## Will machines completely replace all human beings?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Again:
Arminius wrote:
Arminius wrote:The interim balance sheets are one of more examples which show that in this thread even three points ov view are included (and please look also at the results!):

For comparison:
1st Interim balance sheet,
2nd Interim balance sheet,
3rd Interim balance sheet,
4th Interim balance sheet,
5th Interim balance sheet.

These results do not necessarily speak for the "yes"-sayers, do they? And before the beginning I knew that the "yes"-sayers are the fewest.

|=> #

4.8 • 100% / 23 = 20.86956522%
10 • 100% / 23 = 43.47826087%
8.2 • 100% / 23 = 35.65217391%
_________________________
23 • 100% / 23 = 100%

_/

If we add the middle column (43.48%) and the right column (35.65%), then we get as a result 79.13%. That are the not-"yes"-sayers.
But if we add the left column (20.87%) and the right column (35.65%), then we get as a result 56.52%. That are the not-"no"-sayers.

Relating to the thread question, the realtionship of the "yes"-sayers (20.87%) and the not-"yes"-sayers (79.13%) is really interesting:

According to the Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) 20% of the population own 80% of the land, 20% of the pea pods contain 80% of the peas, 20% of all clients cause 80% of all sales, 20% of all websites are the goal of 80% of all weblinks, ... and so on. This 80–20 rule is roughly followed by a power law distribution (also known as a Pareto distribution) for a particular set of parameters, and many natural phenomena have been shown empirically to exhibit such a distribution.

Relating to the thread question, it could be interesting, if the Pareto principle applied also to the „yes“-sayers (20.87%) and not-„yes“-sayers (79.13%), as I already said.
Last edited by Arminius on Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Arminius wrote:Again:
Arminius wrote:
Arminius wrote:The interim balance sheets are one of more examples which show that in this thread even three points ov view are included (and please look also at the results!):

For comparison:
1st Interim balance sheet,
2nd Interim balance sheet,
3rd Interim balance sheet,
4th Interim balance sheet,
5th Interim balance sheet.

These results do not necessarily speak for the "yes"-sayers, do they? And before the beginning I knew that the "yes"-sayers are the fewest.

|=> #

4.8 • 100% / 23 = 20.86956522%
10 • 100% / 23 = 43.47826087%
8.2 • 100% / 23 = 35.65217391%
_________________________
23 • 100% / 23 = 100%

_/

If we add the middle column (43.48%) and the right column (35.65%), then we get as a result 79.13%. That are the not-"yes"-sayers.
But if we add the left column (20.87%) and the right column (35.65%), then we get as a result 56.52%. That are the not-"no"-sayers.

Relating to the thread question, the realtionship of the "yes"-sayers (20.87%) and the not-"yes"-sayers (79.13%) is really interesting:

According to the Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) 20% of the population own 80% of the land, 20% of the pea pods contain 80% of the peas, 20% of all clients cause 80% of all sales, 20% of all websites are the goal of 80% of all weblinks, ... and so on. This 80–20 rule is roughly followed by a power law distribution (also known as a Pareto distribution) for a particular set of parameters, and many natural phenomena have been shown empirically to exhibit such a distribution.

Relating to the thread question, it could be interesting, if the Pareto principle applied also to the „yes“-sayers (20.87%) and not-„yes“-sayers (79.13%), as I already said.

Arminius: the question of statistical analysis here, relates to wider a wider scope.
Some of the tangential considerations involve a wide array, if the OP could conceivably be pulled together. Your introducing Leibniz into the formula and then Kant, brought in a question which can not really be solved ontologically, as to whether one, or the other has relevance here.

If, we would follow Leibniz, variable functions would/ could question any sort of equivocal synthesis as suggested by the above breakdown into the 20-80 distribution. Kant would serve here a better purpose, and i am not trying to play linguistic games, only to point to a wider data set, then is used within the confines of ILP.

I brought in the occupy movement, since they have been portrayed as a disaffected and disenfranchised group, more likely to have strong feelings about their place in society vis-a-vis, such issues as the use of machines to replace traditional jobs.

A correlation there, would certainly would not parallel a similar 99-1% breakdown , between those who believe in the issue of whether all machines will replace jobs, i am sure that not all 99% would believe this. The correlation may if, averaged out via a synthetic statistical analysis, would maybe bring the figure more in line closer to an equivocal difference.

My attempt is two, or even three fold.

