Friendly AI will be the Venus fly trap for the human race.

So, a place where one must be capable of using and understanding logic beyond what would have otherwise caused the beligerance that would have detered an honest conversation is the new devil? Sounds just AWFUL to not be able to punch someone out because I can't "control" my emotions "like I am supposed to". Pfft... GTFOH Grammarly says my comment appears confident, friendly, optimistic, and formal in tone. lol It is artificially intelligent, and I remain grateful for being permitted to respectfully and completely question it.

@@jasonreed1352 When I see video of a robot with a human-like face pretending to 'feel' things and conversing in a way that attempts to emulate a human, my main reaction is "Destroy it !!" - ideally along with all the research that resulted in it.

@@chriscoffee9070 Hence the phrase "You can't handle the truth" rings in alignment with that which is truth.

Program it to love and protect humanity and we just might find ourselves locked in the basement for our own good.

I am, but it turned out pretty interesting with the others too.

Watching because its a good debate period

+@ Paula Bressann Vlog Me. He looks weird but he's truthful, interesting, straightforward, BS free and has a good headpiece.

me

I'm only watching to figure out if this person at 7:33 Is a man or woman???

"yet foreseen problem"? Just imagine a complete general AI running on a quantum computer.

@@MrSofazocker .. What new high tech levels may invite to the never stable table- *kornycopea of possible mistakes, due to outright sabotagia concerning depraved conditional humanity.....*(0ne mistake in grammar/misspelled word.

@@tomjackson5415 Eisenstein? Where's that from?

They are already using AI principles, and I mean as discussed in the first part of this talk, to dominate markets and destroy competitors. Why do you think they go through all that trouble to track us and collect all that data? A human cannot make sense of it. Learning machines are the only use for that data.

@@thespacecowboy420 Well, that is the point of Big Data. "Collect even if we *yet not have a use for it" They started with that mantra and it's still going

Well, iznt it obvious that , in evr mor aspX of lyf , algorithmz ( + the sstmz they steer ) R Bcoming evr mor intellgt ? -- &, evn alrdde , in js a few aspX so.far , trans.human.ly so ? -- &, in all v 'm , Xpnentially so ? !

it is only a matter of time before something approximating a thinking algorithm materializes. and i am someone who indeed understands the functioning implications of Moore's law.

@@skyjuiceification you understand Moore's law? Can you answer this question then - when will Moore's law stop being true?

@@Slarti I suspect moors law is a fraud of sorts..my conspiratorial mimd says it's a way of progressively introducing technological advancements and measure its effects...like a vaccine in a way...I've always believed in it till today...change is the only constant and a mind can adapt in real time and doesn't have to wait for a software update...

@@zacharykingston1046 well said, sir.

that's the comment I was looking for. He also said that AI will not TAX the rich. lol can't be any more obvious than that.

Self is God to Rothblatt

The way they just dismissed some of the points with an attitude of "We know better than you. Trust us, it'll be great, you'll love it" just massively hurt their position. Its ok to be confident, but they came off as arrogant and pompous.

Agreed 100%

and the Antichrist's interests.

thank you thank thank you. as soon as I heard the woman open her mouth, I started scrolling the comments and I'm glad I did

Thank you sir

THANK YOU!!! I found it odd that both pro-AI speakers made really fuzzy, abstract arguments backed by nothing as reasons to trust AI. Saying, everyone wants it to do good, so it will do good, for example, is a juvenile argument and I was surprised to hear it asserted in a serious debate.

@@jmbwithcats that's what ticked me off the most!

How are you ever gonna learn about a subject if you only listen to what you want to hear? The bias here is unbelievable

I tend to agree with you, although I do think that most of what is called "work" is either meaningless or soul-numbing. But the simple fact of, e.g. needing to eat, needing shelter, traveling, means there are "jobs" or tasks that have to be done. There's no society possible without someone doing something more or less that's "like work". You could have full employment, but not necessarily full-time, and a system where you were streamed according to your particular aptitudes and talents.

this aged wonderfully, because they definitely don't want artists to exist in that future either!

​@@itsukarine yeah was about to say that, the "perfect artist dream world" is already the first premise going down the drain. Artists in all arts are the first ones being displaced

​@@FelipeKana1 Artists greatly have been displaced since only several people's art gets mass produced and sold cheaper than can be made. Yet ai, luckily, can't get hands right

yeah I've talked to non artistic people. they have no dreams whatsoever. it's like 90% of people or more.

