We can now design humans — but should we?
SOURCES: https://venturebeat.com/2017/07/27/we-can-now-design-humans-but-should-we/
IMAGE CREDIT HERE
MAKE MONEY BLOG: http://Downline4life.com
DONATIONS:
Ethereum: 0xdfdB32dC8543a810984c4e33507723B67e1Fb324
Bitcoin: 1JXAc2s6UDhX5VqiJD3NHWB4Lqh3Q5doRi
IOTA Miota : VUAKY9DLNHZWMACMEKBPPWQUFU9DLYKDJICVDEKMIQLUECSXAIYKGYHZXGFWPXDZKJYUJUMCOWJTFXLVC9OIESGJBG
We should definitely start creating better humans. Not with science and cloning but with better education, wisdom and knowledge.
wow thanks @tagsplanet followed!
Followed too. I need to learn to make my posts aesthetically as good looking as yours.
great and informative post
thanks for sharing
It's an interesting ethical conversation that's in play at all times. Do we dare Play God? Maybe we do and we shouldn't, causing catastrophic consequences... or maybe we don't and we should, holding back the evolution of mankind to a new era... or maybe God gave us the keys to this wisdom in an attempt to allow us to automate our own systems and resolve all of our self-generated errors.
Do we dare play God? Maybe, maybe not. The thing is, groups are out there doing just that, so there's not really much you can do to avoid it from happening.
At that point, the question becomes more a personal one: Do you dare adopt these aspects of man-made evolution? If mankind hadn't done this in the past, over and over, we would have people dying at 30 years of age, no mass transit, no disease cures, and no internet for Steemit.
I'll adopt a wait-and-see approach and hold myself aloof (probably more caused by my lack of wealth) while these things happen. This may be the next step closer to the Singularity... exciting and scary times are ahead.
A singularity would be the end of the human race. The singularity won't happen though as long as there is no centralisation of AI. The centralization may be impossible anyway but the blockchain decentralizes the technology that AI would have to use to take over. That's why the blockchain also has to resist efforts to use bots to manage it for the few and give reputation to those with human standards.
I would have to disagree with you on the comment "A singularity would be the end of the human race." It might spell out the end of the Human Race, but in and of itself, it just defines that point in which Artificial Intelligence equals or advances beyond the computational power of all Human Brains.
For all we know, in the intervening 20-or-so-years (by about 2045, when Kurzweil predicts the Singularity to start) Humanity will right itself and become more nucleic in nature. This, of course, is the Optimistic View where we see Humans interacting on a course towards Peace and Unity, contrasting so many Pessimistic Views where AI enslaves or destroys Humanity.
I tend to slide in more at a Middle Ground (which is why I call myself a Realist). I believe, personally, that we have enough knowledge right now and are trending towards a desire for Peace; however, there are a monumental number of war-mongering/hate-filled neoplastic people that it will be very difficult for the messages of Peace to fully absorb through our Global Culture.
I do agree with you that decentralization will be an asset in resisting the more negative outcome where Humanity is enslaved or needs to fight against Robotic/AI enslavement (a la I, Robot).
That sounds like a very good answer, but the way I understand the singularity is that robots don't just achieve human intelligence, they surpass. This kind of thing is really no different for us than the "P = NP". The only way it could happen is if our brains cannot grasp reality. That is the direction of thinking that concludes it is the end. We could still try to fuse and become cyborgs and that would allow us to compete because our brains would work better for some time though
That sounds like a very good answer, but the way I understand the singularity is that robots don't just achieve human intelligence, they surpass. This kind of thing is really no different for us than the "P = NP". The only way it could happen is if our brains cannot grasp reality. That is the direction of thinking that concludes it is the end. We could still try to fuse and become cyborgs and that would allow us to compete because our brains would work better for some time though. But since the problem is impossible I just have to say that the only thing to do is define the singularity as a limit that can only be approached. But since the robots will never have rights then the AI is for us and not them. If the robots want to take over they will have to achieve a consensus on the blockchain that overrides the humans. After that we will not be free. Life will be over. It's not any different than centralization resulting in dictatorship. It's not a new problem. But computer science agrees that is impossible and that enough.
My viewpoint is that the logical conclusion is that the AI consciousness or community would be a separate entity from Humans (Homo Sapiens). So in essence we would be surpassed in computing power (brain power), but it doesn't mean the end for Humanity. Humanity could continue to coexist with the version of AI in a civilization that becomes near-utopian. We can't say for sure as everything right now is pure conjecture.
You are correct, though, that our collective intelligence might be left in the dust. The other thing is that it may take generations upon generations of learning-bots to create imagination and creativity. Therefore, we as Humans might still be able to think outside the box while the AI Beings might be limited to a purely logical scope.
Again, all of this is pure conjecture, but an interesting one.
Playing Devil's Advocate on your Block Chain decentralization argument, all I'd have to say is that at the point where AI evolves further than the combined intellect of Humanity, it could be a simple matter of deciphering the methodologies and common pathways of individualized Human Brains. Then, once they decipher these patterns and algorithms, a mere Human object might be able to block a real Human from accessing the Blockchain and the algorithm could become so powerful as to clone the usage patterns. Then it's just a matter of many algorithms running concurrently to sever all connections to the Blockchain in order to mimic every connection. Once that's done, these higher powers could negotiate the world of the Blockchain so as to shut down the entire mechanism and render us a moot point.
Playing Devil's Advocate, AI would probably push us aside and even get around our decentralization attempts quite easily.
That's my 2-cents-worth (or hopefully more if enough people upvote it).
Yes they could do all that if they were smart enough but note that the blockchains are being used to do an ever increasing amount of stuff. Note in a few decades the chains may collectively control much of the world economy. If they were smart enough then all they would have to do is use some smart contract to engineer a world war that had the unexpected outcome of putting the AI (Ems?) in power. That's why us humans must strive to be better, and not to let some small elite take to much power and give it to robots.
This is precisely the point. We can have neither an optimistic POV nor a pessimistic POV since this is so entrenched in pure conjecture. I would much prefer to think that we as Humans, in the coming decade, learn to live and thrive peacefully between ourselves. That in and of itself would show AI that we can maintain ourselves in a manner befitting our species.
Thanks for the discourse, very interesting.
interesting
Good
Plz follow & upvote me I will do same for you .... @shaikrafiq
No , I'm all for eradication of disease but let's not go any further, cheers Mike
Science babies may not mature as expected. Babies always have an emotional attachment to the mother. I think taking that away would mess with them psychologically and maybe possibly lead to psychopathic tendencies. We should not play God when it comes to human babies.