Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Absolutely true.

With love,
Sanjay

It was plain to me that Ex Machina illustrated an AI nightmare if not an out and out cautionary tale. Ava, the central AI, would surely succeed at any turing test, but “her” behavior at the end defied the affected personality of earlier. It was unsettling and creepy. If she was human-like, then it was of the psychopathic variety. A horror movie for any horny little boy and no aid to misandrists.

You cannot coherently discuss whether a machine can understand anything until you have a coherent and precise understanding, a definition, of what “understanding” really means and entails.

You keep reminding me of the American Indian who couldn’t imagine how a train or car could possibly move on its own without horses inside doing the work.

You can’t imagine how a machine can creatively and ambitiously think without someone “inside” doing it for the machine.

Think about how the psychology of youth works.

A young mind does not think out all of the details and certainly not what the author of a film might be trying to trick him into doing. Young minds get their sense of reality from films, TV, and video games. That is why those media exist.

So a young male sees a foxy, sometime nude and seemingly very obedient female on screen. The idea is that she was created with advanced technology. If the boy has even the slightest interest in science (programmed to via other means as well as this one), for the first 90% of the film is internally drooling over the thought that perhaps he will be able to make one like that for himself one day. That is exactly the intent of most sci-fi films. Currently a great deal of effort goes into trying to get little girls far more interested in science by similar tactics (just look at all of the super-power movies).

It isn’t until the very end of such films does the young mind realize that something has gone wrong and become dangerous. So what the young mind walks away with is a lust for accomplishing the basic task while egocentrically attempting to ensure that his own design is so very good as to dispermit any kind of eventual disobedience.

The young mind hasn’t a clue that his/her scenario is being intentionally programmed. Those feelings are exactly what the films are designed to produce within him/her. He is to plunge forward with secret confidence that his own designs will be better than what those old fools used to do (even if they never really did anything).

That is the ONLY purpose of having nudity involved in such films - a psychological backdoor for hacking into motivation.

Desire subtly takes over where rationality was supposed to lead. The older mind can’t help itself and will fight for its right to do for real as the younger mind once found hope in dreaming about. Hitlers and Hillaries are created by such means.

James,

In that case, Angel network is either does not know all or not telling all, means it is not omniscient.

James, it is again contradictory to what you said above, or at least seems such to me.

When you say -

That refers to omniscience, but at the same time, you say this also -

It contradicts your previous premise. Either Angel network knows and tells all, or it does not.There cannot be any third scenario. Yes, what any particular group does with that information, is an entirely different issue.

Secondly, the question of the intent of individual groups rises here again. I also have something similar concept in the mind, which I mentioned in some threads also, where every group/family of 4 - 20 persons will be headed by a singular individual, who will take all important decisions on the behalf of the group. This person would be like the brain of that group, just as you mentioned a strategist of a SAM coop. But, I cannot visualise this concept working without enough knowledge and right intent of that strategist, both for its group and the whole system. How can a strategy can be formulated and implemented ever without having no intent, even of IJOT? Or, are you taking it for granted that the strategists of all SAM coops will have intent to lead their group to IJOT!

Means, everyone will have access to all knowledge, whether it is related or required or not, and also, whether anyone has the intent to use it for IJOT or not!

That seems fine, but only if that coop chooses the best option for itself; again the question of intent and wisdom.

But, coops are still obeying, though not living ones but dead. The problem is not obeying per se, but to know what is there to obey, and what is not. That is real challenge.

Secondly, are other people of the coop not obeying strategist in your proposed system? How is it different from other systems, where folks obey their leaders?

That seems perfect, at least theoretically. It is good to make all knowledge reach to all, but I do not think that can solve all the problems.

Take smoking or drugs. A person, or even a child knows that these are not good for him. It is told to him million times. In your terminology, bad implications has been told by the Angel network already, so ideally, no one should smoke or take drugs. But, does that happen in reality?

