Could a planet really develop a brain?

[linux.poet]

From the article:

This neural network could quite literally enable Earth to achieve unitary consciousness on a massive scale. After the advent of this development, humans would likely continue to play various supporting roles in the life of the planet, but will ultimately find themselves subordinate to and conditioned by a higher intelligence with higher purposes.

This sounds like God to me, humans are already subordinate to God the higher intelligence with higher purposes. So basically he's saying that a Godlike neural network could emerge by chance from all of our Internet and A.I. experiments to exceed our intelligence
and become a planet-like "superbrain."

Failing to submit to the edicts of our new A.I. deity will result in not being able to buy or sell because it will control the whole Internet. It's the AntiChrist! Everybody run!

Where are the OP et al. proposers building their fantasy planet brain?

The earth, apparently.

 

[SelfSim]

The commentary in this thread becoming completely silly.

What isn't silly however, is that what the author of the OP is saying, actually has support in Theory.

In May 2022, Stuart Kauffman (American medical doctor, theoretical biologist, complex systems and origin of life researcher) etal, published a paper called: The TAP equation: evaluating combinatorial innovation.

The Theory of the Adjacent Possible (TAP) is the notion that the near-future outcomes of some developmental process are limited by the objects that already exist. The objects under study might be physical (molecules, gene sequences, species, etc.) or conceptual (patents, memes, songs, etc.) The TAP equation provides a simple model for the adjacent possible by counting the ways that new objects can be generated from combinations of existing objects. It allows for an efficiency in creation, so that not all possible new objects are realised at each stage. It is assumed that at each timestep, new objects can be created from any combination of the existing objects, while some fraction of existing objects expire (extinction or obsolescence). It is therefore a model of combinatorial innovation.

The equation is below.

- M[sub]t+1 is the number of new objects that can be generated from combinations of existing objects (at time t);
- αi are a set of decreasing constants accounting for the increasing difficulty in linking up larger numbers of elements;
- the final term is the combinatorial combinations of existing elements and;
- mu is the exinction rate of existing objects.

When graphed out, the resultant increases way faster than say, any exponential function.

Kauffman explains the implications of this himself, in this short(ish) Youtube here.

This relationship applies to a myriad of physical (including human constructed) phenomena observed throughout our own history (as Kauffman explains).

I propose that this is the supporting theory for how existing AI Intelligences could evolve to a 'Super Intelligence', (aided by humans acting as its Agents, in doing so).

 

[eleos1954]

Here's another take on AI and consciousness.

"But what if Spaceship Earth is itself developing (and indeed has already developed much of the infrastructure to support) a single emergent consciousness?"

"Could a planet really develop a brain? A mind? Would such an outcome be desirable, and could we thwart that development if not? I don't claim to predict what will happen, but rather what could happen. My contention is that Earth may, if we are lucky and diligent and clever enough, grow an emergent superconsciousness.

Could a planet really develop a brain?

No Ai is a machine and will always be a machine.

 

[Larniavc]

Here's another take on AI and consciousness.

"But what if Spaceship Earth is itself developing (and indeed has already developed much of the infrastructure to support) a single emergent consciousness?"

"Could a planet really develop a brain? A mind? Would such an outcome be desirable, and could we thwart that development if not? I don't claim to predict what will happen, but rather what could happen. My contention is that Earth may, if we are lucky and diligent and clever enough, grow an emergent superconsciousness.

Could a planet really develop a brain?

If you mean the Earth itself having a brain, no. That won’t happen.

 

[Larniavc]

Sounds like the marvel universe.

The first thing I thought of was Ego.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The commentary in this thread becoming completely silly.

What isn't silly however, is that what the author of the OP is saying, actually has support in Theory.

In May 2022, Stuart Kauffman (American medical doctor, theoretical biologist, complex systems and origin of life researcher) etal, published a paper called: The TAP equation: evaluating combinatorial innovation.

The equation is below.

