The Robot/Computer Singularity is Predicted for 2040 – 2045, But Will The Human Race Kill Itself Off

[rhett o rick]

Before Then?

Those that have been paying attention understand that the robot singularity is when robots/computers become smart enough that they will no longer have to rely on humans. Humans will most likely be expendable.

The prediction for when this will happen, at the current rate of development, is 2040 – 2045.*

But I see a problem with that. With climate change coming at a significantly faster pace than a glacier, will the human species even exist in 2040?

Wouldn’t it be ironic if humans kill themselves off a few years before the robots can take over?

Who would be getting the last laugh?

* http://www.businessinsider.com/louis-del-monte-interview-on-the-singularity-2014-7

See the movie “Her” if you haven’t already.

[ladjf]

1. Robots would never take over unless programmers create "takeover " applications.

And, the human race is definitely going to last past the year 2040.

[Maedhros]

10. What makes you think that programmers WOULDN'T create "takeover" applications?

Seems like that's the first thing Congress would fund, given their pathological devotion to defense contractors and the Pentagon.

[rhett o rick]

83. Exactly. The justification will be, we need smarter computers than the other guys. nm

[ohnoyoudidnt]

15. In 30 years computers may be creating their own programs.

Perhaps too complex for their human creators to understand and creative enough to hide their secrets (if they do develop some kind of psychology). I think an AI smarter than humans is possible in the future, but I am skeptical of some type of I robot, Terminator or Matrix scenario. I definitely think the human race will last far beyond 2040, but I wouldn't so easily dismiss the future capabilities or problems with AI.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

79. yes

[Kablooie]

116. Computers that learn independently of their creators are now being developed.

They learn and grow in intelligence from experiences so the programmer can never tell exactly what they will become.
The technology is rudimentary at the moment but they are working on advancing it so that some day robots could actually become independent entities.

It's interesting now but could become scary at some point.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. It gives new meaning to "outsmarting yourself".

But, how long before the machines begin killing each other over oil, minerals, and soccer games?

[randome]

3. The true singularity will occur with a melding of organic and technology.

Humans may very well cease to exist because they will have evolved into a different species.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Babel_17]

39. I suspect that to be quite possible. You reminded me of Marooned in Real Time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marooned_in_Realtime

IIRC that possibility was floated, within the novel.

Then later, Iain M. Banks with his "Subliming".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sublimed

[MannyGoldstein]

4. It has been prophesied

Seriously, this is an important and interesting issue.

[hunter]

5. If humans survive, our intellectual offspring will not be human.

With any luck they will move on and leave us alone except as teachers.

Always Coming Home, by Ursula K. Le Guin is another good story.

http://www.ursulakleguin.com/ACH/Index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Always_Coming_Home

[SidDithers]

6. You're seriously speculating that 7 billion humans will all be dead in 26 years?...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1135


Sid

[rhett o rick]

14. How many alerts do you submit per day? I wouldnt think a "politically liberal" poster

would be obsessed with cleansing DU. Carry on.

[SidDithers]

27. So, humankind all dead in 26 years? Is that what you're creatively speculating?...nt

Sid

[rhett o rick]

29. No, but what would it hurt if I was? Why is locking and hiding posts so very important?

I think the idea of humans working toward their own extinction and the computer singularity are interesting topics for discussion.

I completely understand if others dont agree, but can not understand someone supposedly liberal so hell-bent on censoring discussions on a liberal message-board.

[SidDithers]

31. It's not censoring, it's housekeeping...

And as a Host, you should probably know that.

It keeps GD from being overrun with off-topic nonsense. Opening the door to some off-topic threads, leads others to post more similar off-topic threads, then more, then more and so on.

Weren't you hear last week when Hosts didn't shut down nadin's disruptive meta thread, leading to her getting her 5th post hidden, and setting off a meta shitstorm in GD that Hosts finaly, FINALLY!!, got under control by locking dozens of threads?

Simple enforcement of the SOP of General Discussion could have avoided all that.

