We Need Limitations On Technology...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hatman said:
DSJ, please give me a reason for holding back technology, because I see no good ones. Stop evolving? No thank you. If you'd remember this quote from Darwin:

It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.

Guess what, it still applies today. You shouldn't be afraid of change.
Click to expand...

I take it you never heard of the phrase, "Curiosity killed the Cat?" As for that issue
about Change it has it's pros and cons. Regarding this issue the cons for this would be like Artificial Intelligence and stuff you would see in Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey becoming reality with HAL 9000 coming to mind. The pros is that technology would be beneficial for saving our society and planet.
 
Card Slinger J said:
I take it you never heard of the phrase, "Curiosity killed the Cat?"
Click to expand...
that's not actually a correct phrase. originally, the proverb was 'care killed the cat', with 'care' meaning 'worry' or 'sorrow'. nothing about curiosity /pedant
 
Card Slinger J said:
I take it you never heard of the phrase, "Curiosity killed the Cat?" As for that issue
about Change it has it's pros and cons. Regarding this issue the cons for this would be like Artificial Intelligence and stuff you would see in Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey becoming reality with HAL 9000 coming to mind. The pros is that technology would be beneficial for saving our society and planet.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that having a HAL 9000 while curing most of the world's problems would be worse than what we have now? I can honestly say I have never seen that movie, but I doubt it could be that bad.
 
actually yeah, HAL 9000 only killed a few people and that was due to the specifics on the mission he was sent on; essentially, he faced conflicting orders and in his mind his only solution was to kill the astronauts and finish the mission himself. it's a little more difficult to infer in the film than in the novel. /stillapedantbutonewholikesarthurcclark
 
All I see here is a sensationalist news source overreacting to a mod for kinect. Keyboards and monitors will never phase out. Keyboards offer people like me a system of buttons to input commands with at a speed that I can think at. I would have to dumb down my work to adapt to anything else... touch products for example. :) Moreover, screens are reliable and are high-rez to the max. Such products are going to start out very low-rez and the higher rez ones (in a small size) will be VERY expensive.

Why should we have LIMITATIONS on technology? Putting limitations on growth is strictly anti-competitive. If someone has a great idea, let them make and sell it. If it doesn't sell, too bad. If it sells, the developers will make huge money and technology will be officially advanced. Technology has plenty of places to go. The two variables on its growth are natural variables. Those variables are peoples' abilities and the public's ability to adapt to new technologies. These variables will change over time. Putting limitations on technology will mean that we will live in a time without change which is horrible for capitalist economies. Companies need to grow over time to stay profitable. If we limit their growth (and inventions), the public will not get new inventions and those companies would suffer.

Please study economics or at least research what you are talking about before throwing around such dangerous ideas. Limitations on technological growth is one of the most absurd things I've heard in a while...
 
I don't know about you but the last thing I want to see are Robots with enough Artificial Intelligence to act and be like human beings thus screwing up the natural order of society as we know it or real Androids in other words something similiar to the Cylons from Battlestar Galactica. In 5 years we would be close to that kind of technology and If you ask me it's a very scary thought.

Remember Watson from that episode of Jeopardy! where it won the game show and people were freaking out about what IBM was planning with Supercomputers almost acting like HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey? I remember Whoopi Goldberg from the View was asked If she would interview Watson from Jeopardy! and she was freaked out about it, I don't really blame her. Why should Robots blend with our Society? They shouldn't.

Not all change is good folks, use some common sense.
 
Card Slinger J said:
I don't know about you but the last thing I want to see are Robots with enough Artificial Intelligence to act and be like human beings thus screwing up the natural order of society as we know it or real Androids in other words something similiar to the Cylons from Battlestar Galactica. In 5 years we would be close to that kind of technology and If you ask me it's a very scary thought.

Remember Watson from that episode of Jeopardy! where it won the game show and people were freaking out about what IBM was planning with Supercomputers almost acting like HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey? I remember Whoopi Goldberg from the View was asked If she would interview Watson from Jeopardy! and she was freaked out about it, I don't really blame her. Why should Robots blend with our Society? They shouldn't.

