Page 3 of 16

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:13 am
by Ifreann
San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Fiction is useful for exploring the downsides of potential new technologies, but it would be silly to wholly write off a field of technological study just because once someone told a story where they had that technology and it was bad.

Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and been warning us about the dangers of certain technologies for years yet scientists refuse to heed such warnings

Do please elaborate.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:14 am
by Nuroblav
State of Turelisa wrote:Transhumanism is one of the greatest threats to Mankind. It's a misuse of reason by Man seeking to advance his autonomy by striving to place the laws of nature within it.

On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!

To be fair I'm happy the way I am, despite how strenuous being a human is. But if someone wants robots arms, good for them so long as it's done safely. Then again, is it possible at the moment? Pretty sure it is but I could be wrong.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:19 am
by San Lumen
Ifreann wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and been warning us about the dangers of certain technologies for years yet scientists refuse to heed such warnings

Do please elaborate.

Star Trek predicted things like cell phones and stun guns and countless other things. How many films have their been warning of the dangers of AI. Upgrade, terminator, the matrix and I robot are a few

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:25 am
by Region of Dwipantara
Nuroblav wrote:
State of Turelisa wrote:Transhumanism is one of the greatest threats to Mankind. It's a misuse of reason by Man seeking to advance his autonomy by striving to place the laws of nature within it.

On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!

To be fair I'm happy the way I am, despite how strenuous being a human is. But if someone wants robots arms, good for them so long as it's done safely. Then again, is it possible at the moment? Pretty sure it is but I could be wrong.

At this moment, no. In the future, where intelligence enhancements, genetic engineering, cybernetics, and literal telepathy are being developed? Yes. Seems like the future is slowly becoming an immensely unequal place where the ultra-rich transhumanist Homo deus class stomps over the left-behind plebeian Homo sapiens living off basic.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:28 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Fiction is useful for exploring the downsides of potential new technologies, but it would be silly to wholly write off a field of technological study just because once someone told a story where they had that technology and it was bad.

Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and been warning us about the dangers of certain technologies for years yet scientists refuse to heed such warnings


Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and has been guiding us to amazing discoveries and rational social accommodations of them too. How come scientists disregarded the warnings but for some reason heeded the positive predictions?

Maybe the scientists read sci-fi as a child, and when they saw "sci-fi" movies with their much greater representation of dystopian futures, they just scoffed at them. Reading, they were inspired to study science, while the others who got their vision of the future from movies lost interest in science or progress and became horse trainers or motor mechanics.

Good science fiction is inspiring. Your comment suggests you are mostly familiar with action-movie science fiction, which to me is plain depressing. Yeah. We might still be that dumb in the future ...

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:32 am
by San Lumen
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and been warning us about the dangers of certain technologies for years yet scientists refuse to heed such warnings


Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and has been guiding us to amazing discoveries and rational social accommodations of them too. How come scientists disregarded the warnings but for some reason heeded the positive predictions?

Maybe the scientists read sci-fi as a child, and when they saw "sci-fi" movies with their much greater representation of dystopian futures, they just scoffed at them. Reading, they were inspired to study science, while the others who got their vision of the future from movies lost interest in science or progress and became horse trainers or motor mechanics.

Good science fiction is inspiring. Your comment suggests you are mostly familiar with action-movie science fiction, which to me is plain depressing. Yeah. We might still be that dumb in the future ...

I think there is certain level of arrogance among some scientists

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:32 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Do please elaborate.

Star Trek predicted things like cell phones and stun guns and countless other things.


As part of a rather positive vision of humanity's future. Earth is peaceful. Anyone wanting excitement or danger has to join a starship crew. Isn't that ... good?

War with aliens isn't that positive, but at least it gives us motivation to unite as one species.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:33 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
San Lumen wrote:
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Science fiction has been phenomenal at predicting the future and has been guiding us to amazing discoveries and rational social accommodations of them too. How come scientists disregarded the warnings but for some reason heeded the positive predictions?

Maybe the scientists read sci-fi as a child, and when they saw "sci-fi" movies with their much greater representation of dystopian futures, they just scoffed at them. Reading, they were inspired to study science, while the others who got their vision of the future from movies lost interest in science or progress and became horse trainers or motor mechanics.

Good science fiction is inspiring. Your comment suggests you are mostly familiar with action-movie science fiction, which to me is plain depressing. Yeah. We might still be that dumb in the future ...

I think there is certain level of arrogance among some scientists


They know stuff you don't. You'll have to study hard for years to catch up ... or you could get over it.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:36 am
by San Lumen
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
I think there is certain level of arrogance among some scientists


They know stuff you don't. You'll have to study hard for years to catch up ... or you could get over it.


Yeah there’s no possible way technology like this or AI couldn’t lead to the film Upgrade, Terminator or The Matrix

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:40 am
by Region of Dwipantara
San Lumen wrote:
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
They know stuff you don't. You'll have to study hard for years to catch up ... or you could get over it.