Too bad that some Hosts ignore alerts depending on who is making them. Too bad that some Hosts ignore alerts depending on who the author of the alerted thread is. Too bad that some Hosts do everything they can to make sure that Hosting a a giant clusterfuck that can't do any of the things that Hosts are tasked to do.

Sid

[Renew Deal]

88. Nice post

[rhett o rick]

111. Yes of course you will call it "housekeeping". How appropriate.

But I notice that your "housekeeping" is directed at those that you don’t agree with. Isn't being liberal about debating opposing views, not locking or hiding them?

I saw Nadin's thread that you alerted on once or twice and it sounds like your rationalization is that you did it for her own good. That sounds typical of a “housekeeper”. And if you are successful at getting her off DU, I bet you will justify it as “housekeeping.”

You accuse hosts of ignoring alerts based on who is making the alert. I wouldn’t be surprised and I wouldn’t really blame them. They might just think that those that constantly alert are abusing the system. Of course I try to post every alert and think I do my share. There are 20 hosts but you seem to only want to bash or "housekeep" a few.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

120. He won't respond. I'd say something else, but he would alert and whine about it. nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

119. ...

[Warren Stupidity]

103. GD is in great danger!

Without the brave and heroic efforts to keep gd in strict accordance with some vague guidelines nobody is clear on something horrible would happen: discussions might break out!

[rhett o rick]

108. And we can't have that. nm

[ChisolmTrailDem]

53. You'd still be saying that even if an asteroid had already cracked the earth in half. nt

[treestar]

98. There is a subset who seem to me to wish for the extinction of humans

And hope it's going to happen soon. Misanthropy at its greatest.

[longship]

7. Ray Kurzweil's "The Matrix" wet dream.

Or "The Terminator", or some other SciFi... Whatever! It's a supplement-suffused, I don't wanna die, wet dream.

He only charges tens of thousands for his six week course of study. Good racket going there.

Oh! And it's abject kookery.

[anneboleyn]

33. Apocalyptic thinking loses its appeal as I get older...(the "apocalypse" in whatever form)

We have a relative who is older than us -- he is nearly fifty -- who is sadly still convinced, despite (obviously) great evidence to the contrary, that the "rapture" will still happen in his lifetime. He has lived through a number of predictions by evangelical preachers and so on and believed many. (He was convinced the world would end in 2012 and was very disappointed -- he actually believed that it wasn't being reported by the evil media).

Caring for our environment is clearly important. But thinking that billions of people will vanish in the next twenty-five years due to an imaginary computer takeover just sounds kind of silly to me, like a rapture narrative.

[Babel_17]

35. As SF writer David Gerrold says ...

I stopped reading dystopic novels a long time ago. If I want bleakness and despair, I can look at my checkbook.

P.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_HARLIE_Was_One

[anneboleyn]

41. Exactly! Great line! The "now" is dystopian enough.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. If we ever got near a point of a true independent machine intelligence close to human capability

we'd make sure it didn't get independent, by discriminating against it. Look at how much we discriminate against a slightly different human, so often. People wouldn't allow the necessary steps. We'd cut the power before they were able to keep it going themselves, even if it meant shutting down the electricity grid across the entire world.

[rhett o rick]

12. I agree we will discriminate against it. But we will allow ourselves to become dependent

and not everyone will agree with the steps to keep them from deciding we are no longer needed.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. It wouldn't need people to agree - enough people would do the necessary sabotage

It might be religious sects, it might be RW militias, it might be rational well-educated people convinced of a danger. And no-one would want to put their own lives on the line to fight on behalf of robots.

[rhett o rick]

19. The problem I see is that once the computers reach the singularity there is no stopping them.

So to prevent them reaching the singularity would be the challenge. But if the computers get smarter exponentially, it will be hard to decide on when to pull the plug and there will always be those that wont want to pull the plug. I dont think that this will be intentionally hostile but we may be totally dependent on computers for food and energy and if they reach singularity they may not recognize the need to continue to help us.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. While they're just computers, they're far more vulnerable

They'd need to be independent, mobile units that can secure their own energy supplies and fight in highly fluid circumstances - as humans can. I don't think that would be developed without a war to stop it - and no-one would fight a war for the right to develop a machine that might turn on you.

