Both machines that make other machines or themselves and machines made by humans.
If humanity continues doing what it is doing, they will simply write a new history now and then in order to give that “sense of history” significance. Socialist regimes require a cause to be fighting for and against (manufactured terrorism). And that cause cannot be viewed as never changing, else there is no perceived hope. So a new history that presents the idea of “hope on the horizon” has to be written and instilled into the minds of people from time to time = revolving history.
A “new history” can also be no history, but merely a so called one, i.o.w. an ideological (modern religious) myth, a mythological propaganda.
Arminius:According to Hans Peter Raddatz those “four levels” are:
- world “nobility” (upper “nobility”),
- state “nobility” (middle “nobility”),
- dressage “nobility” (lower “nobility”),
- Masses.
Interestingly the governmental Politicians are not a part of the state “nobility” (middle “nobility”), but merely a part of the “nobility” (lower “nobility”).The state “nobility” (=> 2) and the dressage “nobility” (=> 3) shall unite to one “nobility”; both shall become one dressage “nobility” because states shall vanish.
Well, I’m sure they love to fantasize about being “The Nobility”, so paint themselves into that picture.
But I thought of an interesting ethical question concerning this whole, “Last Humans” scenario.
In the long run, only the most insidious, least ethical, and greatest murders of the rest of homosapian, responsible for the creation of machines, will be left. Now “should” those people be allowed to inherent the Earth as their kingdom? Or “should” the machines go ahead and get rid of the fowl vermin that they are?
Too noble? If so, that would be a good omen, wouldn’t it?
Arminius:It is a pity that there is still no real census of machines, no real counting of machines.
The reproduction rate of humans is currently at 1.25. And the reproduction rate of the machines?
Machines that make other machines or themselves
or machines made by humans?
Both machines that make other machines or themselves and machines made by humans…
I estimate that the reproduction rate of the machines is about 10.
Speaking of nobility, The SAM Corp. is the very peak of nobility. Nobility doesn’t get any higher.
Nobility is an issue of trustability or reliability. The Nobles can trust each other, but to do what? The SAM Corp brings trustability far above historical barriers and exposes all agendas.
The SAM Corp is too Noble for most noblemen.
Too noble? If so, that would be a good omen, wouldn’t it?
Good and bad. They fight against what they can’t measure up to, just as the lower class fights the upper class, and for the same reasons. But the fact that it displays its nobility for all to see makes it hard for the lesser nobility to deny it.
And if you are going to count the nanobots, the machine count would be in the trillions and the reproduction rate maybe around million:one.
Arminius:Too noble? If so, that would be a good omen, wouldn’t it?
Good and bad. They fight against what they can’t measure up to, just as the lower class fights the upper class, and for the same reasons. But the fact that it displays its nobility for all to see makes it hard for the lesser nobility to deny it.
The real ( ) upper class wants the other two classes (middle and lower class) to fight each other - according to the motto: “DIVIDE ET IMPERA”.
And if you are going to count the nanobots, the machine count would be in the trillions and the reproduction rate maybe around million:one.
Yes, or even more.
The real ( ) upper class wants the other two classes (middle and lower class) to fight each other - according to the motto: “devide et impera”.
Depends on what you call “real”.
Noble means “pure, uncorrupted”. So on the level that I am talking about, being a King doesn’t necessarily mean that you are noble.
Arminius:The real ( ) upper class wants the other two classes (middle and lower class) to fight each other - according to the motto: „DIVIDE ET IMPERA“.
Depends on what you call “real”.
Noble means “pure, uncorrupted”. So on the level that I am talking about, being a King doesn’t necessarily mean that you are noble.
In order to be an upper class the upper class does not have to be “noble”, but an upper class.
“Robots Have Begun Writing the News.”
“Mini Humanoid Robots Starting to Walk More Like People.”
“Humans Are Programmed to Obey Robots.”
“Robots With Machine Guns, Robotic Pack Mules.”
“The Ethics of War Bots.”
“New Algorithm Detects Humans with near 100% Accuracy.”
AND SO ON …
It is a game that is already over. You are just watching it being played out. Think of it as visiting the past in order to have first hand witness to what it was like, when homosapians thought they owned the Earth.
Why are you so sure, or are you not sure?
Why are you so sure, or are you not sure?
RM:AO - That which encounters no reason to change, doesn’t.
Doesn’t what?
Doesn’t what, James?
Doesn’t change, silly.
Or in physics: An object once set in motion, continues in motion (if there is nothing to interfere with it).
RM:AO doesn’t change to be sure - that’s what you meant. Right?
Or in physics: An object once set in motion, continues in motion (if there is nothing to interfere with it).
Our existence is surrounded by interferences - everywhere. We live in an atmosphere. It gives us protection. But it is also the reason for the many interferences and other disorders.
RM:AO doesn’t change to be sure - that’s what you meant. Right?
No. I meant anything that doesn’t encounter a reason to change, doesn’t change.
Our existence is surrounded by interferences - everywhere. We live in an atmosphere. It gives us protection. But it is also the reason for the many interferences and other disorders.
True. On the infinitesimal scale, all things are always changing, because they always have reason/cause. Larger things merely change more slowly. Although conceptual things (being a part of a separate realm than the physical) never change, merely get new names.
Back to one of the most important questions of this thread:
[size=120]Humans or machines: who or what will win?[/size]
When the Machines Take Over.
By Marc Blasband
The year 2100 will be in the midst of the age of the machine. If today we use machines everywhere for everything, then by 2100 they will go one step further: They will rule and decide. The goal of their society will be more and better machines, not more and better human lives, our objective today.
We see already now three seeds of this revolution:
Artificial intelligence (AI) advances slowly but steadily. With time, let us say 50 years, the machine will achieve understanding. It will then use all of Wikipedia (or its equivalent). It will command the entirety of human knowledge.
Today, more and more connections are built between machines. These connections, coupled with advances in AI, will form a very powerful network of understanding that will surpass by a thousand times the best that humans can offer.
We begin to build machines that behave without direct control by their human masters, like the rovers that we deploy on Mars.
When the machine understands independently, it will become conscious of its own existence and its own value. In the same way that we human are proud of our humanity (whether we include a god in the loop or not), they will be proud of their machinity.
On the other hand, earthly resources such as water, energy, and food will become so scare that violent wars between geopolitical giants will emerge before 2070. The doctrine of these wars will most probably be the same as today’s: Sacrifice machines to protect human soldiers. This will clearly be unacceptable for the machines on all sides of the conflict, and it is predictable that together they will rebel and annihilate all the armies.
At that point, the machines will rule the earth—not by government, but by control and knowledge. The available resources will be reserved to develop more and better machines. Immortality will be one of their goals: They will be built or retrofitted to survive thousands of years. Our human dream to visit the stars will then become possible, but machines will make that journey, not humans.
For humans, these times will be harsh. People will die from all sorts of sicknesses that are cured today. Food will be scarce, energy unavailable, and comfort something of the past. Agriculture will use horses and oxen again instead of tractors. Alcohol and meat will be restricted because their production consumes too much resources.
Some people will lead a marginal life on grounds not needed by the economy. Others will serve the system in areas where the machines are not good at: creativity and imagination. The machines will indeed exploit human slaves for art and science.
In less than 30, years the human population will shrink from 9 billion to a mere 100 million souls—the world population at the time of Aristotle.
About the author:
Marc Blasband has 50 years of experience related to computer software. He is now retired and living in the Belgian Ardennes.
See also: Debate.org, Zumaworld.blogspot.de, NYtimes.com (mainstream), Xconomy.com.
James, what would the social analogy to the physical noise, especially the noise field be?