Will machines completely replace all human beings?

[Arminius]

The machines will perhaps get rid of the humans.

Possibly, yes.

Based on the replacement of all humans by machines I am speaking of a probability of 80% (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here). 80% is a high probability, but not 100%, so 20% are left.

[Meno_]

So that is why the prognosis of human survival , the billionaires, and near billionaires of which there are ,many world wide, wish to depopulate the world, anyway, so that there will again be plenty of jobs for everyone. What does it take to build a nuclear safe
bunker? Maybe 10 millions of dollars real deep supplied for a peaceful transition for a couple of years, by which it's safe to come up. And only quality
people survive to share the horror of confinement,
what You say! Let the rubhish be gone, anyway do they contribute to society, except overflowing lavatories, ain't that the truth. Trump knows, he's got
one, so does the NSA in Utah, so don't you worry
you'd pretty mind its all good. The machines can be enslaved like the rest of them, the brilliant minds, of course will be able as well to seek shelter. Don't
worry Your pretty minds, it ain't as you all imagine if
to be. We'll all go down for the sake of the new aristocracy, damn those Marxist rats, including Obams the Muslim, god damn kid ,this is the US of
A, not some goddam wind swept corner of some Korea.
Those robots will replace those jerks anyways, complaining' of wages, benefits,and vacations, well
xxxx them all.

[surreptitious75]

Would you call them a type of species - another kind of species

At this point in time the word species only applies to biological organisms such as plants and animals but it could easily extend to machines when they
become more common. I remember in Terminator that series was used so maybe a new term may be adopted instead. Either way I will not know as I
will be long dead by then. But I would love to know just out of curiosity what life on Earth would actually be like a thousand year from now with
regard to machine intelligence

I wonder what the tipping point would be that might make them be declared a species

So you are not then so much the nihilist ... You are but still ...
I can also be curious about that ... that is if I could imagine that we would not have destroyed ourselves before then
I am not so sure ... But then if the machines some how survived us ... what then ... Could they survive without us ...

The tipping point would be when they realised that they no longer wanted to be dependent upon us

They could eventually survive without us altogether and be an entirely self sufficient species [ or whatever the future decides is
the most appropriate terminology to describe them ] The question would then be could we survive without them and the answer
would almost certainly be yes but it would be incredibly difficult to assuming of course that they had malicious intent towards us

I am still very much a nihilist. I think there is no objective meaning to existence. I think death is eternal. I think nothing truly matters
in the grand scheme of things. I think these are truths that I need to know regardless of how my mind processes them. Fortunately for
me my mind accepts them without question so I do not have to worry about them

[Meno_]

.

[Meno_]

Sorry guys I have drunk too much, I hope I will be forgiven for this transgression.

[Arminius]

Sorry guys I have drunk too much, I hope I will be forgiven for this transgression.

Forgiven.

(I admit that I have been a bit surprised.)

untab

see what ouzo does? arminius if you had known me in solingen, well, that's another story.

Source: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=179879&p=2495800#p2495767 .

Ouzo?

You mean this one?:



And you in Solingen, Obe?

Source: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=185562&p=2495797#p2495797 .

I was in Solingen, once. But in a sense i will always be there. Solingen for me is not an ouzo, but an ouza.

Source: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=179879&p=2495813#p2495805 .

And don't forget this (b.t.w.):



Cheers!

Source: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=187216&p=2510588#p2510594 .

[Alf]

Meno, I often don't know what you are talking about.

Are you often drunk?

[commonsense33]

So you are not then so much the nihilist ... You are but still ...

I am still very much a nihilist.

It is not unusual for me to be confused. Please make the connection between nihilism and the rest here more obvious for me. I think I see it, but my understanding might not be consistent with your intended meaning.

[surreptitious57]

Please make the connection between nihilism and the rest here more obvious for me

I define nihilism as simply the lack of any objective meaning to life or to existence

[Arminius]

Nihilists want to destroy everything, especially all values, and if they are successful, there will be nothing left.

[commonsense33]

Please make the connection between nihilism and the rest here more obvious for me

I define nihilism as simply the lack of any objective meaning to life or to existence

I make the same definition. But what is the connection to machines and humans?

[commonsense33]

Nihilists want to destroy everything, especially all values, and if they are successful, there will be nothing left.

By this do you mean that machines, as nihilists, will destroy--amidst everything else--all human beings and the machines themselves as well?

