Actually I am not certain that I ascribe so much to the notion of the dangers often popularly given in dramatic depictions concerning article intelligence, or at least if given the claim it seems, one wonders as to the likely reality of such drama. For instance, as of yet it would seem even more sophisticated mechanical robots are highly interdependent for a given power source and likely if given to independent locomotive abilities with back up power supply may have very limited ranges in so far as motion, let alone indigenous computational processing faculties that would make such robot far less intelligent than those depicted in Hollywood films, or the Darpa experimental running bots (the size of a big cat if that) should need a power source tether to engage in the high energy locomotive powers demonstrated, or at least having a power generator likely in such case using some biomass fuel source. In this case I believe running at some 28 + mph (as demonstrated)...or one might likely make better use of an autonomous car in such case if one were looking for efficient means of transportation, despite the potential ability of the running bot, having some greater advantage in so far as terrain. The problem with the most modern batteries in such day are not only given by the amount of mass which in turn leads to added expense in terms of energy use demands but also that the process of refueling such source more often than not is neither given by quick replenishment as might be harnessed for instance in the potential energy of a biomass fuel source, or why adoption of the completely solid state battery sources have had any number of downsides relative to biomass based systems in terms of readied ease and convenience of use. In terms of practicality, the robots of today wouldn't likely in such state could less readily use the same energy that humans or other sentient life in so far as bio energy sources, and likely even as the solar energy provides and enormous potential wealth of energy, the problem of diffusion enters into the foray in terms of harnessing such energy. Distributively speaking life on earth makes obvious use of such wealth for instance, in much plant life but rightly in terms of evolution, neither were there as much sense in a plant being necessitated to move in so far as harnessing such energy. Thus life of this kind could actually flourish with much greater mass while efficiently using such energy stores for such mass while neither having so much the expense found in other forms of life, namely, as related to things like locomotion. Thus even while things like solar cars have been developed and might be highly efficient at using energy output relative to input, limitations would exist in so far as the ability of such cars in so far as things like mass to energy output relations. Of course, this age old problem were solved in the biomass fuels solution...heterotrophs feed from autotrophs and there by relinquish the problem in generating such energy which evolutionarily speaking for mass to energy output ratios require not only larger mass, but much greater diffuse light gathering ability coupled with much higher efficiency likely found in the common base of autotrophs found. The energy problem still it seems abounds, and likely this is where I imagine some of the bigger problems exist in so far as the 'evil robots' take over the world scenario. fuel infrastructure exists but it seems one should wonder a limiting supply potentially for the types of fuel that make for the problems of proliferation of synthetic life similar relative to biological growth models. Of course, this hadn't neglected potential technological advances in energy storage problems...maybe more likely in the future something of wireless energy transmissions methods, or other less exotic and more commonplace less complex chemical fuel sources are used in such process, thus reducing as much limiting factors, or better materials which can more efficiently store energy as well increasing capacities for a given mass ratio. This is not to say that energy problem as a limiting factor to growth isn't one that is readily resolved either in the future. The robots of today are likely to be louder and much noisier, if they were reliant upon biomass fuels to say the least, and modern aerial drones equipped on battery supply, for instance, today on average have flight times of less than thirty minutes with much recharging/refueling downtime. On other hand, even today it seems our skies aren't polluted with drone aerial traffic relative to the concern and attention given, and certainly if the common household has a robot, it is not the mechanical one envisioned obviously as by the Jetson's. On the contrary, more likely these are found in kinetically passive and more solid state type devices commonly used in the home, whether given by smartphones, or other well adopted technologies that seem relatively innocuous in any daily life. I think unfortunately, the concerns often given for technology is downplayed conveniently less so at times if it weren't equivalent to the problem of environmental destruction. Unseen destruction is easier to happen since nothing seems obvious if small insect populations are decimated but otherwise nature seems to be functioning fine and an obvious soot residue hadn't lay in clear view. Thus the dangerous machine, may actually not be the imagined Terminators of tomorrow but instead something that we readily use on a daily basis and were kept passive relative to our commands and desires. I think our fantasies on the other hand describe our imagination that a given synthetic life form were nothing more than a created Frankenstein humanoid projection gone awry! Unfortunately, as we are likely to find also intelligent life found elsewhere in the universe synthetic or not may not even remotely resemble us.
