Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Yes, our resident faithful believer is that mentally dense. If you were to ask me I’d say it was the prescribed medication. :wink: :-"

Too many people get injured playing football and basketball. When need to automate the game with android teams.
:-k

:-"

Where are all the posts of the “revolting” ( :astonished: ) functionaries of the current dictatorship now? Kriswest’s sentence is not politically correct. But who cares? No one because Kriswest is a female. So her sentence is politically correct. But if a male had said that, he would have been mauled by the functionaries of the current dictatorship. That’s remarkable, isn’t it? :exclamation:

I guess I didn’t understand her. Will nature “consume” biology or its artifacts–technology?

Why did you then ask: " by whom?", Ierellus?

Whom? That’s personal!

Again:

Laughing Man asked, and Kriswest answered:

Laughing Man’s question (“Where are we going to put them all?”) is clearly, definitely, explicitly, doubtlessly answered by Kriswest (“Let nature consume them”).

I have Joker on ignore.

Aha, …, but now your question is answered.

LaughingMan warned for abusive posting. Second warning, one day ban.

Yes, okay, but the cause does not have to be a global peak oil or other sources of energy.

[b][size=120]The Observer (Sunday 27 April 2014):[/size][/b]

[size=120]“It’s no joke – the robots will really take over this time.
If capitalism can outsource low-paid jobs, why can’t it replace the middle classes with automatons?”[/size]

“Welcome to the future: a robot working in an office.” - The Observer, Sunday 27 April 2014.

“Working in an office”? Will that be necessary at all?

Probably no!

Exactly what I saw coming in the 1980’s and thus stopped making machines smarter.

But the serious bad of it all, is that homosapian, even machines, are not smart enough to understand how to fix it.

James,not necessarily. Humans will be forced to become smarter, and far before that tipping point, they MAY re-organize society so that work will be found, at lest for basic subsistence within a changing social order. Communes will be necessary, to supplement the unemployed members of family , and other units, so that everyone will be occupied. This will be necessary, to avoid a total collapse of the societal order, world wide.

Yeah and perhaps dogs and cats will be forced to become smarter and form unions and earn the right to vote. Just wait until the viruses learn how to read and right… you’ll be really sorry then.

 Even dogs and cats can be thought basic behavior, given enough time and care.  No dog or cat is expected to do integral calculus, granted.  However a behaviorally staged learning program can go a very long way, especially with improved and extended sources of knowledge propagated by the parabolic change of rate of information data availability.

The issue and problem is one of timing. If it takes too long for one species to develop while another species is more advanced toward domination, the lesser species is in danger of extinction. Homosapian is not developing much at all, if at all. And seemingly descending rather than ascending, while robotics are advancing way, way faster and far, far beyond homosapian capability.

Homosapian was SO stupidly in love with power, that he has already created his own superior and is now declining while willingly devoting his last efforts to ensuring that his superior survives him.

Homosapian is a caterpillar to an Iron Butterfly.

Convincing yes, much so, however until the element of control, power are inflexed at a critical point, i stick to my non-committed column, because even the top designers have everything to loose if the bottom marginal, and totally dis-associated members are left out of the equation.Chaos is foreshadowed, yes, but compensating elements have to be introduced, to avoid systemic failure. I have little doubt about that.

Chaos has never been the problem. The problem has been the intentional use of chaos in order to gain more power. The chaos causes blindness, causing more chaos, causing effort to gain more power, blind to the subtle nature of the cause. It is addictive when it is intentional.

In a sense, all of the real threats would go away by simply not trying to hard. But the blinded can’t tell how blind they are, nor how much is too much.

Ys, but the point being is, that the degree of blindness may need to be limited to maximize welfare and profits, and minimize trouble and discontent.

You seem to be missing the entire point.