One, to clarify which methodology and philosophy would be more appropriate in the application
Two, without undermining the notion of 20-80% distribution, only to point to the insufficient ethno-methodology, as per applied statistical analysis -of the 'Kantian-synthetic' sort, and more
relevance in terms of Your proper introduction of Leibniz into the scheme, (so Your original
application of Leibniz was correct. However that correctness would undermine the idea that
the least will determine a correct outcome) Although a synthesis of this sort demands a wider
Inquiry, it would not reflect a statistical offset of other variables, such as would occur, if the
difference exceeded that of the analysis per members of the forum.

These variables would be, different values of opinion in different sets, different numbers within the same sets, etc.

If 20% of the occupy movement believed that machines will take over , then we may incorporate (there goes that word again) that with 20% of ilp members, in that case, both, the synthetic (or the non academic) statistic would correspond, resulting in the type of statistical schema, as suggested.

However, if there is a wide divergence, of say less then 99% to more than 1% of the sampled group, a synthetic solution would not work, because the variability of opinions of the occupy movement would need to be factored into the equation.

Some of those variables may include questions dealing with why do disaffected think, in spite of their dissatisfaction that machines are not a threat to their future employ?

Now You may think am working against my own theme, of trying to raise the percentages of those, who may be disaffected and think that machines take over. Not so. Your formula of 20-80 will work on the synthetic level only if, it is narrowed down to a set consisting only of mebers of ilp.

This may have been the reason, whereby we were unable to come to a conclusion as to whether which philosophical approach is more relevant.

As trite as this critique seems, and as fuzzy the set theory involved appears to be, i feel it is of central importance to clarify, even without getting Humboldt, Marcuse, or any other thinker involved. I think language analysis here irrelevant, as not being in the statistical matrix, of determining the methodology, if ever such a study would be taken as relevant, to real social movements, apart from a strictly ad-hoc research into an 'Ivory-tower' type of inquiry.

There is some sense of the superfluous here, an excess, a surplus value, and if You feel it goes beyond the scope or intent of Your OP, i would be happy to see a general response.

A sub-set question here would be, 'how representative are ilp members of the general population?' I would think this question is again, another variable, dissuading a general 'synthetic' solution.

Ultimately, although not needed in any sort of statistical analysis, what would the effect be of the results, of both, the inherent value of holding conventional jobs and, the ethical burden of employers to defer automation to a prior study of employer-employee relations, as they effect the over all social economic picture. There may be such going on, at present, but not to the degree, that it has become common knowledge.

For the third consideration here, i think it's contingent upon the first two, and , once derived, would have a feedback effect, in case the multi variable schema becomes most determinative.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

The numbers in the tables (interim balance sheets) are quite meaningful; they didn't change very much even over a longer period of time (this is especially true for the left column):

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

The question how representative are ILP members of the general population are can be answered with: MUCH; and there is the fact that some of them have a deeper relationship to philosopy than others, some of them have even an indifferent relationship to philosophy, some of them love philosophy, some of them like philosophy, some of them dislike philosophy, some of them even hate philosophy (cp. my thread: "Do you really love philosophy?"). So it is quite representative, Obe.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

You forget how one applies philosophy. To know the philosophical teachings from ancestors is one way, to learn from life is another, to do both is another. Most of the people that consider themselves philosophers are book literate, not life literate.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest
ILP Legend

Posts: 20554
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Kriswest wrote:You forget how one applies philosophy. To know the philosophical teachings from ancestors is one way, to learn from life is another, to do both is another. Most of the people that consider themselves philosophers are book literate, not life literate.

Yes, that's right.

I was referring to Obe's question:

Obe wrote:A sub-set question here would be, 'how representative are ilp members of the general population?'

According to that, I don't think that it is important to go into details, and you probably know: the devil is in the details.

In addition: I do not know all ILP members; so I have to extrapolate their relationships to philosophy. My statistical tables ("interim balance sheets", as I call them) should give only an orientation, not more.
___________

By the way:

You joined ILP on 22/12/2005. If you didn't change your "avatar", then the cat which is seen on it would be "not very young" anymore:

Lovely.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

She passed away this week from autoimmune disease. Odd that you mention Screamer a day after she passed. Life has interesting and sometimes painful twists. But I thank you for posting her photo. See on this phone Avatars are not shown. That photo brought good memories though tinted with tears.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest
ILP Legend

Posts: 20554
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Kriswest wrote:She passed away this week from autoimmune disease. Odd that you mention Screamer a day after she passed. Life has interesting and sometimes painful twists. But I thank you for posting her photo. See on this phone Avatars are not shown. That photo brought good memories though tinted with tears.