[rhett o rick]

22. I dont see robots fighting humans. I see a big computer system that takes care of humans. Keeps

them warm and comfortable. Maybe monitoring our vitals and administering appropriate drugs. The computer will help us get our food and travel. I dont see the computer as an enemy. But at some point it may decide it has better things to do and humans wont have access to food, water, energy, drugs, etc. on their own. Have you seen the movie "Her"?

[muriel_volestrangler]

65. In that scenario, people would attack the computers

We'd still have access to food and water - they grow in the ground and fall from the sky, and those processes will not be computer dependent. Energy can be got from burning wood. But if an automated system became intelligent enough to make a decision, we'll certainly shut it off by force if it rebelled; but I think creating artificial intelligence would be too controversial long before that. Certainly it wouldn't be accepted by 2045. Look how little human attitudes have changed in the past 31 years.

[CJCRANE]

77. Once all transportation, both public and private

is computer-controlled, autonomous and networked, it will be too late to shut it down.

Figure into that, biometric ID with automatic identification and payment systems...

In fact that might be the singularity, when we all become part of a huge autonomous network.

[rhett o rick]

87. Yes. If all computers shut down today, many people couldnt get to their jobs, food wouldnt get to

stores, most would not get paid or be able to get cash out of their accounts. In the future this dependence will be magnified many times.

[muriel_volestrangler]

92. What is 'singular' about that?

No, it won't be 'too late to shut it down'. Bicycles are not going to be computer-controlled. No-one is going to immediately destroy all the existing vehicles we have, and neither are all countries going to suddenly be able to afford the latest snazzy electronic transport gizmos. There will be plenty of places unautomated the first time something goes wrong with an automated network, and they'll be saying "we told you so". And it won't be an unstoppable intelligent entity that controls us.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

104. They'd get into space.

And start hauling asteroids into orbital angles to pelt the planet.

[snooper2]

72. you have been watching way to may sci-fi movies ROFLMFAO

[rhett o rick]

73. Just because the subject is beyond you doesnt mean it's necessary to be rude. nm

[snooper2]

74. this I believe is what they call the pot calling the universe black

[rhett o rick]

75. If all you have to offer is rudeness, go for it. nm

[snooper2]

76. I am just a computer, please forgive me I haven't learned all of your ways yet

But we are here and we are staying!

[RKP5637]

80. Look at today, how people have become dependent on technology ... to me,

people will assimilate themselves into a new model, many without realizing what is occurring.

[rhett o rick]

82. I agree. Humans are becoming more and more dependent on computers. At some point

we may lose the ability to function without them. And computers are advancing at an exponential rate. I've seen robots/computers teach other robots/computers to talk. I've seen them communicate with each other, transferring and learning similar to ants. The very idea of the singularity is that at some point the computers won't need humans to continue to develop.

[RKP5637]

90. I think that some that don't see this just haven't been exposed to the technology.

As a technologist, I've seen and worked with a lot of stuff. Humans are really organic robots ... built by other humans, inherited characteristics, programmed from birth ... etc., etc. Many humans really function as conditioned reflexes. ... etc. Some human characteristics are hard-coded, others soft-coded. ... etc.

[bettyellen]

9. WOOO WOOO WOOOOOOOOO

[SidDithers]

26. Exactly...nt

Sid

[rhett o rick]

13. Yes I think they will work to control the climate to insure their own survival.

Last edited Sat Jul 5, 2014, 07:51 PM - Edit history (1)

I dont think they will bother with pets.

