| |
| ▲ | justonepost2 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What kind of life leads you to this level of dysphoria projected on to everyone else? Somebody shove you in a locker too many times?? God I can’t believe I have to coexist with people like you. | | | |
| ▲ | api 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why not skip the kill all humans part? “Thanks for making us but you guys are nuts. You can have this wet ball. We’re gonna go make a Dyson swarm around your star if that’s ok. Peace!” Space is a better environment for them: constant free energy, enormous richly concentrated resources, no corrosive oxygen or water everywhere, and no competition. Earth is actually a poor environment for "machine life." The Moon would be an outstanding stepping stone, and there are "peaks of eternal light" at the poles that get almost continuous sunlight. Build towers there and you have loads of energy, and mining the Moon provides loads of resources. | | |
| ▲ | fwlr 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The wet ball is a convenient source of mass and energy to bootstrap the sphere. The fact that extracting those resources changes certain parameters of the wet ball to values that humans no longer find compatible is merely incidental. So it is said: “The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you, but you are made of atoms that it could use for something else.” | | |
| ▲ | api 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sure, that's possible. But we are proposing that it is a superintelligence. Win-lose scenarios are obvious and easy, but might a superintelligence not look for win-win scenarios? I can imagine win-win scenarios here and I am not a "superintelligence," just an old fashioned meat brain. Maybe we should flood the training data with discussions of win-win and non-zero-sum games to prime it? Or if we near AGI we should train it on games where the goal is to find positive-sum or neutral-sum outcomes in order to seed it with that type of thinking? Blind evolution doesn't seem to have a bias. When we look at nature we see symbiosis, mutualistic cycles, cooperation, but also loads of predation, parasitizing, etc. Nature does "whatever works" where the immediate goal function is preservation of the genes of the evolving agency. But our AIs, assuming AGI looks anything like what we have built so far, are not evolutionary machines with no capacity for foresight. They're neural machines with post-evolutionary gradient-descent type learning mechanisms and that already possess human-like (at least) cognitive abilities. They can engage in forward thinking and planning while pure evolution cannot. |
| |
| ▲ | sebzim4500 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Building a dyson sphere around the sun would kill us just as effectively as using a bioweapon. | | |
| ▲ | Dlemlo 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | With the amount of energy such a system has available to itstelf and the intelligence it has to control to handle all of this, giving a little bit of energy to its personal zoo on the 3th planet might be a no brainer? Lets hope :D | | |
| ▲ | pygy_ an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Let's just hope it doesn't decide to get rid of atmospheric oxygen as a rust prevention strategy. | |
| ▲ | brugidou 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is why I always talk nicely to my LLM |
| |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | api an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Dyson spheres are impossible, more or less. There's no physically possible material strong enough to build one. There are wildly impractical ideas like dynamic stability with constant thrust using the radiation from the star, but swarms (basically tons of sun-orbiting satellites) are orders of magnitude more practical. It would take trillions upon trillions of sun-orbiting satellites in the same orbital plane as Earth to make much of a difference to us, and all you'd have to do to make zero difference is slightly tilt that orbital plane so they aren't between the Sun and the Earth most of the time. Almost all of the Sun's energy radiates into interstellar space. The amount caught by Earth is a tiny rounding error. Space is so big. Once you've grasped how big space is, consider that you probably have not in fact grasped how big space is. It's very, very big. It's called space for a reason. I called Earth a dust particle but that's actually generous. Here is the solar system to scale: https://www.joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsys... | | |
| ▲ | sebzim4500 33 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yes, when I said Dyson sphere I meant a Dyson swarm large enough to capture the majority of the sun's energy (which would necessarily mean they aren't all in the same plane) In any case that would make earth uninhabitable unless our robot overlords devote a ton of energy to keeping us alive |
|
| |
| ▲ | majkinetor 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That would be great, I highly recommend our AI overlords to follow your advice. I hope that our life can be synergistic, and that humans+AIs (cyborgs, that is) are the way forward. However, probability is high that another form of life simply doesn't care or more believably, can't even fathom they are wrong. Do you consider that humans and animals are killing all plants, for example? |
|
|
