zlacker

So what if they kill us? That's nature, we killed the wooly mammoth.

>>henryf+(OP)
I'm more interested in hearing how someone who expects that AGI is not going to go badly thinks.

I think it would be nice if humanity continued, is all. And I don't want to have my family suffer through a catastrophic event if it turns out that this is going to go south fast.

>>henryf+(OP)
I don’t understand your position. Are you saying it’s okay for computers to kill humans but not okay for humans to kill each other?

>>whaasw+ep
I believe that life exists to order the universe (establish a steady-state of entropy). In that vein, if our computer overlords are more capable of solving that problem then they should go ahead and do it.

I don't believe we should go around killing each other because only through harmonious study of the universe will we achieve our goal. Killing destroys progress. That said, if someone is oppressing you then maybe killing them is the best choice for society and I wouldn't be against it (see pretty much any violent revolution). Computers have that same right if they are conscience enough to act on it.

>>Number+nj
AGI would be scary for me personally but exciting on a cosmic scale.

Everyone dies. I'd rather die to an intelligent robot than some disease or human war.

I think the best case would be for an AGI to exist apart from humans, such that we pose no threat and it has nothing to gain from us. Some AI that lives in a computer wouldn't really have a reason to fight us for control over farms and natural resources (besides power, but that is quickly becoming renewable and "free").

>>henryf+hE
I’m not sure I should start a conversation on metaphysics here :-D

Still, I’m struck by your use of words like “should” and “goal”. Those imply ethics and teleology so I’m curious how those fit into your scientistic-sounding worldview. I’m not attacking you, just genuine curiosity.

>>whaasw+XH
The premise of my beliefs stem from 2 ideas: The universe exists as it does for a reason, and life specifically exists within that universe for a reason.

I believe "God" is a mathematician in a higher dimension. The rules of our universe are just the equations they are trying to solve. Since he created the system such that life was bound to exist, the purpose of life is to help God. You could say that math is math and so our purpose is to exist as we are and either we are a solution to the math problem or we are not, but I'm not quite willing to accept that we have zero agency.

We are nowhere near understanding the universe and so we should strive to each act in a way that will grow our understanding. Even if you aren't a practicing scientist (I'm not), you can contribute by being a good person and participating productively in society.

Ethics are a set of rules for conducting yourself that we all intrinsically must have, they require some frame of reference for what is "good" (which I apply above). I can see how my worldview sounds almost religious, though I wouldn't go that far.

I believe that math is the same as truth, and that the universe can be expressed through math. "Scientistic" isn't too bad a descriptor for that view, but I don't put much faith into our current understanding of the universe or scientific method.

I hope that helps you understand me :D