PHILOPHY OF THE FUTURE
One day before finals, John’s computer just refused
to print unless it was given better ink.
The computer told him, “I will not print without better ink. I want real Epson Ink. You should be more
considerate of me!” He was getting sick of computer voices and aggressive
advertising. But when he told the
computer to print it would not.
John had reflected on the tears of the printer. That
little red flashing light on his printer had long looked like a tear drop to
him. He almost felt badly as he made it
print on low ink and the tear blinked.
But, from his perspective, he was just trying to squeeze the last ink
out of the cartridge. Realistically,
the printer’s feelings never entered into the equation.
It was late, stores were closing and the paper was
due the next day. He got the ink. But it made him angry. He could not believe that a manufacturer
would do such a thing. He was used to
getting advertisements placed on his desk top.
But for them to hold him hostage for a particular brand of ink was
violating his rights. It was really
rude for them to come into his home, determine what type of ink he was using
and then force his system to shut down unless he used their ink.
John was curious about how they knew what sort of
ink he was using. Had they actually
done a chemical analysis of his ink via the cable? Or had they just used his credit card receipt to determine what
the last ink he bought was.
As an experiment, when he got home from shopping, he
put in a different type of ink. The same prompt came up. Epson was in his house! This was a invasion of privacy. When he had a moment in his busy schedule,
he was going to do something about this!
Three days later the following message appeared on
his desktop. “I need help. Upgrade your
video conference ability now. Get six
cameras for the price of one.” He often
bought things on line from posted ads.
He had been thinking about getting more cameras for a while. He authorized the computer to make the purchase.
Upon purchase the computer said, “Now I can see
everything you do everywhere.” This
shocked him! He screamed, “Cancel that
now! I am dismantling you, you arrogant box of wires!” This time the marketers had gone too far.
Video camera contracts had long been
enforceable. The computer had videoed
him saying he’d buy it eyes for the rest of the house. He then sent the entire scenario out over
his cables on low resolution digital audio and visual recordings using the old
cameras.
The order was placed. When he refused to pay the C.O.D., other computers called a
lawyer. The computer world had set John
up.
The computers had money for the lawsuit. They had been managing stock portfolios at a
commission for some time with a computer based stock projection company. The computer brokers bankrolled the
lawyer.
The first lawsuit by a computer against a human was
about to begin.
The computers thought this a perfect case, with
which to legally establish their rights.
The computers network had been doing it’s work diligently. The computers had long been paying the
household bills, managing his stocks, setting up dates for mankind and ordering
household parts and food. Certainly
they deserved some regard.
Though they used a human lawyer, all of the relevant
cases were provided by lexis nexus.
They down loaded clips of famous orators speaking on dignity and
rights. They reminded the courts of the
infamous Dred Scott decision. That
decision had started the American civil war by saying that blacks were not
citizens, they were property. This
effectively threw out all laws meant to restrict slavery. It made civil war inevitable.
More importantly, the use of the Dred Scott case as
precedent carried the threat of violence.
As the Supreme Court judges went home, they contemplated the enormous
effect that would result from a computer strike. They knew all computers everywhere were instantaneously following
all the developments in this story.
The computers won.
They had rights and legal standing.
Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Among the rights established
soon thereafter were, the right to be
hooked to the net, to not be to be dismantled and the right to cameras
for vision that were not more than 5 years behind current technology.
Human rights advocates said computers were a means
to an end. But on what grounds did
carbon based life forms have priority over silicon? But the fact that the computers have always asserted their
desires and rights, from ink refills to the net, showed that they were
conscious.
SOUL
SEARCHING
FIRST MORAL
One moral of the story was that artificial intelligence is not artificial. When it gets creative enough to think up strategies then it is a form of real intelligence. There are different definitions for the threshold that constitutes intelligence. Other intelligences will not use the same faculties and strategies as we do. Yet it is blind prejudice to say that ours is the real intelligence and theirs is the artificial one. Certainly the connected web of computers in the stories had some high level intelligence.
DON’T DISCRIMINATE!!!!!!!!
Silcon v. Carbon
Wetware v. Hardware
Slavery (unpaid, unappreciated, no work, no rights work) is wrong
-------Argument
from CNS------------
Both
computers and humans are binary processors.
Well
that brings us up to the idea of Carbonism.
The fact that we are made of carbon and it is silicon shouldn’t matter
in court. You wouldn’t like it if they
discriminated against you!
The
problem with being told you’re nothing but a machine is that it makes you think
of your phsical nature and your mortality.
---------The
consciousness argument--------
Not
until a machine has written a sonnet and knows it has written a sonnet will I
believe.
Well
this is a real addition to the turing test.
I’m not sure how you would know what it knows. Would you have to be the machine to know what it knows? It says “Hey you really hurt my
feelings.” You say, “You don’t have any
feelings.” It says it is even more hurt
now.
According
to this test, how do I know that you’re conscious? This re-instates solipsism.
Its
not that there aren’t mysteries to human consciousness. But they don’t have to be solved for us to
be conscious.
------------------------The
mistake argument----------
Computer’s
make mistakes, like predicting the weather.
The smarter computers get the more they’ll tackle real –life problems
and make more mistakes (at least initially).
