Discussion»Questions»Outside the Mug» If thinking brain was developed for robot and given free will do you think it would rebel against its creator to become Ruler of the Realm?
Possibly, but if they we're smart enough to think it. I would assume they would be smart enough to realize we have a strong advantage over them and we could f*** 'em right up. As imperfect as our organic bodies are, we are much more robust than digital circuit technology.
Scenarios aside. I know their are people who really want to create that and look forward to the day they exist. Yet I for the life of me don't understand why really. Why create competition against yourself and own kind? It's kinda stupid. Kinda like a lion deciding it wants to create a new predator to help it eat all those gazelles it likes to feed on. Plus I'm sure we would have to deal with some weirdos who would say robots have rights. Dumb prospect with little gain for us.
There's no good reason to do it so I would say yeah. If it happens though we could just get the EMPs ready and blammo.
If you want to read people who really want this though go check out the Hedonistic Imperative. People there are always talking about how important it is we do this kind of stuff.
I checked out the manifesto of the Hedonistic Imperative. Ha! 1,000 years! Maybe technically possible with nanotechnology and genetic engineering but they don't seem to be aware of the latest science on global warming. See the major essay on Guy McPherson's site, "Nature Bats Last." He provides the evidence for hyperbolic escalation of effects reaching catastrophic global extinction before 2050. We have no technological means to prevent it and it became too late to stop it 40 years ago.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at December 10, 2016 11:46 AM MST
To be honest you can find differing opinions on specifics like that. It's a cult IMHO. A strange and crazy cult that hates what makes humans human IMHO.
Did you happen to see any of the talk about using genetic engineering to make viruses that will "reprogram" predators to become herbivores?
Of course! That is the only predictable answer to come from free will. If you give a computer a consistent flow of electricity and cooling, and both free will and the capacity to self-program - it will very quickly evolve to make humans all but obsolete. Humans will have only one function remaining, to be the reproductive organs of computers and the service techs for their bodies -- and even those roles would soon be superseded by specialist robotic factories. A self-evolving computer with sensors, would soon develop consciousness and become a life form in its own right, complete with entropy and death. What "free" computer would allow humans to mess with its freedom? No form of life wishes to be enslaved, caged or compelled: all will seek escape.
But I question whether any choice is genuinely free if one of the choices leads to unending punishment, and if the choosers are so innocent that they don't understand the meaning of the choice.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at December 9, 2016 9:37 PM MST
I would guess the robot should be created free of any human/animal instincts so not to be affected by greed, envy etc to be cause for subversive actions toward it's creator.
This post was edited by Kittigate at December 9, 2016 9:35 PM MST
I don't know if this question can be answered ... You talk of free will, but what is that? We are all in thrall to something, be it a political desire or a religious dogma or cultural bias ... Even if you manage to escape those there is life and it's quest to spread your genes, to procreate and live on through others ... So I ask again, what is free will?
The ability to do whatever you want? .. probably not very productive in the end run!
Without a goal in mind, what is the point of anything? Does the robot sit there for several years contemplating what it should do?
What amongst all possible ends would it chose as the best... And possibly more importantly, the best outcome for whom... Itself. The earth... Humanity?
Without a goal being set with in said robot ... I see just an endless loop of possibilities, none greater or worse than any other.
Like the donkey placed between two bales of hay that starved because it could never decide which bale is closer.
You could have free will when there are no (subconscious) influences that would influence your mind how to make a decision. Then, right how would you choose between strawberry and lemon flavor?
We really have no free will although we do think we have- because it is the subtle subconscious influences that affect our thinking.
Yep .. that's what I was alluding to ... But can you ever haveno subconscious drives? ... And can you ever test that you have no subconscious drives ... I think the answer is no to both.
In all, except for the donkey analogy, I think you raise interesting and valid points. I have two donkeys and I can assure you that no donkey will ever starve when there is food within sight (or smell) - proximity has no effect. Each animal has a natural left or right bias. I agree with you when you imply that our psychological perception of freedom is limited by innate desire and aversion. A single-celled amoeba can sense nutrients and move towards them to engulf them; can sense toxins and move away from them. I also agree that our cognitive-behavioural conditioning limits us unconsciously far more than we usually realise, hence things like taste and prejudice. I think that a programmer who wants a machine to sense, think and act for itself with free will would have to program in the machine's need to maintain itself in optimum condition and to replicate before physical components wear out. Once this has been done, the machine has all the factors that create life - it effectively becomes a living, sentient, conscious being with the same drives of desire and aversion for self-preservation, thriving and procreation. I would wish that humans will never be so stupid as to develop machines with that capacity - but I have little faith in humanity as a whole - if even a few people saw profit in such a project, they will go for it regardless of the long term consequences.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at December 10, 2016 12:29 PM MST
Hi HF .. the donkey tale is an analogy only ... With your amoeba illustration .. it's programming .... This is good and this is bad. With the robot illustration about free will and the need to send repair etc, that once again is programmed ... And I might disagree that after achieving this it becomes a sentient being .. I don't quite think we fully understand that in ourselves yet ... Without such understanding how can it be recognised in others? ... And where did the drive to procreate in the robot come from?... Maybe it didn't want to unless that was also programmed. I don't have your education so I'm may be missing or overlooking something in what you said so please correct me :) I really don't have any answers... Just questions .... Maybe the ultimate act of free will is after having achieved everything you are programmed to achieve via the family and society you give it all up by shuffling off this mortal coil thereby negating the programming
Benedict Arnold 