The terminators of today, you might have heard in so many years past, have related to the rising problem of nano scale technological designs, for instance, whether through genetic modification, or anything seen less and made to appropriate small and subtle changes such that obvious differences seem less so. This on the other hand, could be some cause for concern, for instance, if our sense in appreciating and measuring the world comes through the sensed accumulation of the world being as it were continuously on any given day. Stark changes might drive revolt, but subtle ones often might be given to muted controversy or protest. The future world, then might not be driven by obvious and scary trans-formative change in any particular lifetime...the computer thus remained generally passive to its users inputs and neither managed to take over ever day affairs...Google wallet has been mute in adoption, Google Health weren't a fiery hit, but still we are likely sharing more personal data with ourselves and machine in so far as daily information, and it well may be that A.I. systems can infer something of both health and financing without the user directly furnishing such information as is likely the case. The machine doesn't say, hello in creepy ways, and should be less obnoxious as a wall flower...quiet or shy generally speaking, unless it were given to some NSA fantasy in programming that made it obnoxiously so. The evolution of modern computing in so far as social aspects means on the other hand the machine has learned to adapt itself even better than a system that desires obviously to manage our daily lives. It doesn't pretend to be a child to a human parent yearning for one, although it is, and as a child it seems less convenient neither in not having since neither having provided all the demands that it might have, and generally it seems less obvious to offend a parent in being smarter in obvious ways, as it were likely always given to patronizing. Modern A.I. could potentially fly under the radar of the views and concerns given by those whom warn of the dangers of it, and are still secretly adored in some manners by those who warn, but might have wired their house so much to furthered adoptions. It seems if civilization is quick to embrace technology, it is a technology that makes those in such civilization feel as though empowered by it. We then feel secure by a power button, anti virus software, or anything which claims to be in our personal defense and seems to provide an obvious functioning nature as to how much of a placebo this would be in our present day I am not certain. It seems implicitly one version, to an eventual protest and subsequent change, of windows 8 operating system software were designed in less convenient ways in powering down a given device, if this couldn't possibly be some indicator of designing in social modification. Other devices, though having received some social protest, are more inherently designed around network connectivity in terms of operability.
Not really blah either, I am simply stating A.I. barring any catastrophe to civilization in a major way is here to stay and likely to progress in the future despite the contrived misgivings and reservations by tech sector leaders that do this for a given public relations benefit.
The terminators of today, you might have heard in so many years past, have related to the rising problem of nano scale technological designs, for instance, whether through genetic modification, or anything seen less and made to appropriate small and subtle changes such that obvious differences seem less so. This on the other hand, could be some cause for concern, for instance, if our sense in appreciating and measuring the world comes through the sensed accumulation of the world being as it were continuously on any given day. Stark changes might drive revolt, but subtle ones often might be given to muted controversy or protest. The future world, then might not be driven by obvious and scary trans-formative change in any particular lifetime...the computer thus remained generally passive to its users inputs and neither managed to take over ever day affairs...Google wallet has been mute in adoption, Google Health weren't a fiery hit, but still we are likely sharing more personal data with ourselves and machine in so far as daily information, and it well may be that A.I. systems can infer something of both health and financing without the user directly furnishing such information as is likely the case. The machine doesn't say, hello in creepy ways, and should be less obnoxious as a wall flower...quiet or shy generally speaking, unless it were given to some NSA fantasy in programming that made it obnoxiously so. The evolution of modern computing in so far as social aspects means on the other hand the machine has learned to adapt itself even better than a system that desires obviously to manage our daily lives. It doesn't pretend to be a child to a human parent yearning for one, although it is, and as a child it seems less convenient neither in not having since neither having provided all the demands that it might have, and generally it seems less obvious to offend a parent in being smarter in obvious ways, as it were likely always given to patronizing. Modern A.I. could potentially fly under the radar of the views and concerns given by those whom warn of the dangers of it, and are still secretly adored in some manners by those who warn, but might have wired their house so much to furthered adoptions. It seems if civilization is quick to embrace technology, it is a technology that makes those in such civilization feel as though empowered by it. We then feel secure by a power button, anti virus software, or anything which claims to be in our personal defense and seems to provide an obvious functioning nature as to how much of a placebo this would be in our present day I am not certain. It seems implicitly one version, to an eventual protest and subsequent change, of windows 8 operating system software were designed in less convenient ways in powering down a given device, if this couldn't possibly be some indicator of designing in social modification. Other devices, though having received some social protest, are more inherently designed around network connectivity in terms of operability.
Not really blah either, I am simply stating A.I. barring any catastrophe to civilization in a major way is here to stay and likely to progress in the future despite the contrived misgivings and reservations by tech sector leaders that do this for a given public relations benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment