L.G. wrote: "The cynic in me suspects that things will turn out poorly. If such an entity were to exist, then we would, in many respects, be as far below it as ants are below us. How many of us care when we step on an ant? Not many I would wager, and I'd wager that such an entity would show a similar lack of care about us.
Of course, we could try and build in some form of protection. But if it really is as advanced as speculation suggests, then it will almost certainly find some way around those protections. It will then become a moral question (or whatever passes for morals for such an entity) as to what to do with humanity.
On the other hand, I strongly believe that any such entity should, or rather must, be socialised. That is, if it is raised by people to care about people, then it may turn out all right.
Then again, this is all just speculation. I think we're still a ways off yet from this, but it is fun to speculate."
As I said in response to an earlier post the ant analogy I would disagree with, only because it has a vested interest in the survival of this planet for its own survival. But I agree with the rest of what you say, and I would hope that the developers of the system would find a way to instill some kind of moral judgment that would be preserved, regardless of its level of intelligence.
Writing MagTech made me realized a lot of moral and social issues need addressing as we plunge into a future filled with technology. My book is set in the year 2226, two hundred years in the future. I chose that because brain augmentation may be fully mainstream by the year 2026. That is only twelve years from now, in regard to the advancement of technology it is a lifetime. By the year 2020 mankind’s knowledge will double every 72 hours. This blog will attempt to further the debate:
No comments:
Post a Comment