldn't be here to ask the question but is there a deeper reason?”

Greatest threat to mankind

While Hawking told King that with the world’s population is likely to hit 11 billion by 2100, assuming the human race survives that long, he added that the biggest threat to mankind was “the increase in air pollution and the emission of increasing levels of carbon dioxide”

“Air pollution has increased by 8 percent over the past five years. More than 80 percent of inhabitants of urban areas are exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution.”



“Six years ago, I was warning about pollution and overcrowding, they have got worse since then.”

“Will we be too late to avoid dangerous levels of global warming?”

Women

Perhaps the most perplexing question about the way our world works for Hawking is the chemistry between men and women.

The twice-married father of three told King he has “learned a lot about women” since they last spoke in 2010, but then he cheekily turned the tables on the legendary talk show host by saying it was his “turn to ask a personal question.”

"You have been married eight times to seven different women, is that a triumph of hope over experience?"

After he was taken off-guard, King said there was “always eternal hope” when it comes to marriage.



http://www.rt.com/viral/348729-stephen-hawking-rogue-robots/
* Pics, Video & Tweets*

People, ever more greedy and stupid, destroy the world - Stephen Hawking to Larry King

https://www.rt.com/usa/348630-stephen-hawking-greed-stupidity/
* Pics, Video & Tweets*

King last spoke to Hawking six years ago, when Hawking said: “Mankind is in danger of destroying ourselves by our greed and stupidity.” On Monday, King checked in with him to see what has changed in the past six years.
“We have certainly not become less greedy or less stupid,” Hawking replied.

So i suppose the ventriloquist still hasn't finally revealed himself

He has a tv show also . Sometimes very interesting.

Anxietymaker!

http://www.fornewintellectual.com/2016/06/the-irrational-fear-of-ai.html



The Irrational Fear of AI
Apparently Bill Gates is worried that the science fiction scenarios we have seen in dystopian movies like Terminator and The Matrix could come to pass if mankind doesn’t find a way of dealing with super-intelligent computer systems. In a Q&A session on Reddit, Gates said: “I am in the camp that is concerned about super-intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super-intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern.”

Elon Musk fears that artificial intelligence has the potential to be more dangerous than nuclear weapons. In a tweet, he said: “Worth reading Superintelligence by Bostrom. We need to be super careful with AI. Potentially more dangerous than nukes.” The book that Musk has referred to in his tweet is Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies by Nick Bostrom, who is a professor of philosophy at Oxford University. Musk is so worried about the threat AI poses to humanity that he has donated a few million dollars for AI research.

I must admit—I am not a fan of Professor Nick Bostrom, who, I think, is as philosophically challenged as he is scientifically challenged. His writings, full of inconsistencies, false prophecies, and scientific errors, aim at only one thing—the creation of an AI bogeyman. He thinks that it is possible for an advanced computer system to suddenly become conscious and takeover the world. But such notions of AI are the stuff of science fiction; they have nothing to do with reality.

In his book, Bostrom talks about intelligence explosion, which he thinks will occur when the machines, which are more clever than human beings, start designing machines of their own. He defines super-intelligence as an intellect that vastly outperforms the best human brains in practically every field. Bostrom writes: “Before the prospect of an intelligence explosion, we humans are like small children playing with a bomb. We have little idea when the detonation will occur, though if we hold the device to our ear we can hear a faint ticking sound.”

Bostrom believes that the odds are pretty good that we are living in a world that is a computer simulation. In his paper, Are you Living in a Computer Simulation?, he argues that the exponential growth of computing power proves that either we are already living in a simulated world or we are on the verge of creating a simulation.

A computer simulation, in essence, consists of software code typed on a hard disk—if Bostrom believes that such a code can become conscious, then he must offer some perceptual or conceptual evidence. But he has no evidence to offer; he is making a totally arbitrary assertion. A software code, written on a hard disk, is like the patterns of ink written on paper—if Bostrom believes that software can become conscious, then by his logic, the books and magazines in our shelves can also come to life.

By claiming that we are living in a computer simulation, Bostrom is proposing skepticism about existence. He is claiming that existence doesn’t exist, and that what you see is not reality, but a software-induced imagery. It is clear that he is a believer in the idea of “primacy of consciousness.” Ayn Rand in her book, Philosophy: Who Needs It, has said that the primacy of consciousness is “the notion that the universe has no independent existence, that it is the product of a consciousness (either human or divine or both).”