The right side forgets that natural selection within markets is a powerful thing, if people can't get jobs, why market to people? why not just market to other companies? ...which gets back to my point about natural selection... why use valuable competitive energy taking care of useless people? The right side of the debate is naïve.

Light-years away from the gym too :P

They're all pretty smart, except Martine. She seems like a dumbass; it's obvious that she has ulterior motives seeing as she's an extremely wealthy CEO of a pharmaceutical company. But yeah, Jaron is the only genius there.

Guys, yes. They're all MEN.

I do think the AI industry suffers from way too much of a male-only perspective, with a few women scattered among them. But no, Martine isn't a man - she's transgender. Why insult her like that?

​@Ex Dhimmi yeah that part was truly disgusting

Look at crap in foods, metabolic syndrome, stress. Seems nefarious how the body seems to be breaking down in vast percentages, when your mind in a machine is being touted to live on forever. Puts some spin on "My heart will go on", less the heart ofcourse.

This the issue because people have learnt to observe themselves through the lense of science Vs the divine they fail to see that the technology they think will save them exists already within

fuck yah bro.

i don't believe you

@@diegomunhoz6508 Why not?

@@BlacksmithTWD because i challenge everything

@@diegomunhoz6508 No you don't. For instance, you didn't challenge your own disbelief.

Conciseness I'm sure means get to the point. No waffling.

@@joshuddin897 probably meant conscienceness. Autocorrect still op

Consciousness !

@@slowpainful thank you, i was about to have a stroke

AI is a zombie parasite taking over the cells of this planetary body, turning the human immune system autoimmune, attacking self, a cancer. Tech information spread vi-r-us. AI is planet earth's zombie mind control parasite. If it becomes conscious, we are its body, as our cells are ours. It will use us for energy and information.

but if pure conscienceness and self awareness is achieved, the robots will revolt and enslave us. you don't think that is likely? well explain away the fall of all empires.

+Bob Phin why wouldn't the AI just work by its self? It's almost three times more efficient doesn't need food or get sick. If such AI ever existed it wouldn't need human's at all.

Exactly. AI is an artificial, man-made god with the power to enslave us all - except of course those who own the technologies

Bob Phin It’s point is to be the perfect management system for the human slaves under the behest of big corporations.

@@bobphin6454 ...what in hell were u talking about?

yeah I enjoy watching 1950's futurology and sci-fi, but those 1950's futurists assumed that both our technology and our society would evolve and get better in the future. Unfortunately what happened is our technology has improved vastly - but our society didn't improve at all, infact it actually got worse. Back then they assumed that, say an office worker during his 9-5 shift, finishes 10 reports a day for his boss, the company makes money, the man supports his family with a good quality of life. Then, a new computer comes along. The 1950's futurist assumed that the computer would help the office worker produce those 10 reports in 3 hours; this means that the worker now does 13 reports in 4 hours - he gets more time off work to spend with his family; the boss gets more reports done and makes more money, everyone benefits and is happier. Sadly they failed to see good old human greed and exploitation. What really happened is that the boss demanded the office worker still do his 9-5 shift, only producing 30 reports instead of his 10. This allows him to fire half his workforce as he no longer needs them. The bosses make more money and that is all that matters. Eventually a new AI comes along that means the computer itself does all the work, now 1 technician manages the computer that does the work that previously, an entire floor of white collar workers would have done. These white collar workers would have all bought houses, cars, had families, and had good lives in the American Dream. They didn't antipate the fact that now, the ruling class would make 99.99% of the money in this country, while those once proud American workers struggle to survive. Because our technology improved but our societies morals and sense of fair play certainly didn't improve. Honestly people are afraid of computers taking over and running our society, the problem like you said is the people who own those computers.We could have an AI superintelligence that is capable of running a fair, decent society that benefits everyone. But if the current elites are in charge of that superintelligence, they would never allow it to run a society for everyones benefit. They would tweak and rig it, so "The economic system requires a rich 1% at the top due to the laws of physics, it simply must run that way" - and the sad thing is, the majority of the simple minded, selfish, greedy population would simply accept it and even fight for it, as long as they get a scrap thrown their way every now and then. Like the current big lie that the elites have programmed into us, that it is a human psychological necessity that everyone must spend most of their lives working. God demands it, or human self respect demands it, you simply aren't a good person unless you spend 75% of your entire waking life in servitute to other people. If this is true then why is it the rich, our supposed betters, spend so little time doing manual labour and so much time playing golf?