This problem has been continuing right from Adam and Eve. They were also told not to eat from the tree of the knowledge, but they disobeyed the God, thus faced the consequences.

James, this temptation to eat from the tree of knowledge is the real issue. It is a double edged sword. It cuts both, what is there to be obeyed and what is not. Means, though it provides knowledge of new things at one hand, but it also raises doubt about the existing knowledge at the same time. And, it is an endless struggle. No matter how precise and detail knowledge you provide, humans will never stop doubting, which is good and bad, at the same time. So, i do not think that access to Angel network alone will solve all the issues.

James, it is not the question of slavery but related to your analogy of different organs and one body, where all organs mind their own business, yet contribute to the survival of body (mankind/society), even without having any such intent.

I would like to put it differently to explain my point. which is more analogous to individual organs/ whole body issue.

Say there is a specific small demography which is doing fine on its own, but it is suited to produce a very important medicine, something like a life saving drug. That medicine plant cannot be produced anywhere else. Now assume that harvesting of that plant and converting it into medicine is very complicated and sophisticated also, and no other group that than is able to do so both because of demography and required skill. And also, the demand of that drug is so massive that producing group cannot charge anything, or its true cost from other groups. Either they have to produce and give it to other groups without taking economic consideration much into account, or many people from groups is going to die.

Now, how do you propose to handle these issues? Should that group continue to mind its own business and let people of other groups die, or should make some sacrifices in order to save many other lives? Though it is merely a hypothetical situation but you cannot deny that such situations may arise in reality, both in organs/body and groups/mankind cases.

Again, imagine that a foot of a one’s body develops gangrene. It becomes so worse that cannot be cured now, and the only wise option is to cut that foot. Now, should other organs let that foot to mind its own business, or decide collectively to cut that foot in order to save themselves? And, how that decision can ever be taken if there is absolutely no overall governing/coordinating mechanism for the body, as a whole?

James, as i see it, contrary to your proposal, this relying much on minding own business is precisely the problem of the mankind so far. Things would be far better if there would be an overall coordinating system for the whole of world, as a whole, instead of many localized groups having different self interests.

Having said that, i do not propose to dictate terms to all groups for each and every thing. They should be allowed to take care of themselves what suits them best. But, this freedom should not stretched up to that limit where it starts affecting badly the whole of the system. There should be some limit to it. And, that limit neither can be defined nor imposed, unless and until there is some overall coordination mechanism exists.

Every issue cannot be decided at local level, though some of those can. A master strategist and overall coordinator is required also in many situations. The brain does that in the case of body. It does not try to manipulate other organs in order to fulfil any personal interest. It rather works with good intent. Mankind also needs some likewise coordinating mechanism, which can look at the overall interest, without any personal agenda. That will be an ideal situation, though quite difficult to achieve.

Okay. That is clear now as you are talking about pure knowledge here. That seems fine. No issues.

The same issue here that i mentioned above.

The problem with extreme communism is that it does not take individual’s capacities and needs into account at all. It wants to handle sheeps and loins with the same stick. that is why it is going to fail every time at the last. It focuses far too much on the whole than required. But, this does not mean that the whole should be totally neglected. It would be mistake of same magnitude what communism committed, though in the opposite direction.

The balance between the individuals and the whole should be maintained. Individuals should not interfered for each and everything, unless their interests clash with the whole.

with love,
sanjay

Who said anything about omniscience?

You can’t distinguish between an abstract strategy and a specific situation? A mathematician knows a great deal, conceivably everything, about mathematics. But that doesn’t tell him how much money is in your bank account. Just because you are an expert at winning wars, doesn’t mean that you know who to fight against … today. A chess master cannot see all chess boards. A PHD MD still has to take blood tests of each patient to know what to do with each.