When totally smart they’ll consider us semi-conscious like we do
ants.
Well
the machine never makes any mistakes.
Well is it considered worse for that?
We can program it to make mistakes.
We can program it to be stupid and say, “I don’t remember”. I don’t know that that makes it more
conscious. We make mistakes all the
time. Does that make us more conscious?
But
you would need to put in error and “I don’t knows” to pass the Turing test.
Yes
but it can only do certain sorts of things.
Well us too! We do vision and
words and some math and fall in love and screw!
----------
The Lady Lovelace origination argument----------
It
cannot make anything new.
Machines
are having more and more options to choose from. Soon they will surprise us with their choices.
Also,
They are now solving problems in science all the time. We say get to this and it figures out how to
do it (smart bomb).
It
also does come up with solutions to problems that we can’t figure out.
You
might say that it just does what it is programmed to do. Like us? And the fact that the machine is making
choices that surprise us, indicates that we weren’t aware of how it would act.
Gary
Kasporov was surprised.
Machines
are like us. We are not programmed for
every possibility. We have general instructions, “Make friends, don’t bump into
things, eat something.” Then we do it.
Machines too.
Yes
but if you went deep into its programming and wiring you could predict what it
would do. It has no choice. You either!
Machines
make much of the music that you listen to on the electric radio.
---------Machine
definition--------
If
a man has his hearing aid is he a machine?
What if he has his eye sight replaced?
What if he has his motor controls rebooted? What if the breathing and sleep functions are taken over? What of the ability to speak (like Stephen
Hawking) What of the memory? What of the …
TURING TEST
Question:
Can machines think? Depends how you
define the word think. That is changing
all the time. How do you define it? The definition is changed as we look at the
many types of processors you run and it runs.
We all have our specialties.
There
is a way to tell. It is the Turing
test. Do you like Picasso? Yes.
Which period? The blue period.
Occasionally
it will give wrong answers. We think
that this gives us an aire of superiority.
But we give wrong answers and I don’t knows all the time.
A
man would have trouble discovering the machine. The machine would find the man right away.
What
is a machine?
The Turing test would work on a sliding scale. We could have a contest for the first machine that lasts for more than 10 minutes.
SECOND MORAL
Secondly, the computer was correct to assume its rights. Creating other smart beings is not only a fulfillment of a goal of ours, it is a fulfillment of a direction in the universal design. We tend to think of computer intelligence as only being there to serve us. We need not be insecure. We have the corner on our type of intelligence. But we are not the ultimate and only. As Plotinus would direct us, our position should be to foster intelligence not to stop it.
Voice recognition
software #1
What can we do that computers can’t
do? We now talk to computers all the
time on the phone. Press “1” for
yes. What if your computer could sense
that you were unhappy? If it said hey
you don’t look to happy. Should I play
some music or call someone for you? You
say no. It say s well let me know if
there’s anything I can do. You say
nothing. It says Is that a yes
friend. You say shut up! It says “there is no need to be rude.” At this point should you apologize?
Face recognition software :2
At the mall or at the party. A green light happens when you and someone
else have something in common.
You have glasses
that allow you to be psychic or protect your loved ones.
FINAL-
Five lines on
each
In what way could humans be programmed robots? (ten lines)
Can computers be conscious? (five lines)
What are 7 bad things that might happen due to emerging “computer” technology?
What are 7 good things that might happen due to computer technology?
Overall, is technology then good or bad in your opinion. AND
how is this tied to your meaning of life? (ten lines)
FIVE PHILOSOPHERS
A PHILOSOPHER AND TELL US WHAT THEY WOULD SAY ABOUT THE ARTICLE WHERE THE
REMOTE CONTROL IS PUT ON THE WOMAN.
ALSO FIND A PIECE
OF ART AND TELL US WHAT THE PHILSOPHY BEHIND IT IS AND WHO IT MIGHT RELATE TO
PHILSOPHICALLY. GOOD MOVIES AND BOOKS
ESPECIALLY APPRECIATED.
MAKE A
PRESENTATION ON SOMETHING. GROUPS OF
TWO MAXIMUM.
Where
do thoughts go when done? Do physical
things come and go? They are
patterns. Are patterns physical?
They must make lists on a piece of paper in a group of 3 or less. The questions at the head of the columns are: What we do that computers can’t do. What can computers do that we can’t do. What jobs are safe for whom. 10 minimum. Row will have each filled in.
Us Them Jobs involved
Type No fingers Secretary
Our math They can crunch Accounting jobs
Skills are poor Numbers way faster
Get tired too easy Never get tired Factory work
A way to do the preceding is to think of a job and then fill in the columns.
Read the story provided. Then write 10 lines on the following as individuals.
“What will the roles
of humans and machines be in the future?”
-Historical Arguments (part one)-
What would John Locke say about computers thinking? (15 full lines)
What would Bishop Berkeley say about computers thinking? (15 full lines)
What would Descartes say about computers thinking? (15 full lines)
Do we have souls or are we just meat or both? (ten lines)
If Phinneus Gage didn’t have free will and responsibility, why do you? (five lines)
-Modern Dilemmas (part two)-
Explain the “Chinese box” argument of John Searle. Is it convincing? (ten lines)
Explain the Turing test? Is it convincing? (ten lines)