Not all change is good folks, use some common sense.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think that we can replicate the human brain, the MOST COMPLICATED organ in the human body? Watson had no emotions, and thus it could not do anything bad without command. And do you honestly think that IBM would purposly make a HAL 9000? We could easily shut it off. And if we had already replicated the brain by that time, I'm sure we'd have a lot more than we have now to combat it.

Of course not ALL change is good, but most of it is. You can't be afraid of change and succeed in this world.
 
Your entire post there was a big argument from ignorance. One day, we will have amazing AI development that will be able to resemble a human completely. That is why we have concepts like the Turing Test. I most certainly do want to see robots that are indistinguishable from people. Imagine the possibilities!!! We could get them to do all the "dirty jobs" for us or we could get them to help around the house (betty from Jetsons). Perhaps we could have a completely realistic baby for teenagers to practice with before they have actual babies. If they are completely resemblent of a human, they would have no possible actions that humans could not (unless made specifically to do that action). By your logic, we should kill all humans because some humans could possibly turn into a terrorist group leader. You are going to have some bad apples from a tree, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't harvest from that tree.

That being said, we COULD make military robots as well. This would be an amazing development as it would get our troops out of the warfront and instead replace them with non-living replacable robots. IMAGINE THAT!!! :D Making them take orders and follow directions and eventually win us a war... that would both be very cool and very worthwhile. If they are trained like any human soldier, they will follow orders without question and never deviate unless told to.

Why would any reporter want to interview Watson? You miss the point that Watson can only answer trivia questions. Questions like "how are you" are foreign to the robot and would not get a reasonable response. If you asked it "who was the 23rd president of the united states", you'll probably get a good response. That is a really bad interview partner and would probably be poor for ratings.

Please actually do research before you come back. I am proud to say that I am in the AI industry and I love seeing new developments as they come. The video that you linked is not even close to AI... how can you go from there to Hal9000? As I said before, your concerns are anticompetitive and just dumb. The thought that this kind of development is "creepy" is not a concern strong enough to make your claim valid. As technology grows, we solve problems that we didn't even know we had. Putting a limit on technology will only leave those problems to meander and never get solved.
 
Zero said:
That being said, we COULD make military robots as well. This would be an amazing development as it would get our troops out of the warfront and instead replace them with non-living replacable robots. IMAGINE THAT!!! :D Making them take orders and follow directions and eventually win us a war... that would both be very cool and very worthwhile. If they are trained like any human soldier, they will follow orders without question and never deviate unless told to.
Click to expand...

heh.

more problems than you could imagine if we went this route.

BUT

we are making strides in some cool ways. ;)
 
Just a possibility to advance in a positive way. Just an example... I am a AI guy... not a military guy. I know nothing about military save for "ABOUT FACE!!!". It is a major possibility from the AI front... possibly not from the military front ;P
 
I have a degree in computer science as well and if you really did have an AI background you would Know that from an AI standpoint we are nowhere near the required instances needed for it to work properly.

You would have better results with simple auto tracking and operators than relying solely on AI.

Please step out of fantasy land.
 
Zero said:
Your entire post there was a big argument from ignorance. One day, we will have amazing AI development that will be able to resemble a human completely. That is why we have concepts like the Turing Test. I most certainly do want to see robots that are indistinguishable from people. Imagine the possibilities!!! We could get them to do all the "dirty jobs" for us or we could get them to help around the house (betty from Jetsons). Perhaps we could have a completely realistic baby for teenagers to practice with before they have actual babies. If they are completely resemblent of a human, they would have no possible actions that humans could not (unless made specifically to do that action). By your logic, we should kill all humans because some humans could possibly turn into a terrorist group leader. You are going to have some bad apples from a tree, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't harvest from that tree.
Click to expand...

You sir are a complete fool, AI development on that kind of level would jeopardize the natural balance of society. Technology that replicates the human brain? No sir that is very dangerous. If robots are able to think for themselves they could very well turn against humanity which is just as bad as a zombie apocalypse well close at least. Not only is that crazy but the risks far outweigh the positives in this kind of scenario.