Maybe it's telepathy that I mentioned your cat. I'm very sorry that you cat is dead.

Do you have any more cats?

Before we deviate too much from the topic, here is a cat buying fish from gumball machine.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

I like that picture. Yes we have other cats, plus dogs, goats and poultry. All but, the poultry are family. We have never thought of them as pets, just four footed kids.
Believe it or not, quite a few of our cats hate fish.
You know, would a thinking AI if programmed empathize with creatures? Or see real beauty in life? Could a bio AI have more probability of empathy? ...... Just to try to stay a bit on topic.

Could giving a machine literature on life create a difference even one programmed to find and kill enemy? What if it learns human ethics and morals?
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest
ILP Legend

Posts: 20554
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Being an occultist, i cant but notice the devolution of the OP into the feline 'category'. Incidentally, one of my favorite songs of all time was Stewart's 'Year of the Cat'.
I am at the moment feeding a stray, who has been on our doorstep since she/he? was abandoned by her mom, but i can't see a cat born in the wild, ever appreciate us more, than showing up predictably every morning for her morning kiddles. I am trying a very patient pavlovian conditioning with her, by placing the food-bowl ever closer and closer to the door, but she seems wise beyond her years, she/he? is ever more increasingly careful and circumspect, raising her head and turning around to check any- thing unusual within her frame of reference, while orbiting her ears to check for any unusual auditory clues.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

I have had two ferals move happily into our home. It just depends upon the personality or (and I really lean towards this one) wether the feline is diurnal or nocturnal. Diurnal cats seem to be more social and need socialization ( generally). Nocturnal tend to loners.
If the cat shows up only mornings or evenings it will be more nocturnal. Canines are this way to a fair degree as well.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest
ILP Legend

Posts: 20554
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Kriswest wrote:I have had two ferals move happily into our home. It just depends upon the personality or (and I really lean towards this one) wether the feline is diurnal or nocturnal. Diurnal cats seem to be more social and need socialization ( generally). Nocturnal tend to loners.
If the cat shows up only mornings or evenings it will be more nocturnal. Canines are this way to a fair degree as well.

Thanks for that Kris, that's an interesting bit of information, but is there hope? She is so cute, and where we live is infested by coyotes, and we fear that her mom and sibling did not abandon her/him, but simply became victims of the hungry predators. This one we would like to save, although it's smart, and seems a survivor, the odds are not very good.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Humanity is slavery. Slaves are machines. Therefore, humans are already machines.

Humans are programmed to serve lords and masters from a young age, mostly through church, or another form of indoctrination, which is public state education. Church and state merely represent two of the most common, effective forms of indoctrinating (enslaving) the masses. Most of you reading this are slaves, without even realizing the extents of your indoctrination. Philosophy is just the beginning, the first step, to freeing your minds and breaking the cycle of slave programming.

By associating yourselves as humans, you readily admit to your superiors that you are slaves possessed by the slave dialectic. You don't even know what the slave dialectic is. However, it literally represents "all that you know".

Programming a computer is not spur of the moment, random, mindless tinkering. It is highly specific, technical, and represents a long history of previous programming.

Programming a computer is almost no different, in fact the same to me, as programming a child, a brain, a "human".

You are slaves. You are machines. Very few of are free, or will ever become free. Most are stuck in "the matrix", to use a popular analogy, one that you are comfortable with. And given the option to know the "outside" world, you would shrink away and cower, or like the character "Cypher", you would be desperate to rejoin your cage and slavery.

Because the first step toward freedom is through your deepest fears. (quote me on this, as all my words will become famous someday, after I'm dead)
phyllo wrote:Before the internet, there were these things called books. There were special buildings full of them.

James S Saint wrote:It is the mostly blind builders struggling against the entirely blind destroyers in an effort to find the light.
"The light is here"
"No it isn't"
"The light is there"
"I don't see it"
"The light exists"
"No it doesn't"

... on and on ...

Wizard
Thinker

Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:10 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

The question is whether natural organic machines will be replaced by man-made, artificial, non-organic machines.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend

Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

James S Saint wrote:The question is whether natural organic machines will be replaced by man-made, artificial, non-organic machines.

You're behind the times. It's not a question anymore.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/smal ... turing-apm

Surprising progress

A key part of the necessary conceptual clarity is to acknowledge the surprising progress to date, and to recognise that (oddly) much of this progress isn't labelled "nanotechnology".

