Will machines completely replace all human beings?

How to get rid of humans?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmh0fp6SOSw[/youtube]

That is an informative video.

If a perfect human simulation is not a living being, then it should not be called “man” or “human being”.

But what if a perfect human simulation becomes indistinguishable from the human, and no data remains on what the keys with which to appraise authenticity, to remote future civilizations?

What if, sometime far away and in the far future, technology can produce perfect simulations?

Will there remain, even a scintilla of a need to sustain a different name?

I agree that there should, but will they , whoever ‘they’ will be even find it useful or advisable?

Or more poignantly , what if, the perfect simulation may become ‘alive’, living at some point? In that case the definition of man may alter the non-humanness of a simulation.

If there will be “perfect simulations”, then they will still know that these perfect simulations are simulations.

As long as human beings can distinguish themselves from machines, however (by knowing the development or by knowing the design … a.s.o.), they should call a machine “machine” and a man “man”.

If something is not biological, then it is not a living being. A human being is a living being. But a machine is not a living being.

Do you agree?

Racism?
Certainly at no time would society attempt to promote the notion that women are equal to men nor that blacks are equal to whites, so certainly they would never promote that extremely intelligent, skilled, and autonomous machines are equal in rights to humans. Seriously?

I can’t agree with that one. Biology is not what constitutes life. Life is the spirit, the effort and behavior, not the physical mechanisms involved.

The question was whether humans can be distinguished from machines even then, if the machines have already become almost indistinguishable. I think that in that case it is only possible to distinguish them biologically.

For now, yes. However cannot a proposition be made
that sometime in the future, living Being can be made in the laboratory, where those would be living, biological, yet artificiality created beings?

There are ethical standards that stymie that effort, now, but once it has become acceptable, just like
assisted suicide, testube babies, artificial
insemination ,transplant of artificial organs, it may hold a future.

It is possible, that there will be no human culture anymore but only a machine culture. So that the humans will only have a chance if they will coexist in the sense of an adaptation to the machines (and not the other way around). :astonished:

In an economical sense, the “Industrial Revolution” means this: Human beings are needed in order to replace them by machines till the time when they will not be needed.

So the “Industrial Revolution” seems to be a paradox when it comes to the general development of human beings.

Economization as a rationalization seems to contradict the evolution of human beings.

This paradox or contradiction can only be solved, if we interpret our machines as something that can dominate us.

What shall we do?

It is unlikely that we will be able to get before the “Industrial Revolution”, unless we will have a global dictatorship that will forbid machines or a natural catastrophe will lead to the xtiction of all intelligent machines and the survival of a few human beings.

Shall we accept that machines will dominate us?

There is a very short time left, if believed, when this crisis will need to be solved to avert the consequences. Perhaps the only answer to be sought, is, in the hope, that the differences between man and machine may become not, non existent, but non recognizable, in the sense that, computer programs generated may become uncertain as to being sourced from one or the other.

Taking the cue from MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction, a political-military device which proved effective to avert nuclear war, both man and machine must become aware to prevent this kind of catastrophe.

Which scientists are giving both: man and machine only a generation, or even less, I think it is 2025.

By that time artificial intelligence is predicted to become at least somewhat self aware.

The basis of that intelligence(biological or artificial), must by that time become de-differentiated, to avoid confusion of computer languages.

So you think that “artificial intelligence is predicted to become at least somewhat self aware” in “2025”?

Realize that the people developing these machines are not philosophically elite. They couldn’t tell you when a machine is self aware or not. They couldn’t even tell you what consciousness is. Their only concern so far is that you are not so afraid that you prevent them from continuing, so they will always say, “perhaps sometime in the future….”. The fact is that those machines have been “somewhat self-aware” for decades. It takes a true philosopher to know when consciousness has been achieved and those are not the voices you hear.

In some same and some other words: The ”people developing these machines are“ too stupid when it come to the subject ”machines / artificial intelligence“.

The machines will perhaps get rid of the humans.

It is possible but they will definitely overtake us because machine intelligence is the next logical step in the evolutionary chain
At the moment machines require humans to operate them but in the future they will be able to operate entirely by themselves