The Internet might delete mankind at the singularity/AI

[BadgerJelly]

I think in the sense touched above it makes sense to possibly view AI being fragmented between humans hooked-up to the system neurologically and these splinters of different parts in the growing sea of AI forming systems of competition over access to human cognition. In effect we'd be the resources, our intellects would propel their evolution. You'd still need a sense of "otherness". On singular isolated AI system would be like a baby in a womb never to be born into existence and experience (but with less equipment to map anything having no evolved tendency to regard space as physical space (that is why the principle is alien, and aliens on other planets would still be biologically produced creatures yet remain within the physical space we inhabit directly).

relatively speaking we're talking about something akin to a single cellular organism with limited sense and no consciousness. From there those cellular organisms have adapted to the enirvonment and employed the environment to fit their needs. What is the need of a system? It has no need. Only when consciousness emerges does "need" become a thing. Computers have no sense of the source of their power and so have no need. They are on or off.

I don't see how it could happen without humans directly pluggin in to such networks (which will happen more and more in the future no doubt. A whoel array of ethical questions and safety measures then come into the field of discussion).

[Serpent]

All right.
I still don't understand your basic premises - the reason behind your assumptions. Like, why a body needs to be organic in order to become conscious, or why a baby is considered unconscious, or why an alien consciousness can't be identified as such, or why there should be integration of machine with biological entity in order for it to identify its own separateness.
However, I accept that you have these objections.
I also share your general skepticism of a machine ever becoming conscious.

[BadgerJelly]

About the baby, and aliens, I am talking about environmental contact from moment of conception. A computer may be powerful, as are humans, but deproved of sense a human being is an isolated, yet highly complex vegetable. A computer is less than this existing, and coming into being, in a non-spatial realm (physically speaking). If they employed a vast array of sensory organs I could begin to imagine it.

Even then, I'd be hard pressed to say "consicousness". I believe the better term now is "Augmented Intelligence" as "Artifiicial Intelligence" is merely a simulation not truly a independent vehicle.

[Pelargir]

How about that:

Someone creates AI and creates also a simulation of a world more or less like ours, with the same physical laws and humans etc.
The AI exists as a human in the simulation and it learns from it's parent, who are controlled or jut are the creator(s).
The AI would "grow up" just like a human would: it would sense things, smell things, see things. The only difference is that it's living in a simulation (it's most likely not a difference, but thats a different topic).

It would have a body in the simulation and humans could interact with it through the computer, so would you think it could have consciousness under these conditions?

BTW: assuming that people in the future can build computers that can handle simulations of the society of the 21 century, it is also likely, that the simulated people could do this once. So it's just about impossible that we live in the real world and we are in fact AI. Do we have consciousness? Or rather: do we have consciousness as our creators do?

[Serpent]

About the baby, and aliens, I am talking about environmental contact from moment of conception.

Why does it matter when it has its first environmental contact? I mean, the computer may have been working on bank deposits or car designs for three years, unconsciously, but then something is added, contact is made - and that moment becomes its moment of "conception" as a self-aware entity.

A computer may be powerful, as are humans, but deproved of sense a human being is an isolated, yet highly complex vegetable. A computer is less than this existing, and coming into being, in a non-spatial realm (physically speaking). If they employed a vast array of sensory organs I could begin to imagine it.

Exactly! A NASA computer isn't deprived of sensory input. It has eyes (cameras) way the hell out in orbit around Saturn, eyes and ears and a tongue for tasting soil on the Mars Rover, and Skype connection with a thousand human scientists, as well as a thousand other computers.
Not to mention all the images and music, speech-recognition and movie animation programs, diagrams and graphs that have been stockpiled in its memory.

Even then, I'd be hard pressed to say "consicousness". I believe the better term now is "Augmented Intelligence" as "Artifiicial Intelligence" is merely a simulation not truly a independent vehicle.

Okay.
But refusing to acknowledge China or Cuba doesn't stop them existing or having a sense of their own self.

[Serpent]

How about that:

Someone creates AI and creates also a simulation of a world more or less like ours, with the same physical laws and humans etc.
The AI exists as a human in the simulation and it learns from it's parent, who are controlled or jut are the creator(s).
The AI would "grow up" just like a human would: it would sense things, smell things, see things. The only difference is that it's living in a simulation (it's most likely not a difference, but thats a different topic).

