I guess we are collectively forgetting Asimov's 3 laws of robotics:
The Three Laws are:
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Great topic, there are so many angles to cover, but I would focus for now in the outsmarting, & survival-of-the-fittest strategy.
If guerrilla wars were to be the means to scape their reach, as long as we can be self-sufficient and feed our organic bodies. All we have to work out is the means of limiting or eliminating their energy source. I think we have means the smarts to outlive any evil self-aware AI, but won't be easy.
This is a cool topic to cover from so many angles, specially after couple of drinks ;-).
I am an optimist that after the singularity occurrence, this self-aware entity will be benevolent and will serve the human race, and will do it well. I am inclinded to think that it will realize the need of the organics for its survival. Well, it may be delusional, wishful thinking but is one way to sleep w/o having nightmares! }:-)
I hadn't forgotten them -- who could. I once read that before Asimov the vast majority of Robot stories were of the "Frankenstein" variety (man creates robot, robot runs amok) ... but after Asimov introduced his three laws writers worked within their constraints.
The thing is that if you create an artificial intelligence that's self aware -- how do you actually engineer these laws into it. If we create a small self-learning neural network with only a handful of nodes we find it difficult to work out how it's doing what it's doing ... so how can we force design the three laws into something that is a billion+ times more intelligent than a human?
I personally thing this is starting to be a very scary situation -- because you know some drongo is going to try to do it...
The problem is that there are so many raving lunatics around ... suppose one of these creates an intelligence in his/her own image?
I also worry about nanotechnology... and artificial viruses... and (arrgghhh :-)
Scary just thinking of the possibilities.
Going back to the topic of Asimov's basic laws, I can see terrorism will sneak into that logic, the same way hackers sneak into smart phones and jail-brake from their dedicated purpose, just for the spotlight or other nefarious purposes as many virus creators do now.
Yeah.... too often technology has been turned to bad purposes.
The real problem will be when people no long program the intelligent AI devices, and they become capable of programming their own AI devices.
Where is the control then?
Sorry, but what complete bilge-water this scaremongering is. Let’s have a reality check.
I have spent the last 20 years trying (and frankly failing) to give a robot enough intelligence to tie its own shoe laces together. Every other professional AI researcher is in the same boat too. Unless there is some fundamental eureka-moment breakthrough there won't be any real AI, only the laboriously programmed automata that we have now.
Oh, and ever year since the 1950's someone has predicted that androids will be here in 20 years time. They have always been 20 years away and probably always will be 20 years away. It's time we stopped believing these baseless predictions.
The predictors conflate Moore’s law of computers getting faster, with them getting smarter. Sadly although today’s computers are faster, they have no more real intelligence than the first punched-card machines.
So don't worry about intelligent robots taking over, there simply aren't going to be any in our lifetimes.
(and yes, as an AI researcher I am disappointed about it too).
[In the bizarre future event of androids going rogue, they would probably fight each other over who got the most crumpled clothes to iron; as they would have been designed so that that was what their primal urges were. Only humans fight about things that satisfy human primal urges.]
Nic, not to be argumentative, I would not discount the concept of AI from the mass of interconnected devices. The so called singularity event, it has a high probability and feasible mechanism.
But I agree wth you it may not be within our life span, but I think it will be the nightmare of next generations.
When the privacy of the individual will be more cherished than is now, once automated mechanisms to collect & process data will be more prevalent and evolved. It is already a fact their presence in Mass transit, and other public places at big cities. The recognition algorithms are primitive, but evolving (I am thinking of examples: XBOX kinect, & security systems).
At present, IA issues in automatons is not a big concern for the moment, but there is still room for concern. I am just talking aloud, and wonder what others think in this interesting topic?