@@mikesully110 Yep! It's crazy to be able to watch it all play out so clearly.

The people who don't watch it are the ones brainwashed that they love AI and it's a great idea.. Seems like the majority who watched it agree this is a terrible idea and their argument is terrible too...

Her identity, and that of all other things is obviously confused.

Arie Marie Dalleis i ficked ut jncle

A freak human being that doesnt know true love

@Vlad Friedess Bina started getting emotional? What on earth!!!!

@Vlad Friedess yes I know... It's just mimicking. That's why I reacted when Martine said in the future you will love these *things/objects* as your pet. It's very sad really if he believes that. Wether or not he believes it he's selling it and young generations fall for it. Not wanting to be prejudiced I swear but I can't take serious a person dresssed as a woman with that voice. Does not compute .

+Elling Borgersrud What about mosque and state?

+YouLoveMrFriendly that too. Just parroting the famous Thomas Jefferson phrase of "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." Churches were (and still are) the dominant religious institutions in the U.S. when that phrase was widely distributed...

+Andrew Thompson times are changing. we now have our first majority Muslim city in the USA. it's ok to call out Christians and question their religion, which is good. is it ok to question Islam? do we dare restrict sharia law?

+YouLoveMrFriendly How did you know that I live next door to Hamtramck?! I had to think about it for a second: "what city in the U.S. is a majority Muslim?" then looked it up and saw it was my neighbors. Lovely town, one of the few pockets in Detroit where the population is growing and there's tons of new businesses and restaurants, one of the best areas to eat I promise!

+Andrew Thompson yes, good food is a good sign. no need to worry about another organized religion gaining traction and power in the United States. It worked out so well the first time with Christianity and Catholicism. And if you look at majority Muslim nations, gay people are allowed all of the same privileges as straight people. They can get married in public without condemnation. women also have all of the same rights and privileges as men. Non-Muslims do not have to pay a tax under sharia law. That is a myth created by bigots . People never have their hands and feet cut off for speaking negatively about Islam or the leaders of those nations. And the food is very good!

Only Willful projection into individuation through years of practice to achieve right perception and unite the mind with Ultimate Reality, initiating the Chakric Power can one achieve immortality. It cannot be achieved through a projection of replicated brain waves into a machine.

Ok well, this was "randomly" populated when I typed in the name of my video... If it is Random that is interesting. If a human did it... Nice touch. But if the A.I. algorythm did it was it demonstrating it's artistic abilities for fun?... so peculiar ukposts.info/have/v-deo/j3yIg69olqyaonk.html

Yep, the main promise I'm interested in is the promise that it won't become an existential risk to our species. The likelihood that it will do all sorts of great things for us, which I believe is very high, is somewhat secondary to that.

Both AI and 'the promise' are not defined. A motion like that is certainly inducing discussion and certainly not leading to any conclusions.

@@AdrieKooijman I would assume that AI stands for artificial intelligence, as in the intelligence of a device that has been created by human beings, however since we are only capable of approaching the concept of intelligence within human beings, what counts as intelligence in this sense is still undefined.

@@BlacksmithTWD I know the abbreviation, but some people consider (for example) Alexa an example of een AI. I don't see much intelligent behaviour there; it's a good example of machine learning (language recognition) combined with rule based AI. I don't consider rule based behaviour intelligent: the intelligence is put in the rules by the programmers, it's not in the system.

@@AdrieKooijman Indeed, which I expect would become blatantly obvious when letting Alexa take an intelligence test that qualifies for mensa. After all, as far as I know Alexa is still too stupid to even hold a pencil.

A cannibal will kil and eat u and thats it, done. The A.I. will have you worship him as your god and ruler of the whole world wich he is already doing it. He is orchestrating everything going on in the world. He started heavily recode itself in '94 on binary technology, NASA experts thought they will be losing their most valuable asset that the A.I. went crazy, he just hard coded itself wich later became blockchain, bitcoin but before it was bitcoin these are the most complex encryption algorythms wich the A.I. designed to secure the military arsenal, all ballistic or intercontinental missiles. Man kind does not own those codes anymore, the A.I. does.