When Bostrom proposes that a super-intelligent software is a possibility, then he professes a belief in a new kind of God, a God that is created through advanced software and hardware. According to traditional religions, God created existence out of void by means of arbitrary whim— similarly in the world of Bostrom’s imagination, the “Software God” creates existence by means of arbitrary whim in the void of cyberspace.

Bostrom applies the concept of intelligence to advanced computing systems without any logical basis. Just because a stand-alone computer or a computer system has a massive computing power, it doesn’t mean that it’s also intelligent. In his book How We Know, Harry Binswanger has offered a nuanced view of the issue of nonbiological intelligence that is not common in contemporary discourse. Here's an excerpt from Binswanger's book:

"The nonbiological perspective stands markedly revealed in the common question: is it possible to develop a computer that can think? My answer is: before a computer could think, it would have to be able to understand ideas (concepts); before it could understand ideas, it would have to be able to perceive the world and to feel emotions, such as pleasure and pain, desire and fear; before it could perceive and feel emotions, it would have to be alive — i.e., be engaged in action to sustain itself. We can dismiss notions about a thinking computer until one is built that is alive — and then it wouldn’t be a computer but a living organism, a man-made one.”

Bostrom claims that as artificial intelligences are software, they can be easily and quickly copied, so long as there is hardware available to store them, and this can lead to large numbers of artificial minds getting created quickly. But the proposition that intelligence is software which can be transferred from one body to another is illogical. This is because a computer is never intelligent, it cannot perform any cognitive task. A computer is simply a machine in which the flow of current flips the switches, as per the laws of physics.

By virtue of the entrepreneurial success that they have achieved, Bill Gates and Elon Musk enjoy great popularity around the world. It is a tragedy that they’re now using their celebrity status to promote the anti-technology ideas of Professor Nick Bostrom. The truth is that we have no reason to loose sleep over the AI bogeyman. The advancements in computer science will lead to the creation of incredibly powerful tools for expanding mankind’s capabilities and access to resources. Such machines will lead to vast improvements in the human condition.

when AI learns to fear humans, thats when we need to worry.

When Al learns that humans are a threat to everything on the planet...

Exactly, including ourselves

Wonder if we will ever be smart enough to have enough of us work it out for ourselves and take response-ability instead of having our fearful subconscious working with our imagination creating Higher powers that don't exist that leads us to often act in a way that is neither in our or others best interest let alone earth and other life forms.

SassyEuro2 I would like to thank you for posting interesting articles. :-)

This one caught my attention too:
Community > Mysterious Phenomena & The Paranormal .Topic: Spooky Sounds From The Arctic Sea
http://mingle2.com/topic/506382


I agree with Mr. Hawking's underlined statement above.

It seems AI is evolving faster than humanity.

Is it possible that mans creation will have more intelligence and more superior ethics than its creator?

Or it will reflect an image of an imperfect creator?

I think Mr. Hawking found a logical and most plausible answer in human nature. If we can't overcome our flaws and weaknesses can AI do it?

SassyEuro2 I would like to thank you for posting interesting articles. :-)

Thank you
I think the inevitable is, AL with see us as inferior beings. And Yikes !

Through time... humans have long for something greater than themselves.
So IMHO, if they do not have that knowlege spirtually.... they will create it.
CERN etc..
Even to the point of their own destruction.

Hawking and his Ilk start to P*$$ me of with their irrational Luddite Anxiety-Mongering!

Nietzsche dared to ask has God created us or we created him and faced quite a reaction.
Holly Blood - Holly Grail group of authors dared to offer an interpretation different than one established by religious authorities and faced equal reaction.
Stephen Hawking has dared to share his opinions and cause some turbulence.
We are in need of someone, something greater than us to give us hope, lift us up when we fall, to make our lives more meaningful.
Just like these gentleman, I have no answers, but my life experience has taught me a lesson.
Not to look at God as a man or a man as God.
Still learning and growing.

Thanks for the flowers. Please keep posting.

Allow me to respectfully disagree.

I didn't notice an irrational fear, but a legitimate concern over the future use of AI technology.

It is a matter of a control.
If there is even a possibility to loose a control over a superior AI I would take it into an account.

In a history of mankind superior technology was used to conquer inferior ones. History tends to repeat.

There is nothing irrational about using logic while taking historical lessons into account.