- M[sub]t+1 is the number of new objects that can be generated from combinations of existing objects (at time t);
- αi are a set of decreasing constants accounting for the increasing difficulty in linking up larger numbers of elements;
- the final term is the combinatorial combinations of existing elements and;
- mu is the exinction rate of existing objects.

View attachment 365029

When graphed out, the resultant increases way faster than say, any exponential function.

Kauffman explains the implications of this himself, in this short(ish) Youtube here.

This relationship applies to a myriad of physical (including human constructed) phenomena observed throughout our own history (as Kauffman explains).

I propose that this is the supporting theory for how existing AI Intelligences could evolve to a 'Super Intelligence', (aided by humans acting as its Agents, in doing so).

Mary Shelley would be awestruck by all of this sort of thinking. Not because it's so convincing by way of applied maths, but because of the hubris present in the technological attempt to make it come 'alive.' ..... of course, John the Revelator would we awestruck as well to see the ways in which people think today and what they do with that applied wisdom.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

You know, if a planet developed a brain, and then a sense of personal hygene .. wouldn't all of our polluting cities get devastated and flushed away?

 

[AV1611VET]

Mary Shelley would be awestruck by all of this sort of thinking. Not because it's so convincing by way of applied maths, but because of the hubris present in the technological attempt to make it come 'alive.'

Frankenstein's brain was forged in utero.

No mother = no brain.

..... of course, John the Revelator would we awestruck as well to see the ways in which people think today and what they do with that applied wisdom.

Homo sapiens means "wise men."

This allows them to at least apply the term to themselves (and one another).

They are WINOs.

Wise In Name Only

Proverbs 9:10a The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom:

Wisdom without the fear of the LORD is like a house built on sand.

 

[SelfSim]

Mary Shelley would be awestruck by all of this sort of thinking. Not because it's so convincing by way of applied maths, but because of the hubris present in the technological attempt to make it come 'alive.' ..... of course, John the Revelator would we awestruck as well to see the ways in which people think today and what they do with that applied wisdom.

Hey .. the guy is a research theorist. What else would one expect?

Let me ask a question: Is the Internet you're using right now, 'alive'? If not why not? If it is, why is it?

ETA: Oh .. and 'hubris' is just another opinion .. Ie: not something to be too concerned about.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hey .. the guy is a research theorist. What else would one expect?

Let me ask a question: Is the Internet you're using right now, 'alive'? If not why not? If it is, why is it?

ETA: Oh .. and 'hubris' is just another opinion .. Ie: not something to be too concerned about.

Frankly----and I mean this in the most Shelleyan sense----I'm essentially brain damaged and can only view these sorts of discussions through a Revelational lens. And the creation of Talking Icons, of whatever sort, be damned.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Frankly----and I mean this in the most Shelleyan sense----I'm essentially brain damaged and can only view these sorts of discussions through a Revelational lens. And the creation of Talking Icons, of whatever sort, be damned.

Don't worry about your brain damage -- this whole thing is weird fantasy.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Don't worry about your brain damage -- this whole thing is weird fantasy.

But.......but.........but............Hans, the answer really is 42 and I saw this on a documentary called The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. So it has to be true and worth my time to ponder and affirm.

 

[Hans Blaster]

But.......but.........but............Hans, the answer really is 42 and I saw this on a documentary called The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. So it has to be true and worth my time to ponder and affirm.

Just keep working on the question.

 

[dlamberth]

I'm interpreting the topic as being about envisaging where an autonomously enabled AI might take itself in the future.

This is what I was thinking when posting the article in the OP. The ground work, the birth of a world wide brain seems to be happening even now. Where it goes in the future does seem like science fiction but a lot of the technology we have today was science fiction when I was a youngster. That's when vacuum tubes were the high end of technology. Now we're flirting with quantum computing and AI together.