Zero said:
That being said, we COULD make military robots as well. This would be an amazing development as it would get our troops out of the warfront and instead replace them with non-living replacable robots. IMAGINE THAT!!! :D Making them take orders and follow directions and eventually win us a war... that would both be very cool and very worthwhile. If they are trained like any human soldier, they will follow orders without question and never deviate unless told to.
Click to expand...

I can understand that military robots would help save human lives in times of war, but let's not try to make science fiction a reality and produce like 1,000 RoboCops to do our dirty work for us. Not only is that creepy but like I said earlier what If in time we find a technology that replicates the human brain? Then what? A War between Humans and Robots? That is a very dangerous route my friend. You would think you'd learn from watching science fiction movies but no...

Zero said:
Please actually do research before you come back. I am proud to say that I am in the AI industry and I love seeing new developments as they come. The video that you linked is not even close to AI... how can you go from there to Hal9000? As I said before, your concerns are anticompetitive and just dumb. The thought that this kind of development is "creepy" is not a concern strong enough to make your claim valid. As technology grows, we solve problems that we didn't even know we had. Putting a limit on technology will only leave those problems to meander and never get solved.
Click to expand...

I know the video I linked to is not close to AI, however this topic is about the consequences of the development of technology and how it can come back to bite us in the butt in the end. I'm not trying to be anti-competitive or competitive just trying to point out why we need to slow down on technology a bit from breaking away what already makes our lives simplistic. Specific technologies are good it's just that If you use them the wrong way sort of like in James Cameron's Terminator series things will get out of hand really fast.
 
You watch too many sci-fi movies... really. Robots cannot take over humanity more than humans can. If we design a robot with the intent of it being human and succeed, great. That robot would, by definition, be exactly the same as a human. Humans turn against humanity as much as this human-like robot can. I don't see why you make a special exception for the pseudo-human. Sure it doesn't need to eat and sleep, but that really can't lead to it taking over the world.

As I said before, creepiness has nothing to do with the advancements of technology. If it is too creepy, it might not sell to the general public, but if it does its job, it will certainly sell to a private investor. You can say that "specific technologies are good it's just that if you use them the wrong way things will get out of hand really fast" about anything. Take microwaves for example. There are limits to these machines. If I put tin foil into this machine, no good can come of it. The speed at which we develop is not what is harming us. It is the amount of testing that these products receive is what is valuable. I sigh every time I see a product that breaks and has to be recalled (Toyota breaking systems for example). Same goes for all "intelligent" products. Good amounts of in-house testing is always necessary for all technologically based products. There should be very few surprises when the product is released.

r3, my post was really way far down the line. Obviously now, it is very inconvenient and illogical to have anything of the sort on the battle field. At the pace things are going, who knows where we may be. This is certainly fantasy land, but just imagine the possibilities going forward ;D

CSJ, stop watching sci-fi movies and start watching nonsensationalist news. It is clear that you have fallen into traps set by sensationalist news sources...
 
Both of you are ridiculous extremists on opposite sides of this petty argument. The kinect mod in the OP is pretty cool and is a stepping stone to making technology like this more viable, for sure, but it's nowhere close to becoming reality at such a basic stage of development. I don't understand how technology so harmless as this has started such a heavy debate. There isn't a need to limit technology because not all technology is centered around creating a high-functioning AI that can replicate human thought, emotions and actions in a way that can, eventually, outclass human life. I mean, seriously, an advancement in technology could be something as practical and useful as a stove that can immediately change temperatures as soon as it is turned on, or an oven that can know when the food its cooking is finished, the next step isn't artificial intelligence on a level that can wipe out mankind.

This thread is so ridiculous.
 
Because in the future, it could cause diseases instead of solving them. Also, how are we supposed to know that technology will destroy plants that produce what we breathe in the future? Pollution. What if we go over the limit by using batteries as our food source?

Just to inform people that technology can destroy us instead of helping us. ;)
 
I did a report on Skinput for school. It's pretty cool. Adapt or die, everypony, that's how the world works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top