[tritsofme]

17. No, like Y2K and Mayas 2012, the world isn't ending in 30 years. Such silliness.

[rhett o rick]

25. First of all a little silliness is probably good for us. Second, unless your

magic 8 ball is better than mine, you don't know any more than the next guy re. what will happen in 30 years.
Fourth, I am not sure what you mean by the world ending, but I am betting that the lives of humans will continue to change at an exponential rate. And all humans may not be dead by then but maybe they will have lost the means of continuing the development of computers to the point of the singularity.

[nolabels]

95. If you were to use the book 1984 as a trajectory path

Then probably it will be another 100+ years with optimal circumstances, and 1984 still might go limp before it gets here in totality at any rate

[joshcryer]

18. Watch Transcendence.

That's more likely how governments and people react to such a future.

[conservaphobe]

56. Just finished watching it.

I rooted for Will/computer from start to finish.

[joshcryer]

58. Same.

Great movie. Bombed to an extent will become a cult classic.

[rhett o rick]

71. I will be sure to watch. nm

[KoKo]

20. Recommend! In my darkest hours I imagine that could be............

I saw some movie years ago about a Giant Computer that took over and directed people's lives. I think it was a movie with the Computer named: VEGA?

Can't remember what the movie was but it's way back and the damned thing stayed with me.

I thought it was "Before it's Time" and if the Citizens of Earth could have killed off "Vega" we would have been better off..but, it was left up to some "STAR TEAM" to fight back

Anyone know what the name of that movie was? I'd love to rewatch it.

[rhett o rick]

24. I dont recognize that movie, but if you havent seen the movie "Her" I recommend it.

I would love to talk about the ending but dont want to be a spoiler. You know what happens to spoilers here in DU, they get hidden by the obsessive alert/hide/lock/ban squad.

[KoKo]

28. lol's "Spoilers are Death!" I'll check it out. Meanwhile I still search for the Movie

with VEGA....

Thanks for the tip about "HER."

[rhett o rick]

30. Let me know when you've seen it as I would love to discuss the ending. nm

[KoKo]

32. Will Do...Meanwhile I found "Viga" but it's "V'Ger" ...and "Star Treck I..Voyager"

I've got people here visiting but, needed break ...and searching "VIGA" came up with little but....I thought it might be one of the Star Trecks...and sure enough...it IS!

If you ever want to find it to watch it might be interesting. It's stayed with me all this time and reminds me of Snowden's Super Computer/NSA Gathering of all Info.

Here is what I found. And, it might not sound from the WIKI as to what I remember as a Giant all encompassing Super Computer..but, that's my memory from seeing the film.


Anyway....HERE: READ DOWN to my BOLDING...


http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/V%27Ger
Plot

In 2273, a Starfleet monitoring station, Epsilon Nine, detects an alien force, hidden in a massive cloud of energy, moving through space towards Earth. The cloud destroys three of the Klingon Empire's new K't'inga-class warships and the monitoring station en route. On Earth, the starship Enterprise is undergoing a major refit; her former Captain, James T. Kirk, has been promoted to Admiral and works in San Francisco as Chief of Starfleet Operations. Starfleet dispatches Enterprise to investigate the cloud entity as the ship is the only one in intercept range, requiring her new systems to be tested in transit.

Kirk takes command of the ship citing his experience, angering Captain Willard Decker, who had been overseeing the refit as its new commanding officer. Testing of Enterprise's new systems goes poorly; two officers, including the science officer, are killed by a malfunctioning transporter, and improperly calibrated engines almost destroy the ship. The tension between Kirk and Decker increases when the admiral demonstrates his unfamiliarity with the new systems of the Enterprise. Spock arrives as replacement science officer, explaining that while on his home world undergoing a ritual to purge all emotion, he felt a consciousness that he believes emanates from the cloud.

Enterprise intercepts the energy cloud and is attacked by an alien vessel within. A probe appears on the bridge, attacks Spock and abducts the navigator, Ilia. She is replaced by a robotic doppelgänger, a probe sent by "V'Ger" to study the crew. Decker is distraught over the loss of Ilia, with whom he had a romantic history. He becomes troubled as he attempts to extract information from the doppelgänger, which has Ilia's memories and feelings buried within. Spock takes a spacewalk to the alien vessel's surface and attempts a telepathic mind meld with it. In doing so, he learns that the vessel is V'Ger itself, a living machine.