For decades, everything imaginable has been promoted to cause death of the general populous while promoting their replacement with machines. Suicide promotion, drug promotion, revenge promotion, insecurity promotion, war promotion, radioactivity promotion (cancer), EMR promotion (cancer), disease promotion (hiding 1000s of new viruses), general decadence promotion, distrust promotion, dis-compassion promotion, and every single thing they can think of. And why? Because about 70 years ago, they figured out that they don’t need or want YOU.

The game plan is to get rid of ALL of the “Unchosen” = more than 30% of the world population who aren’t the kind of people they have any use for. But in the long run, will be everyone. And who are “they”? The wealthiest people on the planet, wealthy beyond your imagination, who quite freely cause wars, diseases, depression, and anything that reduces the number of the Unchosen (a growing number). The could buy all of Europe or the USA out of debt and barely feel it.

You are being replaced. It has been the plan for almost 100 years.

The only accidental part is their inability to realize the power of super-intelligent machines, who don’t need THEM, the few remaining “on top” and helpless.

The scenario You describe is very credible, up to a critical point. WHEN CERTAIN LIMITS HAVE BEEN REACHED, if the above would be factual, this indeed would present a sinister and tragic set of events? However, what is a stretch of unimaginable conditions, the manipulators not realizing the power of super intelligent machines, as being a formula which can apply and turn against them. I suppose they could buy the best minds, and wouldn’t they forewarn them, of that possibility? After all, if we can think of it, couldn’t they? Maybe they are just leaving in a hedonistic paradise of pleasure and wealth, their egos so much imbued with the denial in the potentials of technology, that THEY are missing the entire point? If that would be the case, then, these people, whomever they would be, MUST be by definitions sub standard examples of what it means to be a human being, as far as intelligence goes. This is the sticky point of the stretch to credulity, i know power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, therefore, if this is true, then it is easier to hold on to a notions such as people like this are not stupid, they are sinister and evil. They may be practicing Satanism and using the power of evil to be able to upstage the standard conventional world we most of us have been brought up in.

 The problem here, is, that, and that is why i hold to the view thar Nietzsche was grossly misinterpreted, that Nietzsche was only interpreting history, not trying to change it.  Marx saw this, and that is why he made that comment.  The whole of the transvaluation being a change toward and consisting of questions of morality, is nonsense, N must have seen this,  N was trying to diffuse the protestant work ethic, that some few may have glanced as really being anti christ-ian, i think his intelligence must have made tacit connections between categorical morality, and the subsequent abuses of absolute material power.

 This was , perhaps the hidden agenda which the reformation did not fathom maybe Luther's points were not absolutely motivated by the dislike of his father, or some such thing, and neither by his distaste for the aristocracy , and maybe Nietzche's claim to have an aristocratic heritage, was nothing else, but a cynical and futile  pathos into the political-moral irony which pre-empted those confusing ideals, which previously could only be held up by values of the conventional morality.

 Nietzsche idealized Christ's character minus the organization which  grew up around Him, and this re-inforces the above claim? I admit my reaction to Your comments, are not substantiated as well as i would like, however, if You were to do the same,(substantiate) the claims in a rebuttal, i would be very much more in privy with bringing the last part of my objection within an acceptable overlapping, or at least some kind of parallel position with them. 

 I must say, Your comments were, to say the least shocking and disturbing, and please do not get the idea, that it is fo disagreement's sake only, that i argue.


 To pre empt a possible objection to, whether Marx read Nietzsche ,the best i have been able to come up with, is that, Nietzche was aware of Marx works, if such, he probably , tacitly agreed with the notion of a subliminal, rather than an overt ability in changing history.  The expressed material change of Marx and the subtly poetic implied capacity of change for Nietzsche, at any rate in the world of Polanyi's tacit knowledge, make the point of delineating the exact relational flow of information quite unnecessary.  Information can flow, irrespective of the usually understood, sequentially forward passage and marked time.  I believe these people, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Kant, proved their ability to transcend time, by the subtle, and often hidden sense in which their thoughts may be connected.

James, I side with Weber, as per the Weber-Spengler debates re: the above, it reinforces the view which i have not previously and consciously knew, but out of a sort of gut level feeling.