What are the implications of extra-galactic super AIs?

[RAMA]

The fact that people are working on it is no guarantee of success; that's what you don't seem to grasp. This attitude you take that it's inevitable and the rest of us are just "burying [our] heads in the sand" is condescending, rude, and ignorant of the uncertainty of the outcome.

The answer is two-fold: One, the real-world answer is it is likely to happen within 30 years, progress is being made all the time, which will bring the moral and technical implications into modern discourse way before the fictional one. It's not just me saying it, it's the experts. Why is Elon Musk investing in it? To keep humanity "in" on the AI equation.

The fictional answer is that of course, we've seen this explored many times, in this franchise itself: TNG, TOS. It allows us to discuss the moral and ethical implications in that context. No one realized in the 1960s it was coming so soon! The fact we have members here and others online saying the Golem is not real, that Picard is no longer Picard, etc is exactly what we should be talking about. I find that the bias we're seeing here by some is really telling.

RAMA

 

[Gepard]

The answer is two-fold: One, the real-world answer is it is likely to happen within 30 years, progress is being made all the time, which will bring the moral and technical implications into modern discourse way before the fictional one. It's not just me saying it, it's the experts. Why is Elon Musk investing in it? To keep humanity "in" on the AI equation.

This entire paragraph shows that you completely missed my point.

 

[RAMA]

This entire paragraph shows that you completely missed my point.

Oh, I got the point...I just disagree with it. The first paragraph is a direct answer. The experts take it seriously--enough to put their money into it--so should we.

 

[fireproof78]

The fictional answer is that of course, we've seen this explored many times, in this franchise itself: TNG, TOS. It allows us to discuss the moral and ethical implications in that context. No one realized in the 1960s it was coming so soon! The fact we have members here and others online saying the Golem is not real, that Picard is no longer Picard, etc is exactly what we should be talking about. I find that the bias we're seeing here by some is really telling.

I find the bias more confusing than anything else. We have quantum copies of characters all the time, as well as living style androids that are indistinguishable from the real thing (TOS and TNG both had this).

It's strange to me because it feels like an unwillingness to explore what the show wants to explore.

 

[RAMA]

I find the bias more confusing than anything else. We have quantum copies of characters all the time, as well as living style androids that are indistinguishable from the real thing (TOS and TNG both had this).

It's strange to me because it feels like an unwillingness to explore what the show wants to explore.

There's a fictional unwillingness, but I think there is a real-world element...often religious...that human spirit, intelligence, and "soul" is not transferable. I suspect this is a large component of what we are seeing.

RAMA

 

[Gepard]

Dualism, the belief that the "soul" or essence of a person exists independent of the body, is a fundamentally religious position.

Guess what belief underpins the idea that the "soul" is "transferrable."

 

[fireproof78]

There's a fictional unwillingness, but I think there is a real-world element...often religious...that human spirit, intelligence, and "soul" is not transferable. I suspect this is a large component of what we are seeing.

RAMA

Good point. But, even so, I would say that Star Trek has already dipped in to that metaphysical world in this sense, especially with the katra, among others.

If one argues that the brain is the seat of the unique human identity and the brain is a biological organ with chemical and electrical components then I would suggest that it could be copied.

If nothing else it is something that is of interest for Trek to explore and has explored in the past.

 

[RAMA]

Dualism, the belief that the "soul" or essence of a person exists independent of the body, is a fundamentally religious position.

Guess what belief underpins the idea that the "soul" is "transferrable."

I don't believe in "souls" hence the quotation marks. I don't believe anything about the brain is eventually unquantifiable. Whatever "essence" there is from the biological brain in its many intricate connections should be preserved in a direct transfer in whole brain emulation.

In a fictional sense, this is what we are told has happened in Picard. I see no reason to disbelieve it.

RAMA

 

[fireproof78]

I don't believe in "souls" hence the quotation marks. I don't believe anything about the brain is eventually unquantifiable. Whatever "essence" there is from the biological brain in its many intricate connections should be preserved in a direct transfer in whole brain emulation.

In a fictional sense, this is what we are told has happened in Picard. I see no reason to disbelieve it.

RAMA

This. Better put than I did.

 

[Gepard]

The notion of dualism, that a mind can be moved out one body and into another different kind of body is still embedded in your reply even as you claim that's not what you're doing. Making a copy of something does not equal moving that thing; you've just made a second one. Swapping out the term "essence" for "soul" is a linguistic dodge.