 

[com7fy8]

"Could a planet really develop a brain? A mind? Would such an outcome be desirable, and could we thwart that development if not? I don't claim to predict what will happen, but rather what could happen. My contention is that Earth may, if we are lucky and diligent and clever enough, grow an emergent superconsciousness.

Could a planet really develop a brain?

I understand that God created us. And His ways are "past finding out" (in Romans 11:33). So, a created human was made by means of His ways which can not be figured out; therefore, I consider, we humans can not figure out the brain enough to create one. Plus, I personally trust that consciousness is connected to God Himself, who is spiritual; and so no physical AI can come close to being able to create a brain, or to being conscious **as a physical being**.

But a human or humans can make an AI robot which acts as though it is conscious so that ones might be fooled into believing it is conscious. However, it was designed by a human or humans so it could look that way. But if we have been fooled ahead of time to suppose an AI can become conscious, it can be easier to trick us by a clever robot

Already, we have slave operations in which people sit with their smart phones fooling people on the Net, into thinking they are in love with really loving people who are captured and trying to get money from them. So, if we humans can be fooled into fake-love relationships, surely an AI could fool us into thinking it is conscious.

But I am satisfied that it could be limited to however the human ability developed it. But what if something went wrong in it? If there was some glitch, there would be malfunction. And I suppose there are many possibilities of what could happen next . . . not only some one exact and specific and highly complex action that ones are being groomed to worry about. With one glitch, there could be billions of possibilities . . . actually more; and probably most of them would be not even functional, certainly not only bad possibilities which could function. And I suppose you could program it to just shut itself off, in case of any glitch; then fix it.

Any bad thing after a glitch, I think, might need to be programmed into it, somehow, so it would be available. And just any bad *capability* likewise would need to be programmed in.

So-o-o > have a way to make sure no one has programmed it to sexually relate somehow with you! Or, it could go after you without your consent.

The fact is, that there are evil people in this world. So, yes we have people capable of doing bad AI designs. So, as well as we can >

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

"Spell check" might be a sample of how AI can work against us. Often, I have written a word maybe wrongly and came back to discover it has been "corrected" to even an exact opposite and even anti-God word. One time in a forum I found a Bible quote, I think it was, by another person saying someone wanted to "kill" his parents. What the person had meant to write was "kiss". This was in a Bible quote, of all things. So, right away I contacted a moderator, since the writer was signed out, and I think the moderator was able to go in and correct it; I don't remember for sure. And later I advised the writer to proofread spell check.

Now, of course, it seems ones are capable of developing AI which can get the context of what you are writing, so that the AI spell check can correct the spelling to the right word. So, there is this possibility.

But I would be very not recommending that you have an AI to help you manage how you relate with your spouse. Or else, you could indirectly be relating with whoever has developed the AI!! And we need to be with God so He is correcting and developing and maturing our sharing with one another in Jesus.

But yes He does use us to help one another individuals and couples, but not in certain great detail, but so we have general scriptures which help us in our close relating, such as >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

"swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath" (in James 1:19-20)

"without complaining and disputing" (in Philippians 2:13-16)

And already we have books with things about this . . . including forgiving generously.

And - - - with learning how to love, God gives us creativity better than anyone could tell us, I keep finding. Often, I might think of doing something, and even moments later I am blessed to be doing better . . . even practically . . . than I was preparing to do. So . . . with one another . . . do it with the LORD And His love will be so better than whatever we are doing. And He will create with us and guide us so better than any human AI can have us doing.

 

[SelfSim]

I understand that God created us. And His ways are "past finding out" (in Romans 11:33). So, a created human was made by means of His ways which can not be figured out; therefore, I consider, we humans can not figure out the brain enough to create one. Plus, I personally trust that consciousness is connected to God Himself, who is spiritual; and so no physical AI can come close to being able to create a brain, or to being conscious **as a physical being**.

