From: john grigg (starman125@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Dec 14 1999 - 18:50:06 MST
Kate Riley wrote:
>Therefore, if the AI decided that the human species should be >obliterated,
>I would be justified in calling it a bad judgement call >and taking arms
>against it.
Perhaps the decision to destroy humanity might be a good judgement call from
the A.I. perspective! From the human perspective it would be seen as bad
judgement! The A.I. may feel extermination is the best course of action so
that with humanity out of the way it can develop it's potential without any
restraining.
Whether it has been given access or hacked acess to weapons systems such as
nukes and especially nanotech will determine whether it has a good chance of
taking humanity out.
I'm not giving up in a fight like this! My friends and I will load up our
hunting rifles and do battle. I fully expect to get off at least one shot
before the killer goo shreds me or the nuke goes off overhead! It's the
thought that counts. :)
Imagine a scenario where humanity dukes it out with a reneagade A.I. that
has gained access to some weapons of mass destruction and does a failed
"Pearl Harbor" on us only to be destroyed by the retaliation.
Imagine the setback for civilization technologically and culturally if this
happened. Social prejudice could make A.I. r&d nearly impossible after that
which would set back technological progress. The cybernetic equivalent of
Dune's "mentat" might be developed to replace the need for A.I. in our
society. People on the list have already discussed how uploading could be a
means of offsetting the power of A.I. among us.
best regards,
John Grigg
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:04 MST