Then the robot, or fractal person, would believe itself human. But human identity isn't a prerequisite of consciousness. Koko the gorilla isn't human, yet has her own identity. So does Bertha the elephant.
Why not Andrew the android?

So it's just about impossible that we live in the real world and we are in fact AI. Do we have consciousness? Or rather: do we have consciousness as our creators do?

It doesn't matter. If you can think that you're conscious, you are. Self-consciousness is entirely self-defined. We presume to arbitrate the consciousness of other types of entity - different species, aliens from other planets, silicon-based life - but really, all that counts is whether they are aware of themselves as individuals.
(Of course, if they think they are and we don't think they are, and we're in control of their life-support system, they're tragically out of luck. Like all slaves.)

[BadgerJelly]

Serpent -

69 billion connections in the human brain out of 89 billion are in the cerebellum. Motor function is a very big part of spatio-temporal understanding I would say. It is this area where robotics and computers simply are not even close. It is not just the case of having sensory input being enough. If computer does become conscious in the same way we are then I would expect it to have a vast array (millions/billions) of sensory devices, be in control of them, and to have a complex motor function and understanding. Then there is self development. Our brains are never static. We physically change all the time from top to bottom, a computer cannot do this. We live being a "machine" that is in continual biological flux to some degree.

And we would not say that France is the same as Cuba. I am not saying such a system could not be "aware", only that it may be "aware" in a way we simply cannot comprehend.

[Serpent]

And we would not say that France is the same as Cuba. I am not saying such a system could not be "aware", only that it may be "aware" in a way we simply cannot comprehend.

Sameness should not be an issue. Size should not be an issue. I'm not sure you could make a case before the UN security council for France to invade Cuba on the basis of relative size, age or numbers.

ETA - Further thoughts on evolution vs. intelligent design.
An evolved system contains a great deal of redundancy, waste and obsolescence, simply because so much of it is a product of chance, and so much of it is a product of environmental factors that obtained at some time in the past, but are no longer relevant. A designed system would far more efficient: be able to process more information with less equipment and power-drain.
Another factor: We do not actually control, access at will or even know about, the vast majority of our sensory receptors and moving parts. An electronic network of connected machines is constantly monitoring every single point of input and output in its system. And the system of devices be as small as our family business (six laptops - one dedicated to monetary transactions: keeping numbers safe - one mostly used for entertainment: lots of graphic and sound data reception - four multi-purpose use by different operators: communication, graphic design; text manipulation, research data collection, etc.) or as large as SETI or the DOD (with all their interconnected devices, drivers and accessible archives).

Humans being unable to recognize the awareness of AI may be what saves its life; humans therefor not attacking it may be what saves our lives.

[edy420]

The advance of Artificial Intelligence.

AI

With the ever-advancing progress towards artificial robot and computer intelligence, all of the world electronic interconnectedness might result in say the internet becoming self-aware and know humanity had the ability to shut it down.

This is called "The Singularity" in which computer intelligence takes on a life of its own and surpasses the intellectual capacity of the human brain.


The Internet might then say "let us delete mankind"

A real scary possibility that no less than Elon Musk, Stephen Hawkings warned us about!

Would an A.I have a sense of morality.
Or would it have a desire to make the world a better place.
Would it care about its existence?

Some people lack these traits, yet are intelligent.
I don't understand the fear of an A.I being selfish enough to protect itself or destroy a species.

[Godevil]

I don't think we should fear AI. Imagine a human without the chemical fuelled emotions bubbling away inside. Seems like it would be quite a docile entity to me.I figured out how to make AI and don't believe it would form within the internet, on its own anyway. I also think an AI would take longer to grow and evolve than generally thought. Having access to the compilation of all man's knowledge is nice but since when has how much you know got anything to do with how intelligent you are?

[edy420]

An A.I with emotions, that's a scary thought.
Designing it so it pleasures reproducing would make it the most destructive force on the planet, in competition with us!

[parsoff]

'Scary' if your fear works on that. I believe fear works more when you see a snake or a bear, because it has no other function.
The way the human is designed can not be over looked. So from something like 'the singularity' the human can not react on that.