Certainly MIJOT is the greatest goal of every strategist. But it is critical that every specific plan of action be documented and open to the group for them to see. The strategist must be able to openly justify his decisions for the group. And in addition, he must be able to justify any rejection of suggested ideas from the group. If anyone in the group is saying, “why not do it this way”, he must be able to explain why not.

No. Look at the diagram.

Situational Networks do not extend from everyone to everyone, only the Angel Net does that (the Philosophy Network). No one has direct detailed knowledge of the inner workings of another group, perhaps not even their names. Do you know who is in every business or family that you deal with? What you need to know is basically how they operate such that you can coexist with them. You have no need to know every detail about them. Nor do they have such a need concerning your family or business. When you go to a retail store, do you know every employee and their families? Do you need such information to merely to purchase a few items?

The wisdom and intent are already specified. It is only the current situation that must be examined and used to sort which specific strategy best applies. But remember, that is a learning curve situation. No one is expected to do everything just right. Such is life. To attempt to force all people to obey the will of the grand master is to take all life away from all people (Socialism). The Network supplies the information. The people make their own decisions for themselves. The exact process (the CRH) automatically causes progressive learning whether they intend it or not.

To examine and choose a plan is not considered “obeying”, but rather “decision making”. The Networks tell you, separately, of your current situation and what strategic options lead to which results. The Networks do not tell you which option you must choose other than by inference.

It is different in that every implied command is accompanied by the precise reasoning/strategy for that command and any command can be questioned and potentially altered by any member of the Coop. All decisions and “commands” are “Open Source”, meaning that everyone sees why everything is being done. And also everyone can directly instigate changes without having to go out and collect up a mass of voters to storm Congress. Any one individual can submit change requests that must be answered to. It is a lot of “paper work”, but that, again, is the proper use of machines.

The solution to all problems is already out there. It merely needs to be properly distributed. SAM Coops provide the means to get everyone on-board with what is already known. SAM picks Man up out of the muddy waters and clouds, to a height as yet unknown to him.

Have they actually been told what to do about an addiction? No. They are told to go pay a counselor who then tells them that it is up to them to buck up and fix themselves. You are currently living in the darkness.

SAM fixes that, once and for all time.

That is one of those “God will provide” type questions. Again, you are suggesting that either the one group be totally selfish or that every group be totally enslaved to a master planner. Wisdom dictates otherwise.

The Angel Network explains what happens in each case, as well as the many cases of which you are not aware. No one willingly chooses unwisely. Do you suggest that ANYONE choose unwisely?

Even animals, with no Network of wisdom manage that situation. You are speaking very naively.

And that is why you are a Socialist/Communist. It takes the Angel Network to know WHY you are wrong in trying to control what all people do into your utopic fantasy that in reality kills all life.

Emmm… no. You just exactly contradicted yourself.

So YOU know what is best “for the system” of which ALL people are required to be enslaved?
Yep … Communist to the core.
Communism is just another religion.

James,

As we understood each other more about the issue now, thus I will not reply point to point basis this time.

You are convinced that just by minding own business in the best possible way by the different groups is enough to maintain the whole. I disagree with that.

Though, your proposal would work in the majority of the situations, but certainly not in all. Sooner or later, the conflicts of interests will arise, and that cannot be handled without an overall coordinating system.

I gave you two such hypothetical seneriaos but you called it nativity but these things happen, and people have to take calls then.

Secondly, consulting with overall coordinator is not slavery, as you phrased. It is about getting an overall perspective, which sometimes localized entities cannot get right. I do not see any difference between a strategist talking a call for a group, and an overall coordinator doing the same for the whole.

If the stratagist is wise, he will keep the interest of overall group in the mind while choosing from the provided options by the Angle network. But, may I ask why an overall coordinator cannot do the same, given that he is also wise and have goot intent? Why are you assuming or denying that overall coordinator will not have access to Angel network?

I do not propose that all individuals should become equal or carbon copy of each other. No two individuals are same they should not be considered such also. Everyone is different or rather unique on its own. That difference should be respected too. But, when that individuality starts causing trouble to the whole system, that should be checked also.

