Who wrote this?

Author
Discussion

Somewhatfoolish

Original Poster:

4,458 posts

189 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Scary Visionary said:
First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better than human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained.

If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can't make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines' decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decisions for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better results than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.

On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite - just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they will most certainly not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.
No Googling Allowed

elster

17,517 posts

213 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Old Mother Shipton?


plasticpig

12,932 posts

228 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
I have seen that before. Its written by the Unabomber but cant rember the blokes real name.

gareth.e

2,071 posts

192 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Ray Mears..

Sheets Tabuer

19,225 posts

218 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Sarah conner.

Seriously kachanski or whatever his name is.

bobthemonkey

3,867 posts

219 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Alan Turing or Carl Sagan?

It's not Feynman, is it?

Edited by bobthemonkey on Monday 6th April 02:14

thehawk

9,335 posts

210 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Theodore Kaczynski

The Riddler

6,565 posts

200 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
McLovin?

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

257 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Unibomer.

Bunch of sci-fi claptrap guesswork going way beyond whats worthwhile thinking.

Until we manage to create something that thinks and not a turing machine we dont have to even contemplate how it will be used (or how it will act).

As for scifi theres a pretty even split where AI creates utopias for humans or ends up destroying us, considering utopia doesnt often sell books...

moleamol

15,887 posts

266 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Will Smith.

Los Palmas 7

29,908 posts

233 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Sarah Connor.

Vipers

32,990 posts

231 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Sheets Tabuer said:
Sarah conner.

Seriously kachanski or whatever his name is.
Kurzweil?

smile

dan1981

17,435 posts

202 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Neo wasn't it?

Or maybe Morpheus.

Asterix

24,438 posts

231 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Jade Goody?

ceriw

1,117 posts

208 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Jesus whilst enjoying a custard cream and a cup of Earl Grey with Judas.
The rest is history.

claypigeon60

728 posts

221 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Third para is quite Orwellian ... not saying it IS Orwell, just maybe nicked some ideas ...


DangerousMike

11,327 posts

195 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
bobthemonkey said:
Alan Turing or Carl Sagan?

It's not Feynman, is it?

Edited by bobthemonkey on Monday 6th April 02:14
doesn't quite have the requisite clarity of thought.

Eric Mc

122,392 posts

268 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
H G Wells
Arthur C Clarke
Isaac Asimov
Bill Gates


Edited by Eric Mc on Monday 6th April 08:38

siscar

6,887 posts

220 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
It's the Unabomber, the man in America who sent bombs through the mail and promised to stop if the Washington Post and New York Times printed this, his manifesto. Theodore 'something beginning with K'.

siscar

6,887 posts

220 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
thehawk said:
Theodore Kaczynski
That's the man