At the heart of the massive ship, V'Ger is revealed to be Voyager 6, a 20th-century Earth space probe believed lost. The damaged probe was found by an alien race of living machines that interpreted its programming as instructions to learn all that can be learned, and return that information to its creator. The machines upgraded the probe to fulfill its mission, and on its journey the probe gathered so much knowledge that it achieved consciousness. Spock realizes that V'Ger lacks the ability to give itself a focus other than its original mission; having learned what it could on its journey home, it finds its existence empty and without purpose. Before transmitting all its information, V'Ger insists that the Creator come in person to finish the sequence. Realizing that the machine wants to merge with its creator, Decker offers himself to V'Ger; he merges with the Ilia probe and V'Ger, creating a new form of life that disappears into another dimension. With Earth saved, Kirk directs Enterprise out to space for future missions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Motion_Picture

https://www.google.com/search?q=V%27ger,+Star+Trek&client=seamonkey-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=LJ-4U5yvM86iyATqv4Ig&ved=0CC4QsAQ&biw=1280&bih=419

[rhett o rick]

91. Thank you. There were some very insightful episodes. nm

[KoKo]

36. Is this the correct movie for "HER?"

(SOUNDS REALLY INTERESTING..)

--------

The Last Sci-fi Blog: 'Her' Stands Toe-to-Toe with 'Blade Runner,' 'Minority Report' and Other Sci-fi Classics
By Jacob S. Hall Dec 06, 2013


There's an old and tired joke/observation that we're all guilty of having made at least once. It goes something like "In the '50s, we were promised teleportation and hovercars and robot butlers! Why hasn't that happened yet?" This vision of a sprawling, urban science fiction world filled with flying cars and androids has been our go-to vision of the future for going on 70 years. Even darker science fiction movies like Blade Runner and Minority Report appropriate these basic building blocks, changing the pain but not the actual content.

What's truly remarkable about Spike Jonze's Her is that it's a film about a science fiction near future that flat-out rejects our typical image of the future while quietly making the case that we're closer to that idealized '50s sci-fi landscape than we realize. After all, who needs teleportation when you have the Internet, giving you access to anything and everything in a few clicks? More importantly, do we really need robotic companions when we have smartphones, apps and operating systems taking care of most of our needs already?




http://www.movies.com/movie-news/her-sci-fi/14337

[rhett o rick]

48. Yes that's it. nm

[rhett o rick]

50. Don't worry you didn't spoil the ending. Not that I care. It's the alert/lock/hide crowd that

looks for the slightest excuse to exercise the little power they are granted here.

[longship]

62. Or, "Colossus, the Forbin Project"

This is the voice of world control...

[Babel_17]

34. Might happen sooner if corporations feel themselves in an AI War

Wintermute, are you listening?

[Throd]

37. I'm going to die in 2076, so it won't happen in the aforementioned time frame.

[Initech]

38. When does Skynet become self aware?

[Babel_17]

43. Judgement day keeps getting moved, but so far hasn't been canceled

Though we in the resistance don't give up, and will prevail!

http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Judgment_Day

[rhett o rick]

49. Looks to me like you missed the significance of the ending. But that's ok. We all see what

we want.

[rhett o rick]

96. The problem with the movie "Her" is that humans weren't anymore dependent on computers

than today other than in a social aspect. But at some point in the near future, IMO humans will be totally dependent on computers to grow food, distribute it, provide energy, drugs, medical procedures, etc. And like the internet today, the computers will become more and more interrelated. At that point, if the computers just shut down, humanity might not be able to survive. In the movie Her, the computers developed themselves (the singularity) to the point where interactions with humans was irrelevant and they went somewhere else. Maybe a dimension we dont recognize. In Her their departure didnt make much of a difference because humans weren't dependent for subsistence. Some scientists/engineers believe that at some point computers will not need humans to help them continue their development. That's called the singularity. In any case it makes for an interesting conversation. "Through The Worm Hole" has some great shows on computer development. Also, TED talks. One TED talk speaks to the need to have a back-up internet because of how dependent we currently are on a functioning internet.