Yeah there’s no possible way technology like this or AI couldn’t lead to the film Upgrade, Terminator or The Matrix

I mean, there is a pretty good chance that what will happen won't come anywhere close to what we know or expected at all. Tom Scott's apocalyptic scenario on how YouTube copyright reform deleted a whole century is a great one.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:04 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
San Lumen wrote:
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
They know stuff you don't. You'll have to study hard for years to catch up ... or you could get over it.


Yeah there’s no possible way technology like this or AI couldn’t lead to the film Upgrade, Terminator or The Matrix


Particularly not the "technology" of The Matrix. Seriously, a whole world powered by "human energy" that doesn't exist?

I haven't seen Upgrade, but Terminator was a decent action flick with a bit of sci-fi backstory. The "fuck you asshole" menu scene was particularly funny.

But dystopias defeat themselves. You think any of that is going to happen without people intervening to stop the worst parts of it? At what point do we allow armed robots with no compunction against taking human life, act as police? Or just walk the streets like citizens? We don't need the warnings of dystopian sci-fi to know that's a bad idea.

The robots are staying in factories for now, with a few "guides" in safe public places where they won't be stolen. And in operating theatres ... I think we may be getting close to the line there. A lot of people are very sketchy about having remote surgery (ie a robot controlled by a human surgeon) and I expect even fewer will opt for a little robot on an orthoscope to do internal surgery on them. I'd take it, but probably most people wouldn't, which would make it not worth the investment for most hospitals. That's the line. Sufficient public opposition will make too much robotic surgery, too soon, simply uneconomical.

Individual preference or aversion will hold most robotic technologies (other than in industry) in check. But freedom of choice is not so great a power that it can stop all progress. You're free not to have a universal surveillance and tracking device -- a phone -- in your pocket every time you go out. But you're at a disadvantage compared to everyone else, so the choice isn't that free after all. And so with robots: when a history has been established of orthoscopic robots doing safer, better, cheaper surgery with quicker recovery times than a surgeon cutting you open, that will be people's choice more and more until just a few percent insist on a human surgeon. And they're not so free any more: they may have to travel inter-state (meaning a stay over even if medically they don't need it), a scar that others don't have, as well as the greater risk etc.

Now take surveillance. Mass surveillance became practical as (a) CCD cameras became smaller and cheaper, and (b) computers could handle the masses of picture (and sound) data they produce. Some places (London, Hong Kong) have installed a lot of it, but they're victims of their own success: there is no way they can "watch" even a few percent of the people, so they have to turn that over to computers and only raid the archive when investigating a crime that's been reported. I'm not seeing George Orwell's 1984 in that. The line they haven't crossed is putting cameras in your home, and I'm with you and almost everyone in stopping it there.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:10 am
by Ifreann
San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Do please elaborate.

Star Trek predicted things like cell phones

Not really. Sure, everyone knows that the communicators in the original series are a bit like flip phones, but that's less prediction and more design imitating fiction. More relevantly, how are the communicators used in Star Trek? Almost exclusively by Star Fleet personnel. Star Trek conceives of hand-held or worn communication devices as technology that would not be widely used by ordinary people. Which, as you may have noticed, is wildly wrong.

And where was the exploration of the dangers of cell phones? Where was the episode in which Wesley Crusher crashed a hovercar because he was distracted by his communicator? Where are the scientists who disregarded those warnings?
and stun guns

"Taser" is a name based on the acronym for Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle, a fictional device which is based loosely on similar principles to a taser. Energy weapons with stun settings don't exist.

And again, where was the exploration of the dangers behind phaser technology? Where are the scientists disregarding those warning?
and countless other things.

Such as?
How many films have their been warning of the dangers of AI. Upgrade, terminator, the matrix and I robot are a few

Reading The Matrix as warning about artificial intelligence is awfully shallow. The robots are more of an analogy for a dehumanising system. But in any case, where are the scientists disregarding these warnings? And no, people studying artificial intelligence does not count. If I warn you about the dangers of your house burning down, would you stop living in a house? Of course not.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:26 am
by Region of Dwipantara
Ifreann wrote:Reading The Matrix as warning about artificial intelligence is awfully shallow. The robots are more of an analogy for a dehumanising system. But in any case, where are the scientists disregarding these warnings? And no, people studying artificial intelligence does not count. If I warn you about the dangers of your house burning down, would you stop living in a house? Of course not.

There is a pretty good analogy of how would AI will likely present a danger to humanity: "In a hurry, you told the self-driving taxi to go to the airport as fast as possible. You arrive at the airport covered in vomit, with police cars surrounding you on all sides."

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:30 am
by Valrifell
Having my brain connected through wifi seems dangerous.

I don't want Comcast in my thoughts.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:32 am
by Tolopel
"Would you use this product?"
Well yes but actually no.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:35 am
by Valrifell
Region of Dwipantara wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Reading The Matrix as warning about artificial intelligence is awfully shallow. The robots are more of an analogy for a dehumanising system. But in any case, where are the scientists disregarding these warnings? And no, people studying artificial intelligence does not count. If I warn you about the dangers of your house burning down, would you stop living in a house? Of course not.

