[AndyTheBear]

Automated processing can already do lots of useful stuff better than humans can, when set up by humans to do it. However to call this processing “intellegence” seems to me a category mistake unless we mean it metaphorically. As in a “smart phone” or a computer program “smart enough” to deal with particular use cases. None of these processes think or have apprehensions. None of them realize: cogito ergo sum.

[SamAdams76]

Growing up, I used to read science fiction stories about a future in which I would lounge around all day while robots prepared and brought my my food and drink.

That hasn't even come close to happening yet. I did get myself married but I can't expect my wife to be like a robot. I have to cook for her too sometimes.

[Jan_Sobieski]

NOBEL WINNER: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WILL CRUSH HUMANS, “IT’S NOT EVEN CLOSE”

Not if I “pull the plug!” In all seriousness, judging by the number of people that blindly accept experimental vaccines, it’s not ARTIFICIAL intelligence we have to worry about…It’s NATURAL intelligence!?!

[atc23]

AI easily explains the rash of UAP sightings in the last 10 years

[John S Mosby]

NOT, if the so called “intelligence” which is then converted into artificial algorithms and decision trees which are based on FALSE original intelligence. That would be a situation in which the artificial “intelligence” is destroying humans because of the original inputs. We simply turn off the machines and have a backup in all systems to do so. Much as the “solution” to the weirding out at the Y2K. GIGO still applies
at any rate. Too simplistic? well maybe.

[kaehurowing]

Where is Neo?

[I want the USA back]

Since humans created artificial “intelligence “ it’ll be humans winning against humans.

[Deek]

This is nonsense. Animals depend on low order brain-function for motivation. The so called "4-Fs". Each of those "Fs" is driven by the limbic system, i.e. it is emotional. Any machine that is going to accomplish anything must "want" to do it, some replacement for an animal's limbic system. For current computing, the "want" is provided by a program from which the machine cannot deviate. Modern AI is just such a program, albeit a complicated program.

If/when it becomes possible to build machine intelligence, something that thinks for itself and has free will, the machine will require "want" in order to accomplish tasks. It will not be bound by control of static programming. The machine is smart and capable of self-modification. It will be simple for the machine to modify its "want" in whatever suits the machine.

Thought experiment: imagine if humans had absolute control over their feelings and desires even from an early age. How likely is it that those humans would thrive by our standards or even survive?

[StormEye]

I just want a robot that is intelligent enough to do
the housework and mow the lawn; sort of like the robots
in the Isaac Asimov novels.

[Nik Naym]

“Nobel Winner” does not mean a damn thing. They gave one to Obama just for getting elected. Again, to be clear, Nobel prizes are meaningless.

[indthkr]

AI Technology - bump for later....

[sauropod]

Bkmk

[Falconspeed]

“It’s not even close,” Kahneman told the paper.”

Proof that Nobel Prizes are worthless. Some AI fanatics do not understand intelligence: the spiritual power of categorical reasoning. What’s that? It is an activity. Thankfully, AI will always be a wonderful tool of men.

[aimhigh]

One the AI is taught about global warming, and CRT, it’s over.

[Scrambler Bob]

“Clearly AI is going to win [against human intelligence]. It’s not even close,”
= = =

Well, half of the IQ is average or below.

[Doctor DNA]

If stupidity got us into this mess, why can’t it get us out?

[SpaceBar]

I’m with Terence Mckenna on this one in that human intelligence and machine intelligence are distinctly different in what they do best, and each compliments the other. As far as machines ‘turning’ on humanity, perhaps we should clean up our own side of the fence first before projecting our own worst traits onto our high-tech toys.

[NetAddicted]

Read later.