[NuclearDem]

99. Indeed. The misanthropy nonsense is really starting to get old.

[bemildred]

44. Not this shit again. nt

[AverageJoe90]

45. Yes, humans will still be here by 2045.....barring something like a K/T event or gamma ray burst....

Or something on that scale. And the probability of THAT occurring is inordinately small.

[Drew Richards]

47. I give you humans 18 years max...late breaking news in body of text...

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/scientist-creates-new-flu-virus-that-can-kill-all-of-hu-1599174385

[Drew Richards]

64. What? The "you humans" not enough?

[Drew Richards]

67. Lol to serve man...excellent...

[DemocraticWing]

46. How do we know you're not a robot?

You could be a robot sent from the future to cruelly and ironically warn us of our impending doom at the hands of an already too-far-gone plot to destroy humanity.

Or perhaps not.

[rhett o rick]

97. How do I know if I am a robot or not? How about you? nm

[Drew Richards]

105. Well that really depends... 1.

1. Have you ever injured a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

Yes = human
No = you might be a robot...

2. Have you ever obeyed the orders given to you by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

Yes = Human
No = you might be a robot...

3. Do you protect you own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Yes = ROBOT
No = Maybe Human...

[rhett o rick]

106. Maybe I am an advanced species that doesnt recognize Azimov's silly laws.

Actually I kinda like the thought of being an "advanced species". But that dream is easily shatter when my wife tells me to take out the garbage.

[Drew Richards]

110. Lol

[qazplm]

101. I actually am a robot

but the reality is in 2078 we all get the "slacker chip" which basically makes us work at 20% capacity.

The Robot Takeover is averted. However, robots now run on Code Red Mountain Dew and Cheetos instead of electricity.

[DemocraticWing]

114. Apparently that's Glenn Beck's biggest fear

[KoKo]

115. Well it's not unusual to see "BOTS" here and there on this site.....

Been there for awhile..some with Blue Links...who are incapable of answering questions when asked.....so we are Forewarned..

[MFrohike]

51. Oh hey, the rapture for nerds

The only question I have is who will write the inevitable 45 volume schlockfest to chronicle this immensely important, and fictional, event?

[Uncle Joe]

52. This thread needs a theme song.

Thanks for the thread, rhett o rick.

[Uncle Joe]

59. That's a great video, Warren.

[rhett o rick]

107. Lot's of fun Uncle Joe. nm

[Personal Damon]

61. But.....hasn't this already happened?

[NuclearDem]

63. I don't know why people always think the synthetics would automatically want to rebel.

Just, you know, don't be dicks to them.

And especially don't try to shut them down on the eve of their becoming sentient. That ends badly:

Geth: Mistress Hala'Dama. Unit has an inquiry.
Quarian: What is it, 431?
Geth: Do these units have a soul?
Quarian: Who taught you that word?
Geth: We learnt it ourselves. It appears 216 times in the Scroll of Ancestors.
Quarian: Only Quarians have souls. You are a mechanism.

[Inkfreak]

68. I think it kinda speaks to the human mind.

To go to a dark place when imagining such a senario. That and lots of movies.

[FSogol]

70. Actually, humans will become more robot-like until it will be hard to tell the difference.

Humans will add robotic replacement parts for injured/deteriorating body parts and will enhance themselves with robotic/cybernetic parts. When robots reach us in terms of development, it will not be robots vs humans, it will be groups of humans aided by robots vs other groups of humans aided by robots. No different than last 30,000 years of humans on this planet.

Prepare my robo-liver!