There is a pretty good analogy of how would AI will likely present a danger to humanity: "In a hurry, you told the self-driving taxi to go to the airport as fast as possible. You arrive at the airport covered in vomit, with police cars surrounding you on all sides."


I mean considering how Google maps already knows the speed limit of practically every road in the contiguous united states (at least), I find it hard to believe a self-driving car would permit itself to break the law at the behest of a user.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:36 am
by Ifreann
Region of Dwipantara wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Reading The Matrix as warning about artificial intelligence is awfully shallow. The robots are more of an analogy for a dehumanising system. But in any case, where are the scientists disregarding these warnings? And no, people studying artificial intelligence does not count. If I warn you about the dangers of your house burning down, would you stop living in a house? Of course not.

There is a pretty good analogy of how would AI will likely present a danger to humanity: "In a hurry, you told the self-driving taxi to go to the airport as fast as possible. You arrive at the airport covered in vomit, with police cars surrounding you on all sides."

Only if we do something silly like make them follow instructions literally.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:37 am
by Ifreann
Valrifell wrote:Having my brain connected through wifi seems dangerous.

I don't want Comcast in my thoughts.

Comcast are already in your thoughts, how else could you have formed that sentence?

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:41 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
Region of Dwipantara wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Reading The Matrix as warning about artificial intelligence is awfully shallow. The robots are more of an analogy for a dehumanising system. But in any case, where are the scientists disregarding these warnings? And no, people studying artificial intelligence does not count. If I warn you about the dangers of your house burning down, would you stop living in a house? Of course not.

There is a pretty good analogy of how would AI will likely present a danger to humanity: "In a hurry, you told the self-driving taxi to go to the airport as fast as possible. You arrive at the airport covered in vomit, with police cars surrounding you on all sides."


One of the things I think turns people off self-driving cars is the prospect that they can't "safely speed" in the future. That combination of breaking the law, going faster (speeding is relative: you get used to speed and really notice when it is more or less), and still controlling the car, feels like freedom to them. I don't know what to say to them. The era of Autonomous-Only when insanely high speeds will be possible, is unfortunately decades away.

Though another aspect is that most of NSG are pretty young, so speeding seems like fun (even if they've never done it as a driver). I think that will end the day they drive home from the hospital with a new baby! Not that I've done that myself. But I mean that the general population of drivers probably put a lot more premium on safety and less on the 'freedom' of speeding, than NSG regs do.

Autonomous cars will obey speed limits where those are known, and an absolute limit where they're not, or they won't get certified to go on the road. If that makes them too boring for some people, tough luck don't buy one.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:42 am
by A Salmon Named Harold
The possible manipulation of these chips is definitely a cause of great worthy, however I do believe that these would allow more good than harm.
For Musk's plan being over-ambitious, that's pretty normal of him if you ask me. Just look at how fast he wants to get BFR up and ready for launches and Mars colonization.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:45 am
by Valrifell
A Salmon Named Harold wrote:The possible manipulation of these chips is definitely a cause of great worthy, however I do believe that these would allow more good than harm.
For Musk's plan being over-ambitious, that's pretty normal of him if you ask me. Just look at how fast he wants to get BFR up and ready for launches and Mars colonization.


Given Musk's history with ideas suited for fiction, I wouldn't be too shocked if "over-ambitious" is code for "literally and physically impossible"

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:47 am
by TURTLESHROOM II
New yugoslavaia wrote:
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Do you believe the Book of Revelations is the word of God? Then Yes, this and many other things are marks of the Beast.
Do you believe Revelations recounts a drug or psychotic episode? Then No, "mark of the Beast" is nonsense.


Remember that those sorts of Christians thought that barcodes were the mark of the beast.

It's not the mark of the beast. It's just a new piece of tech.
Doesn't stop it from potentially being abused though.


The Mark of the Beast requires physical implantation or indention onto or in the human body.

Christians thought that barcodes on their person were the Mark of the Beast. Highly advanced RFID chips (beyond merely unlocking doors) embedded in the body, if compulsory, are the Mark of the Beast,

Remember, the Mark of the Beast is universal. Any voluntary implant, such as this, is designed to socially engineer mankind into accepting universal usage of the Mark.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:48 am
by Thermodolia
Nope nope nope. Oh fuck no.

I’d rather be crazy than have a chip in my brain

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:49 am
by TURTLESHROOM II
Thermodolia wrote:Nope nope nope. I’d rather be crazy than have a chip in my brain.


I never thought I'd say this, but I agree in every way with Thermodolia.

I would sooner die than ever have my mind corrupted with a machine that alters my mind. Not only does this have infinite potential for abuse, it could be manipulated in other ways that could create behavior or thoughts that, say, the government would want people to have. This is mind control, pure and simple.

It could also be used to compel servitude to the Beast. Do this or your loopy chip will give you schizophrenia!

PostPosted: Sat Aug 29, 2020 8:53 am
by TURTLESHROOM II
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!


This is going in my signature, if it fits.