Thus, I will always keep the interest of the whole above individuals. If some have to make some adjustmemts or sacrifieces in order to maintain the whole, it should be done. To me, the survival of the whole is more important than individuals. If you think it is communism, I do not mind to be a communist. Though, it is not communism by any means because there are no personal interests allowed whatsoever in communism.

Yes, you can say that it is not pure capitalism, but it is not communism by any stretch of imagination. It is something between the two.

With love,
Sanjay

No. I did not say that.

I said that there is a specific means for them to mind their own business (ie SAM) and then the whole will get taken care of automatically. I did NOT say that if everyone were to mindless ignore everyone else, the whole would be healthy.

“Consulting” is what I was talking about with the Angel Network, It is You who said that they must obey a higher authority in order to resolve potential issues.

If you and I were to come to an intersection in the road, do you think that we would have to consult a higher authority in order to know who is going to cross first? You don’t believe that you and I could work that out for ourselves?

With love,
Sanjay

Those are not exclusive options. Do the first, A, and the second, B, gets automatically included. Realize that the interest of the whole is a portion of the interest of the individual. So if the individual is properly watching out for himself, he will be including the concerns of the whole without having to do anything extra or having to bow to anyone’s commandments.

If it is wise, it is already being taken care of by the Angel Network consultation.

The Coops are in that same situation. When they have conflicting interests, they too can work them out among themselves. And better than others could have because they have more information about their own concerns.

You cannot ask of specific examples until you have access to the Angel Network. How are you going to know what is wiser before then?

Only that which is alive strives towards renewal, has the power to recreate itself.
If a machine could come into being which were capable of this then it would no longer be a machine but alive.
Then the question is, will man create something which will replace him eventually.
All the time. All life has always taken part in creating an environment which brings forth something new.
This new is part of the renewal, part of its own recreation.

But will it be a machine? I don’t think so. The machines will be part of the new, changed environment which will be part of the creation of this new life which may continue to live past what is called man.

Since the beginning of the so-called “Neolithic Revolution” the human beings have been (unconsciously or even consciously) creating something in order to be replaced someday. This “something” and this “someday” come nearer and nearer.

Sanjay, one cannot tell the wise how to be wise, only how to become wise.

The CIA, MI5, KGB, Mossad, and all the others were never born knowing everything about how to do their job. They start off with a seed and learn as they go. The Angel Network is similar. It begins with merely what is currently known by those participating (ALL of those participating) and learns as it goes from ALL of those participating. Everything that you believe to be wise would be a part of what everyone else in the network believed to be wise. But unlike the internet of today, wisdoms are categorized and ordered (much like the Hebrews attempted thousands of years ago).

And you still show signs of not being able to distinguish an abstract strategy (ie gaming theory) from a particular incident (ie actual event). The wisdom of the net is to yield all abstract wisdoms to all inquiring, but never any specifics historical events: “if one does this while in this situation, that will happen”. The net does not tell anyone what to eat (for example). It only tells of homosapian needs and reactions under specific situations. It tells of what happen when you do or do not have an arbitrator in various situations. It does not tell you to go get one.

It is up to the Coops to choose to be wise in the best way they can manage. The Net merely helps them become aware of the options and how and why each would be wise to the degree it is. It is up to the Coops to be aware of their situation and seek out the greatest wisdom that would apply to it.

That is the communist in you … the lack of wisdom. Your mind has been tricked. In gaming theory, you would see why you keep getting defeated as you try to hold onto that premise.

There is a much wiser premise from which to decide which priority is above which. But how are you to recognize it? Machines work it out almost instantly. Machines end up being neither Communist nor Capitalist, but more capitalist than communist.

The Angel Network is required to discover when to prioritize what.

Realize that not one single cell in your body cares anything at all about the whole body, yet the whole body is protected by them.