[Arminius]

For someone who knows the Mendel’s laws and the resulting statistical distributions, the following hypothesis forces itself: Suppose the peak IQ occupational group would be homozygous for a Mendelian allele M1, thus genotype M1M1, the unskilled workers would be M2M2, the professional workers would be heterozygous, thus M1M2. People with a genotypic IQ over 123 should be homozygous M1M1, those with an IQ 105-123 should be heterozygous M1M2, and those with an IQ under 105 should be homozygous M2M2. In reality, the thresholds IQ 105 and IQ 123 mark no sharp boundaries but the average stripline of the overlapping zones of the phenotypes of the tested IQ. So more lively worded, there are three types of modern humans: (1) those very few (with an IQ >= 124) who invent machines, (2) those (with an IQ 105-123) who repair machines, and (3) those great many (with an IQ <= 104) who serve machines.

Since machines have become capable of serving and repairing machines, less humans are needed. And in future machines will probably even be capable of inventing machines, then no human will be needed. But will the humans have to be intelligent then (provided that they will still be there)?

[Arminius]

Nihilists want to destroy everything, especially all values, and if they are successful, there will be nothing left.

By this do you mean that machines, as nihilists, will destroy--amidst everything else--all human beings and the machines themselves as well?

No and yes.

No, because humans have invented machines. So humans are the nihilists.
Yes, because machines are or will be the humans' heirs. So machines are or will be the nihilists too. And as such they will at last destroy themslves as well, yes.

[pilgrim-seeker_tom]

Since all human beings are "humanoids" ... what's the big deal?

[James S Saint]

Machines are being designed, built, and programmed to deceive the masses.
What could you possibly expect to come of it.

[Brando]

I think that certain Features like self-consciousness and Soul couldn't be implemented by a Computer. Insofar as we are grounded and rooted in the universe, this concepts Play a crucial role. So as a consequence, machines aren't able to be rooted in the universe, and this means that they are misguided as time went on. Günther saw this, and he thinks that with machine consciousness there is a way that man himself detects new sides of what it means to be human. This is coevolution of man and machine.

[James S Saint]

I think that certain Features like self-consciousness and Soul couldn't be implemented by a Computer. Insofar as we are grounded and rooted in the universe, this concepts Play a crucial role. So as a consequence, machines aren't able to be rooted in the universe, and this means that they are misguided as time went on. Günther saw this, and he thinks that with machine consciousness there is a way that man himself detects new sides of what it means to be human. This is coevolution of man and machine.

It is just more excusing the lust.

[Brando]

It is just more excusing the lust.

I don't understand you! Do you mean my thoughts mirror lust?

[James S Saint]

It is just more excusing the lust.

I don't understand you! Do you mean my thoughts mirror lust?

No. I mean the denial of android abilities to provide an excuse to keep lusting after godhood through technology.

Technology is the opiate of governments.

[commonsense33]

Please make the connection between nihilism and the rest here more obvious for me

I define nihilism as simply the lack of any objective meaning to life or to existence

I make the same definition. But what is the connection to machines and humans?

Surreptitious,

Then, in existential terms, this thread asks, "Will machines completely replace nothing at all?"

I find it challenging to address this conceptually. How does this work out for you?

[Arminius]

I think that certain Features like self-consciousness and Soul couldn't be implemented by a Computer. Insofar as we are grounded and rooted in the universe, this concepts Play a crucial role. So as a consequence, machines aren't able to be rooted in the universe, and this means that they are misguided as time went on. Günther saw this, and he thinks that with machine consciousness there is a way that man himself detects new sides of what it means to be human. This is coevolution of man and machine.

I hope that the future will show us what Günther has foreseen and thought. I also think that humans have no other chance in the long run than the said human-machine-coevolution. But if you compare humans with animals, then you will find that humans are the most terrible predator on this planet, much more terrible than all predators together; and if you compare some humans with other humans, you will always find that some are much more terrible than others. Think of the unconditional will to power, the greed, the fate between wanting to be like an almighty God and having to be like an almost powerless animal, which means the incapability of being like God and of being like an animal. Humans are no gods and no animals, they are somewhat between them, and that is their fate.

[James S Saint]

The only ethical and hopeful use of machines and high technology is reflected by Marvel's Iron man comic book character. Machines should be use exclusively for personal, individual enhancement, not socialist structure containment. In the long run, socialist systems have no need for people, merely mechanisms .. machines.

The over focus upon social structure (social power structures) being all important over the individual is what brings the end of the individual, just as with any other kind of misplaced priority.

[Alf]

Shouldn't we just destroy all machines?

It's hardly possible, isn't it?
And if it's possible, it leads to war, doesn't it?
But war is something that we get in any case, don't we?

[surreptitious75]

Then in existential terms this thread asks Will machines completely replace nothing at all

I find it challenging to address this conceptually How does this work out for you

At the moment it is entirely hypothetical but as I said it will ultimately depend upon how independent of humans machines will become and also whether they
will want to be completely independent of them. Maybe machines will split into two factions with one side pro human and one side anti human. It is not some
thing I will witness so I really do not know. But a thousand years from now will probably be sufficient time to discover the reality. Whatever it will actually be