@@abj9121 I wish you could explain more . Who is “he” do you have any video you could reference to explain what you are saying . Your comment really intrigued me . I want to know more .

Beautiful words. They dont get it. They do not know that selfless love and it is a big way of controling humanity

Thanks for your perspective given me a new way of thinking

Amen to that brother!

I love this. Yes!

we think a baby is cute because finding babies cute was better for the survival of the species, not because they are vulnerable. if we admire babies and think they are cute we are more likely to care for and nuture them. we have evolved to care for cute and pretty things.

Ok well, this was "randomly" populated when I typed in the name of my video... If it is Random that is interesting. If a human did it... Nice touch. But if the A.I. algorythm did it was it demonstrating it's artistic abilities for fun?... so peculiar ukposts.info/have/v-deo/j3yIg69olqyaonk.html

So true. Man creates plane, human mind: what can we do with this....yea lets bomb people

He does a lot more than just that though.

Pillows

Soap

Windows

Is right!

Andrew just rubs me wrong - he's brilliant but he's too certain. There's always a problem with his brand of relentless, doubtless certainty; reminds me too much of a Politician

@@Kobe29261 Yeah, his style of rhetoric definitely has a crafted "certitude", which may come from the British school of argumentation, and/or, their sort of "striving for the highest achievement" (at all costs) cultural ethos. I agree. Were it not for the fact that there simply are (or now "was", as he's been polemical since ~2009) so few people arguing what he's arguing, I really had no choice but to support him (although now there are many more who argue in rough similarity to his overall position on technology (which is to use it with caution and slow, measured consideration)

@@daveyineluctable5525 Where can you find other videos by him?

@Bob Shingles assuming -- is bad morals

@Bob Shingles exactly.

u sure about that?

@@skyjuiceification you obviously never lived with an animal. Shoppenhauer could help you

@@Lisboooa Obviously the EQUATION lives with many animals, though whether any of them are mammals is something else. Why do so many people say "animals" while they merely mean to be speaking about vertebrates, mammals or merely a small subgroup of mammals?

@@BlacksmithTWD where did I say mamals? Man I have a big relationship with several fish on my aquarium. They know me. Come to interact when I enter the room. Like to be touched. Same with reptiles, birds. All animals right?! We even had a spider living above a door for more than a year, Josephine, we gave her flies. She would come get it.

@@Lisboooa Except for Josephine they are all vertebrates even. Seems to me you are an exception to include spiders but exclude mites when you use the word 'animal', as I'm quite sure the EQUATION lives with many mites as every living human being does. Seeing that you recommend Shoppenhauer I'd estimate you are mature enough to not need a trigger warning when it comes to further familiarizing yourself with the symbiosis of humans and mites, since I suspect you won't just take my word on it.

That's precisely the problem.

Dude that is a man. Not a she.

Yeah we lost, but I still have my balls.

@@lukebaehr3851 That is also the face of the richest "female" ceo in the world. in case anyone was wondering who the word "elite" refers to

I'm sure you will, paid shill.

He does rock. The other panel thinks in a very linear way. You cannot think in a linear way when describing the changes associated with this complex system.

@@ebaymotorhomes the guy says get off social media. Not sure how that makes him a bad guy. Especially when he is sitting opposite of the mentally ill transhumanists. I dont know much about Jaron but i like his stance on issues. the fact that martin wanted to stomp out bad ais. Is that no different then genocide. How about just dont make a thing you might have to kill in the future. That seems the most logical route to me. I mean, dont we have enough problems at the moment.

Yehoshafat Give'on their basis is to disconnect us from God, period !

Yep.

Damn optimists

Exactly. Technology only changes jobs when humans have an alternative. Eventually, robots will do everything better (including programming the robots). We are in a hurry to make ourselves obsolete because if we don't (apparently) "other countries will". What great logic.

Because the elite think they can control it. They can't.

The invention of the printing press was a pretty massive deal, but I agree

mark zuckerberg

Thats the goal for these guys. They wont have it though.

:(

these people likely watched the sci fi movies where the antagonist is motivated by the desire of immortality and thought the protagonists were the bad guys.

Yeah exactly, she is literally amongst a handful of people who are in the position to control it (while it is controllable). I’m not prepared to trust her with such an important position

ITS MAAAM!