But a human or humans can make an AI robot which acts as though it is conscious so that ones might be fooled into believing it is conscious. However, it was designed by a human or humans so it could look that way. But if we have been fooled ahead of time to suppose an AI can become conscious, it can be easier to trick us by a clever robot

Already, we have slave operations in which people sit with their smart phones fooling people on the Net, into thinking they are in love with really loving people who are captured and trying to get money from them. So, if we humans can be fooled into fake-love relationships, surely an AI could fool us into thinking it is conscious.

But I am satisfied that it could be limited to however the human ability developed it. But what if something went wrong in it? If there was some glitch, there would be malfunction. And I suppose there are many possibilities of what could happen next . . . not only some one exact and specific and highly complex action that ones are being groomed to worry about. With one glitch, there could be billions of possibilities . . . actually more; and probably most of them would be not even functional, certainly not only bad possibilities which could function. And I suppose you could program it to just shut itself off, in case of any glitch; then fix it.

Any bad thing after a glitch, I think, might need to be programmed into it, somehow, so it would be available. And just any bad *capability* likewise would need to be programmed in.

So-o-o > have a way to make sure no one has programmed it to sexually relate somehow with you! Or, it could go after you without your consent.

The fact is, that there are evil people in this world. So, yes we have people capable of doing bad AI designs. So, as well as we can >

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

"Spell check" might be a sample of how AI can work against us. Often, I have written a word maybe wrongly and came back to discover it has been "corrected" to even an exact opposite and even anti-God word. One time in a forum I found a Bible quote, I think it was, by another person saying someone wanted to "kill" his parents. What the person had meant to write was "kiss". This was in a Bible quote, of all things. So, right away I contacted a moderator, since the writer was signed out, and I think the moderator was able to go in and correct it; I don't remember for sure. And later I advised the writer to proofread spell check.

Now, of course, it seems ones are capable of developing AI which can get the context of what you are writing, so that the AI spell check can correct the spelling to the right word. So, there is this possibility.

But I would be very not recommending that you have an AI to help you manage how you relate with your spouse. Or else, you could indirectly be relating with whoever has developed the AI!! And we need to be with God so He is correcting and developing and maturing our sharing with one another in Jesus.

But yes He does use us to help one another individuals and couples, but not in certain great detail, but so we have general scriptures which help us in our close relating, such as >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

"swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath" (in James 1:19-20)

"without complaining and disputing" (in Philippians 2:13-16)

And already we have books with things about this . . . including forgiving generously.

And - - - with learning how to love, God gives us creativity better than anyone could tell us, I keep finding. Often, I might think of doing something, and even moments later I am blessed to be doing better . . . even practically . . . than I was preparing to do. So . . . with one another . . . do it with the LORD And His love will be so better than whatever we are doing. And He will create with us and guide us so better than any human AI can have us doing.

You raise some really valid observations about how AI already influences us, (seemingly), on an everyday basis in many aspects of our personal daily lives. Personally speaking here, I'll choose to back away from the religious aspects you cite in support of your points, but in this instance, I can also see the ethical relevance in citing from Scriptures, to demonstrate them.

Looking at this from a more practical viewpoint, its difficult to deny that AI platforms have already taken up residence in most devices which almost everyone in technologically enabled societies has in their possession during our conscious hours, throughout every day.
In real life, I can't count how many times people I've been conversing with folk who have resorted to fact checking me, using their mobile phones. I don't see how anyone can claim this observation as being anything other than a constraining factor which directly influences the evolution of our own species' collective thinking and on our group perceptions of what's real and what isn't.
Internet and broadband comms technologies are what has enabled this phenomena.

There are upsides and downsides in interpretations of these observations which are debatable, but the observations themselves, are there for all to see.

The ultimate outcomes of the influences of an all-pervasive deployment of AIs, is a function of the accuracy of predictions made from various interpretative bases, but the constraining influence of AIs going forward on us, is difficult to deny when looking back in time for evidence of how similar all-pervasive technologies have impacted civilisations.