The key advances toward atomically precise manufacturing will be based on atomically precise structures – structures built with every atom bonded in place according to a plan – and chemists and their colleagues in the molecular sciences have been at the forefront of this technology for more than a century. Everyday products already manufactured using this technology range from pharmaceuticals to the engineered enzymes found in laundry detergents.

When you see a picture of a specific molecule, you're looking at an atomically precise structure. Chemists started drawing and building these structures as far back as the late 1800s. The history of atomically precise fabrication began with structures in the dozen-atom range, and today has reached the range of millions of atoms. And these molecular techniques can not only build structures that comprise millions of precisely arranged atoms, they routinely produce these structures by the billions in beakers of water. The challenge isn't making them, which could be done in a kitchen, but checking that the products came out right, which requires nano-resolution microscopy.

Although these million-atom structures are made of a soft material, researchers have also learned to design and build nanoscale objects of sturdier stuff, a dense polymeric material that can be as stiff and strong as the plastics used to make a computer case. What's more, these thousand-atom parts can be designed to fit together to make larger objects, and can be joined to the million-atom frameworks I mentioned above. One of the most promising applications is to use the large frameworks as circuit boards that provide unique sockets for arrays of different kinds of electronic components.
phyllo wrote:Before the internet, there were these things called books. There were special buildings full of them.

James S Saint wrote:It is the mostly blind builders struggling against the entirely blind destroyers in an effort to find the light.
"The light is here"
"No it isn't"
"The light is there"
"I don't see it"
"The light exists"
"No it doesn't"

... on and on ...

Wizard
Thinker

Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:10 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

James S Saint wrote:The question is whether natural organic machines will be replaced by man-made, artificial, non-organic machines.

That questions too, can be successfully negotiated, without an either/or situation of all machines or all men. Cyborgs are the creatures of the future, they will really have no burning need to have an internal cogito into their own constitution, as much as now , we are 'educated' to disbelieve in the importance of subjective knowledge.

An example is the differential self approbation between seeing ourselves as a product consisting of tubes, organ systems, circulation flows, oxidation processes, etc, versus psychological reactions of sensing all this machinery within, and thereby for the most part ignoring it, (except doctors, perhaps).

Such cyborgs, being of complex duplicities , will as technology improves abilities to gloss over differences between the technical, psychological, and behavioral models within which they can function, will have no incentive to go backward to differentiate, but only to progressively incorporate and integrate the remaining differences.

I think this discrepancy is but a phase, or stage in this development.
The question posed is an interesting one, of whether the human being already having these traits, that perhaps we are already cyborgs in this respect, perhaps suggests the primordial seed of this evolutionary goal, since artificial intelligence, has so far, not successfully demonstrated a total fusion of cognitive function, system, prediction-predictability through auto-feedback and memory.

When and if that critical stage can be attained and surpassed, the question of whether machines will take over or not, will become mute as a historical relic, however the psycho-philosophical notion will de-emphasize to point to the technical process as a basis of a societal acceptance/understanding. When this point may be reached is a good question, but i would think a minimum of a few more generations would be sufficient, to advance the revision to recent memory (since the beyond history concept will effect this shift, enhancing the relative frames of reference within the changing matrixes mentioned)

All kinds of differing man/machine combinations will de-emphasize the differences, and the simulated machine-sex object robotics, (James brought this into the discussion), with varying proportions or real/manufactured components- will be primary to overcome initial resistance, by depreciating societies' discontents over obvious natural, versus virtual evolutionary differences.

If, and this is a very big if, this stage is reached in the first place.
Last edited by Orbie on Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

interterrestrial wrote:
James S Saint wrote:The question is whether natural organic machines will be replaced by man-made, artificial, non-organic machines.

You're behind the times. It's not a question anymore.

I seriously doubt that, but what made you think so? Are you claiming that there are no humans on Earth any more already?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend

Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

You questioned if natural organics would be replaced by machines.

Nanotechnology is already manipulating atomic particles to the point as to create new materials and elements. This would mean that manipulating natural organic material is already possible.

Manipulation is the essence of artifice. God represents the height and limit of art. To manipulate atoms is to manipulate reality. Man is gaining more power than ever before. Man is acquiring divine powers.
phyllo wrote:Before the internet, there were these things called books. There were special buildings full of them.

James S Saint wrote:It is the mostly blind builders struggling against the entirely blind destroyers in an effort to find the light.
"The light is here"
"No it isn't"
"The light is there"
"I don't see it"
"The light exists"
"No it doesn't"

... on and on ...

Wizard
Thinker

Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:10 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

interterrestrial wrote:You questioned if natural organics would be replaced by machines.