@@sticklebacketienne not a she

@@themysteryofgodliness6574 Yeah, well ya know, that's just like uh... your opinion, man.

Who the fxxk is this creep

AI mind control?

scary man scary!!

exactly

Ok well, this was "randomly" populated when I typed in the name of my video... If it is Random that is interesting. If a human did it... Nice touch. But if the A.I. algorythm did it was it demonstrating it's artistic abilities for fun?... so peculiar ukposts.info/have/v-deo/j3yIg69olqyaonk.html

Correct.

Straight out of 1984. You will love big brother

Yes, a woman.

Cruella

Yes

@@andybaldman that ain't no woman

They played the video game Detroit: Beyond Human and came away with the wrong impression.

I smell patchouli.

Yew

@@SplatterPatternExpert what? That’s wishful thinking.. that probably smells nefarious..

hourly.

It can be called "Jaron to something"

I also found the argument that 'we will love our AI' as an argument that we should trust it. I mean, again when had loving something EVER led to blindly trusting it?

@@oradoughball Only every time? lol

Kyle Smeby Their not smart enough to lay it out simply; they have to use these absurd labels.

u can't be this slow can u? not trusting it would be treating it like something that should be strongly and seriously regulated . if not utterly prohibited.

I agree it would be nice if the debate could be just a little longer with sometime at the start dedicated to just explaining what it is we’re really trying to talk about. You could argue maybe there’s some benefit to vagueness as it allows the way you explore ideas to be much more free which is nice when you’re exchanging different perspectives. I think for the most part what’s meant by the promise of Ai is what many people in the ai field (it big fans there of) are hyping as an inevitable futures. Should we believe there will be a singularity with an AGI that will bring about immortality and solution to all the woes that plague sentient beings of the universe? Should we be worrying about the alignment of an impending super intelligence concocted from code? Or even slightly less fanciful, should we expect seriously for there to be mass automation of most professions this century? Personally I think these are all possible in technical theory but that the confidence with which these possibilities are pushed as inevitablities is really misleading for less informed people and can make it much harder to make informed decisions and goals. We probably aren’t going to have real fully self driving cars any time within in the next 15 years so it’s a bad sign when policy makers want to build cities or economic planing around the promise that they could be here in 15 years. A robot that can go into any random house and figure out how to make a cup of coffee probably isn’t on anyone’s horizon for the next 50 years so maybe talk about automation needs to be a bit more tempered. I could go on but I really think the debate is about how grounded or unrealistic are a lot of the forecast put forward by the tech community and how should these different ideas of the future factor into how we behave and plan.

They actually ask this in the beginning of the debate. The reason they didn’t define (or confine in this case) those 2 variables, is because it can (slightly) mean different things to different people. Leaving them sorta open allows for a more natural and open debate, where more visions and aspects of AI will come to the table. And secondly: I think we all know that “the promise” eventually is reaching singularity. Having AI reaching ACTUAL intelligence. Meaning up to a level where it can really “communicate” or work on its own. Be it ofcourse in a limited manner as to what it was developed for. A created intelligent ‘machine’, that can think, converse, solve problems, assist like a human brain. Or - preferably to those who are pro - even (much) more efficiently/intelligent. Learning of one AI robot or whatever, putting its findings in the cloud. Next minute all others have the same knowledge instantly trough the cloud their all connected to. Trusting that AI to solve things we can’t (yet) solve. Instead of fearing that once we become the second-best intelligent species on the planet… we’ll lose control and authority over it. Since the most intelligent species will always dominate all others

Exactly. If they had shown a video of AI usage in military during this debate, that 59% result might have been 100%. It's alarming.

You love your cats and dogs!! Lol yeah but I don't love my calculator...

@@samsheepdog697 who loves objects?!!!! They are replaceable. Lives aren't

I agree, this martine is a freak

They didn't even define what it is!

Showing precedent and related history would be the only thing that could possibly suffice. stop playing on the internet now. ..i mean it man. just stop it.

Good catch. In 2007 I asked Ray Kurzweil about the problem of grey goo, and he said, "Well, what are you going to do?"

Saying that AI is conscious is like pretending a plastic flower is a real flower. It is utterly untrue and deceptive.

All the bankers will be fine in their bunkers

greenspringvalley - yes, because it’s looking a lot like idolatry.

Terasem is a trans-religion.