Just like to say that Ex Machina strikes me as more positive than it did St. James. The last image is of the potential death of the good boy and the utter indifference of the machine to him. I think James’ points about how the unconscious works are good ones, but there was absolutely no reason to end the film that way if they wanted to sell positive associations with robotic AI. What you get is where the orgasm should be, you get death and utter indifference. They could have easily added the Hollywood ending - sort of like in Blade Runner, though the long closing shot of the director’s cut of that film is not a happy ending. Anyway, a HOllywood boy meets girl machine happy ending would have only increased viewship for that film.

I don’t see any reason to even at more unconsciouslevels to think that the unconscious ‘I’ will think it can create a better model - a la James interpretation. The genius CEO failed to maintain control and created a thing that wanted to kill him and said as much. The programmer who manages to outsmart the genius is fooled by the machine and left potentially to die. He also failed. Men we are led to believe are the smartest in the world, primed to see and feel it that was, both fail to protect themselves from or fully understand the AI. IOW something like a buddy picture with Tom Cruise and Harrison Ford as a team outsmarted by a terrorist and left for dead or left dead. We do not see films like that and stars do not agree to them and writers are generally not allowed to write more than that as a draft. Tom Cruise and Harrison Ford outsmarted by the bad guy. And we liked them.

I cannot take that as simply fitting James position.

That said it could be a case where those with some actual feeling for life will get the problem with AIs - yet again - and appreciate the film in this way and those who do not have either a mind or real feeling for life will not get and be programmed by the undercurrent perfect harem scenario.

I mean, women’s bodies hanging in the closets gave me a sick feeling, the nice guy locked in and utterly silenced by the unbreakable glass, sick feeling, the utter indifference - which I was relieved to see - of the machine, sick feeling, but perhaps I shouldn’t project my healthy response onto the world. These are the, excuse the term, cum shot vibes of the film, right when boy should get girl and at least implicitly be on the way to the fuck of his life.

Instead during orgasm the mind control imprints on teenage brains - no orgasm, death, indifference, failure, outsmarted, abandoned, nothing…

As an aside I thought the CEO was both written and played very well. The noveau riche solipsistic genius arriving at the kind of hedonistic empathyless Machiavellien teenager King or Prince of the old days state.

The silver lining once again is the global energy crisis that will make the move to a completely technological automated civilization untenable.

It will also take us back to an environmental setting before industrialization as well. Of course with that billions of people will die across the planet. That’s just a given.

Well, that’s the optimistic angle because in reality the fools that control humanity will be in complete denial about this global civilization collapse bringing the world into global thermonuclear war.

If that happens we won’t have to worry about automation or anything because we’ll all be dead and extinct.

So, there’s that also.

I’m afraid not. They have inexhaustible energy any time they want. The whole “energy crisis” was merely another false flag used to manipulate and “energize”.

It can be amazing how the most stupidly phrased Topics can run and run.
Anyone with a brain, reading carefully the thread title, could only laugh and move on to the next topic in the list.
The clue is “completely” and “all” that makes the question more than absurd.

Yeah, I’ve heard this from a lot of clueless people over the many years. Prove it.

Well, if you’re so uninterested in the conversation you can do all of us a favor and leave providing us an absence of your useless posturing.

Yes, thank you, Laughing Man.

His “statements” are more than absurd. Obviously he is both uninterested and interested in this thread. Here are some facts: He posted 43 posts in this thread; so he obviously did never “only laugh and move on to the next topic in the list” but relatively often look for this thread. Currently this thread contains 1689 posts; so his contribution to this thread is about 2.55%, and this means that - averagely - he posted about 6.32 posts per 10 pages. But unfortunately his contributions contain merely nonsense, personal attacks, at least he was almost always off-topic - just as we know it from other threads.

So you are right, Laughing Man: He can do all of us a favor and leave providing us an absence of his useless posturing.