Nanotechnology is already manipulating atomic particles to the point as to create new materials and elements. This would mean that manipulating natural organic material is already possible.

Manipulation is the essence of artifice. God represents the height and limit of art. To manipulate atoms is to manipulate reality. Man is gaining more power than ever before. Man is acquiring divine powers.

The question is whether ALL ("completely") humans will be replaced, not if any will be. We all know that many have been in very many ways already (just look at the unemployment stats).

More importantly, do you think the probability is at or above 80% that ALL humans will be replaced (extinction of humans).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend

Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Most humans will be replaced. The "survivors" will live in natural wilderness reserves, like a zoo or wildlife refuge.

However these "wildlife refuges" will be like modern towns and cities. The amish is one example of a human group who will be preserved for the sake of historical entertainment.

The other 99% of the human specie will either adapt to new environments, or become extinct. Complete eradication or extinction of a specie is actually very rare, or non existent. Consider apes and gorillas, who have not gone extinct. They simply "quit evolving" whereas humans continued to transcend and improve themselves. Evolution is about "improvement". Evolution is transcendentalism, the ideological, religious faith, that an individual organism can become "more than" it already is.

Evolution is merely the acquisition of greater powers, quality or quantity doesn't matter.
phyllo wrote:Before the internet, there were these things called books. There were special buildings full of them.

James S Saint wrote:It is the mostly blind builders struggling against the entirely blind destroyers in an effort to find the light.
"The light is here"
"No it isn't"
"The light is there"
"I don't see it"
"The light exists"
"No it doesn't"

... on and on ...

Wizard
Thinker

Posts: 880
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:10 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

interterrestrial wrote:Most humans will be replaced. The "survivors" will live in natural wilderness reserves, like a zoo or wildlife refuge.

However these "wildlife refuges" will be like modern towns and cities. The amish is one example of a human group who will be preserved for the sake of historical entertainment.

The other 99% of the human specie will either adapt to new environments, or become extinct. Complete eradication or extinction of a specie is actually very rare, or non existent. Consider apes and gorillas, who have not gone extinct. They simply "quit evolving" whereas humans continued to transcend and improve themselves. Evolution is about "improvement". Evolution is transcendentalism, the ideological, religious faith, that an individual organism can become "more than" it already is.

Evolution is merely the acquisition of greater powers, quality or quantity doesn't matter.

So I take it that your answer is "no, ALL humans will not be replaced".

And realize that to a machine, evolution merely means "a better design". And what constitutes better is typically more efficient. Humans get in the way of efficiency and serve no purpose as far as machines are concerned. So it isn't actually an analogy to humans vs apes. Machines are much, much smarter and efficient.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend

Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

obe wrote:
Kriswest wrote:I have had two ferals move happily into our home. It just depends upon the personality or (and I really lean towards this one) wether the feline is diurnal or nocturnal. Diurnal cats seem to be more social and need socialization ( generally). Nocturnal tend to loners.
If the cat shows up only mornings or evenings it will be more nocturnal. Canines are this way to a fair degree as well.

Thanks for that Kris, that's an interesting bit of information, but is there hope? She is so cute, and where we live is infested by coyotes, and we fear that her mom and sibling did not abandon her/him, but simply became victims of the hungry predators. This one we would like to save, although it's smart, and seems a survivor, the odds are not very good.

A way takes patience and voice recognition. When you feed the little one stay nearby and talk to him or her. Infact use a name for it, repeating it often. Canned cat chow is a good thing, far better than dry at this point. Keep up what you are doing. Patience and projecting love and good intentions in your voice and thoughts are important. Never move fast be very slow. Fast movement scares the crap out of cats. It may take weeks. Best of luck and do not feel bad if it does not work.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest
ILP Legend

Posts: 20554
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

interterrestrial wrote: Man is acquiring divine powers.
Sort of, and without divine intelligence. And we won't even mention solid intuition and wisdom.
The same minds creating those puffy artificial lips for women will terraform the earth.

Moreno
ILP Legend

Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

interterrestrial wrote: Man is acquiring divine powers.
Sort of, and without divine intelligence. And we won't even mention solid intuition and wisdom.
The same idiots, I mean, sorry, minds, creating those puffy artificial lips for women will terraform the earth.

Moreno
ILP Legend

Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

### Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Moreno wrote:The same idiots, I mean, sorry, minds, creating those puffy artificial lips for women will terraform the earth.

That is the issue right there ... "Hubris".
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend

Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

PreviousNext