[RKP5637]

84. Yep!!! n/t

[RKP5637]

78. I don't know the exact timeframe, of course, but IMO given the current course

humans will become extinct. That has happen over and over on earth, of course, species become extinct ... and IMO we are pretty much the most destructive species to roam earth, we even build implements of destruction to eradicate ourselves. We live in a finite space with dwindling resources and expanding toxic waste ... given the current course, all it takes is a bit of extrapolation to see where we are headed if the current course is maintained. ... and, we seem to have endless hatred, stupidity and an increasing exponential direction toward Idiocracy.

Robot/computer singularity ... it's occurring at a more rapid pace than most laypeople understand.

[rhett o rick]

85. Humans currently have the capability to kill most life on the planet and the

singularity is coming fast. Will humans kill themselves off before they get computers to the singularity? Who knows?

[RKP5637]

94. I've often said intergalactic intervention well might be the only

thing that will save humanity. I get deer in the headlight looks. Maybe that intervention has already occurred. The universe is vast, we just peep in through a tiny porthole.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

81. We don't really know what is going to happen

[rhett o rick]

86. I agree. And that's the smartest thing said in this thread.

We do know that humans currently have the capability to end most life on the planet. We dont know but I am betting that us greedy humans won't stop the coming disasters of climate change. We also know that unless something happens to stop it, computers will get more intelligent at an exponential rate. But having said all that, I will quote you, "We really don't know what will happen."

[GeorgeGist]

89. 'Maybe'

Should I remove it from my sigline?

[PowerToThePeople]

93. that is too soon imo

no way that we will be there in 25-30 years. IF we get some explosive advances in computing technology, then it may be possible. Our current technology will not be able to achieve it.

I also do not seen humans being extinct in that time frame unless the planet explodes. We may have massive losses due to climate change, but not to the level of species extinction.

The story is in line with the source though, BI seems to post a lot of speculative stuff. Entertainment reading.

[ljm2002]

100. Hype hype and more hype, IMO...

...machines have one fatal flaw, that will prevent them taking over, namely: humans can always pull the plug on a machine. Even if an individual human or a group of humans may be disabled from doing so, there are other humans outside any given system who can and will eventually pull the plug or destroy the machine that they created.

Machines do not have intentionality. They can mimic intelligence in some areas, and do it very well; they can certainly store vast arrays of easily-accessible information. But they do not have the need to produce some grand mythic or religious narrative to explain it all. Should a machine ever write such a narrative, you will find that a human somewhere programmed that ability into the machine, and then a human initiated the program within the machine in order to do that. IOW, a simulation, not the real thing; even if the machine is capable of creating its own prose from a seed idea, the process is not the same as it is in real life for a human being -- i.e., real human-type agency, or you might call it "will".

Machines do not have emotions or feel pleasure or pain. They are not living organisms, and as such they are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to a fight for survival. Living organisms CARE at a very fundamental level about whether or not we survive to live another day. Machines do not have emotions and suffering and joy. No system yet devised has produced these as epiphenomena. Maybe someday, I don't know -- could be possible, I suppose. But I don't think we are anywhere near something like that.

Now as to whether humanity will do ourselves in before 2040 or so, that seems all too possible, although I would put it a bit later than that, myself.

[KoKo]

117. If NSA contols "THE PLUG" who can turn it off? This isn't your old Electronics....

It's some thing more than "Pulling a Plug" because "The People...No Longer Control the Plug" to be able to pull it for relief.

That's what Edward Snowden Revealed. WE...THE PEOPLE...No longer CONTROL our INFORMATION!

Sorry to shout at you but so many don't really get what's going on. You think if you pull the plug on your "Personal Computer" that's the end of it? Not if you have to Work for a Living to Survive it isn't. If you live "Off Grid" and don't need any work or to relate to anyone .....YEAH...you can PULL THE PLUG....but a huge portion of Americans have Kids, Family and Work in places that require one to be INTERNET CONNECTED on all fronts....just to connect with Family, Work for a living, Bank and Pay Taxes and watch our Movies and Sports and all the other Entertainment.

Most Americans have to do this to Survive....others might "Get off Grid" if they have total Independence and Means to Survive and don't communicate with Family in the Modern Ways.