 

[RAMA]

The notion of dualism, that a mind can be moved out one body and into another different kind of body is still embedded in your reply even as you claim that's not what you're doing. Making a copy of something does not equal moving that thing; you've just made a second one. Swapping out the term "essence" for "soul" is a linguistic dodge.

No, its a wholly inadequate term for some things we don't have adequate terms for, which is part of the problem, but to suffice it to say, I meant very real, complex, mechanical transfer that has resultant properties from its interactions. Does not need metaphysical description though certainly some people feel free to use such terms.

 

[Gov Kodos]

No, its a wholly inadequate term for some things we don't have adequate terms for...

That's just special pleading.

 

[RAMA]

That's just special pleading.

I'm not sure why, but you were on my ignore list, and I have no recollection of you whatsoever, and since you're wrong maybe that's why?

RAMA

 

[Mudd]

RAMA, like every human being who's ever lived, you and everyone you care about will pass away - just like Ray Kurtzweil's father. That is not a mean observation, it's a universal fact. You will not live on in a computer.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I don’t get the point of this thread anymore.

YMMV

 

[The Old Mixer]

I'm not sure why, but you were on my ignore list, and I have no recollection of you whatsoever, and since you're wrong maybe that's why?

Announcing who you have on Ignore is considered a form of Trolling. Please don't do this again.

 

[RAMA]

I don’t get the point of this thread anymore.

YMMV

It is getting off track, but let's say that maybe these androids, golems, Synths will someday be part of this dis-embodied intelligence that clearly these sci-fi writers(like Chabon) think is possible.

Announcing who you have on Ignore is considered a form of Trolling. Please don't do this again.

Ah, well that was inadvertent...I wasn't saying I put him on ignore, only that the board told me he was on ignore from years ago(I didn't realize the BBS was even supposed to tell me who I had on ignore), and since I'm a nice guy I'll take him off.

RAMA, like every human being who's ever lived, you and everyone you care about will pass away - just like Ray Kurtzweil's father. That is not a mean observation, it's a universal fact. You will not live on in a computer.

You're probably proceeding under a misapprehension that I think I'm going to be immortal, which I've stated before is not the case, I don't think I'll make it to that point. I don't think Kurzweil realistically thinks that either, but will future generations? Probably. Just not in a metaphysical way, but a concrete, quantified mathematical way. Data. To bring it back on topic, I think these higher AIs will be a very rich data indeed, with very biological-like diversity and nuances. So again, I'll re-iterate I hope to see that we've misinterpreted their aims in season 2!

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

I find the bias more confusing than anything else. We have quantum copies of characters all the time, as well as living style androids that are indistinguishable from the real thing (TOS and TNG both had this).

It's strange to me because it feels like an unwillingness to explore what the show wants to explore.

It IS strange, it is also strange because we accept a lot of less likely sci-fi stuff in Trek all the time. Warp Drive is many many many times less likely than brain emulation, same with transporters.

We also think SciFi and Trek fans to be quite accepting, but as we have seen here, some can't get past the idea that people will not always be categorized as existing in a biological substrate.

RAMA

 

[Gov Kodos]

I'm not sure why, but you were on my ignore list, and I have no recollection of you whatsoever, and since you're wrong maybe that's why?

RAMA

Soul, essence, it's all metaphysical nonsense.

It IS strange, it is also strange because we accept a lot of less likely sci-fi stuff in Trek all the time. Warp Drive is many many many times less likely than brain emulation, same with transporters.

We also think SciFi and Trek fans to be quite accepting, but as we have seen here, some can't get past the idea that people will not always be categorized as existing in a biological substrate.

RAMA

Star Trek is fiction just as much as Tolkien's elves and Lovecraft's Cthulhu. Fun entertainment. Uploading some wishful thinking called a soul from this 'biological substrate' is every bit as much a fanciful piece of religious woolly thinking as the divine assumption of the Blessed Mary.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

some can't get past the idea that people will not always be categorized as existing in a biological substrate.

Unless and until a person has been created that does not exist "in a biological substrate," the idea is unproven and there is no idea to "get past." There is no substitute for practical demonstration, and, until such a time as one in which it has been accomplished, skepticism is both rational and warranted.