The Robots Will Take Over!

[Quadibloc]

Just read this article:

https://www.hpcwire.com/2016/09/20/larry-smarr-helps-ncsa-celebrate-30th-anniversary/

One quote...

"Asimov had the three laws to protect the robots from doing harm to humans. We’ll get through this AI transition I believe, but only if everybody realizes this is a one of the most important change moments in human history, and it isn’t going to be happening 100 years from now, but rather it’s going to be in the next five, 10, to 20 years."

Since I think that hardly anyone expects that superintelligent AIs will indeed
come into existence within even 20 years, even at the incredible rate computers
have been improving, if he is right about the other stuff, we're certainly going
to be DOOMED, as we *won't* "get through this AI transition".

Given that Moore's Law is coming to an end, as nobody as any idea of how to get
past 7nm, and Dennart scaling packed it in before that, superintelligent AIs may
be always 20 years away like fusion power, meaning we will be safe... but there
is some cause for concern.

John Savard

[Alie...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 9:07:41 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
> Just read this article:
>
> https://www.hpcwire.com/2016/09/20/larry-smarr-helps-ncsa-celebrate-30th-anniversary/
>
> One quote...
>
> "Asimov had the three laws to protect the robots from doing harm to humans.
> We’ll get through this AI transition I believe, but only if everybody
> realizes this is a one of the most important change moments in human history,
> and it isn’t going to be happening 100 years from now, but rather it’s going
> to be in the next five, 10, to 20 years."

The Three Laws require a lot of interpretation that even humans can't reliably manage all of the time.

> Since I think that hardly anyone expects that superintelligent AIs will
> indeed come into existence within even 20 years, even at the incredible rate
> computers have been improving, if he is right about the other stuff, we're
> certainly going to be DOOMED, as we *won't* "get through this AI transition".
>
> Given that Moore's Law is coming to an end, as nobody as any idea of how to
> get past 7nm,

That only applies to silicon. There are other avenues being explored, optical and spintronics, frinst.

> and Dennart scaling packed it in before that, superintelligent AIs may
> be always 20 years away like fusion power, meaning we will be safe... but
> there is some cause for concern.

"Superintelligent" AIs aren't the immediate problem, medium-smart but still clueless specialized "expert systems" like self-driving cars will get us first.


Mark L. Fergerson

[C. E. Gee]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 9:07:41 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
> Just read this article:
>
>
>
>

> Since I think that hardly anyone expects that superintelligent AIs will indeed
> come into existence within even 20 years, even at the incredible rate computers
> have been improving, if he is right about the other stuff, we're certainly going
> to be DOOMED, as we *won't* "get through this AI transition".
>
> Given that Moore's Law is coming to an end, as nobody as any idea of how to get
> past 7nm, and Dennart scaling packed it in before that, superintelligent AIs may
> be always 20 years away like fusion power, meaning we will be safe... but there
> is some cause for concern.
>
> John Savard

I disagree. In fact a story of mine was just published in which some "farming robots" begin a revolution and become engaged in a battle with National Guard robots.

As is the current practice by governments regarding military robots/drones, Asimov's law of robotics is being ignored by those in power.

The current advances being made in robotics are going to shock those skeptical of robotics.

I visit Oregon frequently, once had a business in Corvallis -- home of Oregon State University. The university recently started a robotics school. Some of the stuff being done by students, who are the future of robotics amazes someone as jaded as me.


Namaste

C.E. Gee AKA Chuck

http://www.kinzuakid.blogspot.com

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 13:55:49 -0700 (PDT), "C. E. Gee"
<thelast...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I visit Oregon frequently, once had a business in Corvallis -- home of Oregon State University. The university recently started a robotics school. Some of the stuff being done by students, who are the future of robotics amazes someone as jaded as me.

Hey, assuming that your last name really is Gee and you're from the
Pacific Northwest, by any chance are you descended from Burrell and
Artemisia Gee?




--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Given the two-initials-last-name way he posts his name, my brain keeps
wanting to substitue two OTHER initials and make it N. R. Gee. Too much
Richie Rich as a kid.


--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 10:19:01 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

>On 10/3/16 1:15 AM, Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 13:55:49 -0700 (PDT), "C. E. Gee"
>> <thelast...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I visit Oregon frequently, once had a business in Corvallis -- home of Oregon State University. The university recently started a robotics school. Some of the stuff being done by students, who are the future of robotics amazes someone as jaded as me.
>>
>> Hey, assuming that your last name really is Gee and you're from the
>> Pacific Northwest, by any chance are you descended from Burrell and
>> Artemisia Gee?
>
> Given the two-initials-last-name way he posts his name, my brain keeps
>wanting to substitue two OTHER initials and make it N. R. Gee. Too much
>Richie Rich as a kid.

I'm just interested in the last name because my father's great-aunt
Artemisia (from Ohio) married a man named Burrell Gee, and then moved
off to the Pacific Northwest, where the family lost touch with her.
That was roughly 120 years ago.

It's not a particularly common name.