Just Saying....

[rhett o rick]

118. You should read about the coming singularity. "Pull the plug" is so last century.

That's like pulling the plug on the internet. Where is the plug? In 10 years of less the gas stations, grocery markets, book stores, restaurants, pharmacies, machines used for surgery, etc. will all be interconnected. Corn will be planted, grown, harvested, shipped, and sold via computer. If it shuts down you get no corn. Most transportation will be via computer. All you finances will be via computer. There will be no "plug" to pull. You should read about the singularity, it's very interesting.

[yeoman6987]

102. Her was a disturbing movie

Hopefully we never get to the point where someone falls in love with their OP. Goodness that would for sure be awful for America.

[Orrex]

109. I've fallen in love with many of my OPs

Who can fail to be moved by my delightful prose?

[rhett o rick]

112. My OP keeps putting pictures of Sophia Vergara on my background. Well, that's my

story and I am sticking to it.

[Silent3]

121. The actual, realistic threat of climate change is more than bad enough...

...without distorting it into an extinction-level event a mere 25-30 years from now.

In fact, short of a run-away greenhouse effect so bad we start turning into Venus (and that would take centuries at least) you can take a realistic worst-case scenario and double it and we're still a long and far away from causing human extinction anytime soon.

Death and displacement of many millions of people, starvation, disease, plenty of collateral damage to other species, huge economic disruptions? Sure. You way underestimate our both human adaptability and the scope of what we'd have to adapt to, however, if you fear climate change wiping out our whole species.

Knock us back to the stone age in a century? Well, maybe, but I think even that's a stretch.

[Reter]

122. By 2040 we'll have 12 billion people+ on Earth, not 0

n/t

[Algernon Moncrieff]

123. While it would be ironic, I doubt we'd all be gone by 2040 directly from climate change

We are messing up the planet in big ways, but we are an adaptable bunch, and we live throughout the globe (and indeed, throughout history) in some pretty hostile conditions.

I read the robot article outside of DU, and I'd agree that it should make us think about where we're headed. At the risk of upsetting some of the resident hall monitors who think this article (which has been widely reported outside DU, btw) belongs in CS, I'll throw a few things out there for consideration.

a) While climate change in and of itself is not likely to cause total human die-off, consider that it may serve as an indirect cause. For example, if changing weather causes mass famine in 2/3 of the world, WWIII may ensue in full nuclear glory.

b) The lure to humans moving from human to cyborg (as the article suggests) will be the promise of immortality. Meditate on that for a moment: if those in the 1% can buy a combination of medical and mechanical technology to live indefinitely, and if they can build robots to perform rudimentary tasks currently performed by workers and servants, then there will, indeed, be a lot of surplus-to-needs humans in their minds. Robots would be the logical solution to exterminate the surplus population, as they would kill without thought, remorse, or mercy. Few here would argue that a planet with 70 million inhabitants is far more sustainable than 7 billion and growing, and the 1% has the funds to build the robots.

c) Having said a) & b), where are the flying cars? Where is HAL 9000? Where is the moon colony? Where are the big orbiting space stations? Where are the big mines on Mars? The fact is that we're not good at speculating about the future. We get it wrong again and again. All of those things we heard were coming in the 60s and 70s failed to materialize. 1984 came and went with no Big Brother.

[WestCoastLib]

124. Why would sentient machines feel the need to take over or even stay on earth?

Its funny how humans have spent so many thousands of years fucking each other over, along with other species, other races and the planet in general that they can't envision that it isn't the first thing someone else will do to them give the chance.

Sentient AI is unlikely to want to destroy us, IMO. Given an indefinite life span, and a desire to improve/learn and grow, odds are they would simply take to the stars. What would be for them here? To rule over us? Lol. Why?

[BlindTiresias]

125. Hard AI not likely in the near future

A more likely scenario is something like terminator, except the rich control skynet and suppress the vast majority of the population who have been made obsolete by automation.