Five Years from the Apocalypse?

[Michie]

Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

Dr. Ian Malcolm​

In keeping with the "potentially problematic ethical results of scientific progress" theme started this morning and kept up by various posts throughout the day, here's an article from last week's Telegraph (UK):

Laboratories across the world are closing in on a "second genesis" - an achievement that would be one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs of all time.

Prof David Deamer, from California University, said although building a new lifeform from scratch is a daunting task he is confident it can happen in five to 10 years.
He said: "The momentum is building - we're knocking at the door."

A synthetic, made-to-order living system could produce everything from new drugs to biofuels and greenhouse gas absorbers.
​

Seems like a fairly obvious step after the "let's use the life we've already gotten our hands on for the purposes of scientific advancement" ones we've been taking lately.

The opposition gets pretty short shrift:

Opponents of the controversial research claim the technology could lead to machines becoming "almost human".
​

"Alive" is a long ways from "almost human." But I wonder if anyone's really thought through the moral and ethical consequences of this step. Feels a little bit like "angels fear to tread here, but let's plunge ahead willy-nilly, since we can" territory. And what happens when we start to combine our second genesis with our recently-funded embryonic research? Almost-human machines might start looking awfully good by comparison.

http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Within-Five-Years.html&Itemid=127

 

[Epiphanygirl]

People done lost their minds! Good gravy........

Ya know, I'm almost beginning to understand what the Bible meant when it basically foretold that barren women should rejoice and that they would be happy not to bring a child into such chaos and evil.

 

[Michie]

I dunno, I always thought it meant blessed from the secular standpoint. *shrug*

 

[Epiphanygirl]

I dunno, I always thought it meant blessed from the secular standpoint. *shrug*

I dunno either......I don't feel blessed from a secualr standpoint either.....
I love children............>Very proud Auntie< here

Babies are the hope of the world..........but so many are murdered......now they want to harvest, etc.........Lord have Mercy!

 

[AMDG]

Recently I received an email concerning how to make a peace-filled life in 2009. There were about 25 things to do from "counting blessings" and giving thanks, to forgiving, to pasting a smile on one's face, to taking at least a 10 minute walk a day, to drinking green tea, to ... . One of the listed items is "Frame every so-called disaster with these words: "In five years, will this matter?" Is this apocalypse thing in five years what the list is referring to?

 

[Davidnic]

In general this technology is used to attempt things like controlled bacteria that eat plastic or create a fuel as a waste product. It is not the attempted creation of sentient life but more so the creation of simple cells programmed to fulfill a function. It is often mixed with some nanotech theories in the extreme.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

In general this technology is used to attempt things like controlled bacteria that eat plastic or create a fuel as a waste product. It is not the attempted creation of sentient life but more so the creation of simple cells programmed to fulfill a function. It is often mixed with some nanotech theories in the extreme.

true, but what if in 20 years they'll take this further?

as I think maybe they ..might...

technology is getting sort of outrageous these days IMHO.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

​

Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.​

Dr. Ian Malcolm​

​

wow..so true...​

 

[Avatar]

It's not an engineered biological organism we need to be worried about, it's AI. At some point, and it will be sudden, a sentient AI will arise. With processing speeds millions of times greater than ours and all the knowledge ever accumulated instantly absorbed, within seconds we will be insects by comparison. In a minute a being as close to being a God without being God will rule the Earth.

Hope she likes us.

 

[Davidnic]

It's not an engineered biological organism we need to be worried about, it's AI. At some point, and it will be sudden, a sentient AI will arise. With processing speeds millions of times greater than ours and all the knowledge ever accumulated instantly absorbed, within seconds we will be insects by comparison. In a minute a being as close to being a God without being God will rule the Earth.

Hope she likes us.

There is a scientist I read once who said we are one step in the evolution of the electron that is making for itself a better home with AI's.

Freaky theory.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

It's not an engineered biological organism we need to be worried about, it's AI. At some point, and it will be sudden, a sentient AI will arise. With processing speeds millions of times greater than ours and all the knowledge ever accumulated instantly absorbed, within seconds we will be insects by comparison. In a minute a being as close to being a God without being God will rule the Earth.

Hope she likes us.

can AI ever become sentient?

 

[Avatar]

can AI ever become sentient?

Why not? It's a lot closer to it in 30 years than we were in 1 billion.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Why not? It's a lot closer to it in 30 years than we were in 1 billion.

I think only beings with souls can be sentient.. doesn't it imply consciousness?

consciousness comes from the soul...not from the body... that's why we're still conscious after death

I don't think it "evolved"...how could it? it needs the soul part of us..

 

[Davidnic]

can AI ever become sentient?

Theoretically. And I stress in theory. But there have been recent experiments in Quantum computers where a computer was able to answer a quesiton before it is asked. It uses counterfactual computation.

It is really odd but kind of basic quantum stuff.

Quantum computers are actually now possible. They can sustain the qbit, or quantum bit. So that makes a fast...and I mean amazingly fast computer. But it also provides essentially a trinary code as opposed to binary. Allowing for not only 1,0 or yes, no. But a both or maybe state in the electron. Basically trapping it's spin in a maybe state where it is effectively both 1 and 0...until observed.

Theoretically a quantum computer has the potential to be 1,0 both or the in between when computing. It is really complex but at a sufficiently high level this is how a brain works.

So...is it possible to have a sentient AI. Maybe.

 

[Davidnic]

I think only beings with souls can be sentient.. doesn't it imply consciousness?

consciousness comes from the soul...not from the body... that's why we're still conscious after death

I don't think it "evolved"...how could it? it needs the soul part of us..

I am not talking sentient in the theological sense of a sentient soul. I am talking working like our brains do and having function independent of input.

Call it, self aware, rather than sentient.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

ooh oki

I thought you meant it in the other way..

I was going to say that AIs are just atoms, they don't have souls or spirits so they're not conscious..

but I see what you mean about them still having some sort of "activity" apart from input. That's rather scary.

 

[Lady Bug]

People done lost their minds! Good gravy........

Ya know, I'm almost beginning to understand what the Bible meant when it basically foretold that barren women should rejoice and that they would be happy not to bring a child into such chaos and evil.

nope - I definitely have not, not, not reached that point yet in my life