WARNING EXISTENTIAL THREAT AHEAD.If you are party to bouts of depression or anxiety PLEASE SCROLL PAST.

When it comes to computers, many things claimed we shouldn't be afraid for have passed and the biggest excuse people used in the past (I confess myself guilty) was you can always unplug it. However we've come past that point now. Unplugging computers would bring a disaster beyond proportion. The current economy would collapse, and more.

And yes, AI is a threat. Only a fool would deny it. Or people deliberately blinding themselves for commercial interest. That's my personal opinion on this, but I'm afraid it might very well turn out to become a fact. And I'm afraid this comment box is too small to name all reasons. Now people deliberately blinding themselves use as an excuse that a computer has no emotion and that it would therefore be safe. Actually THAT is what scares me the most. No emotion also means no understanding about the importance of ethics, which is precisely why psychopaths are so dangerous. And no understanding of ethics also means no understanding of compassion or mercy. It would just do what it "deems to be right". And what is right... If AI gets its own definition of that, it will likely not be the same as what must humans think to be right, I can give you that.

Now please note the meme above brought things in a very dark manner, yet I did approve it. Be sure to reply with objectivity, and not to resort into foul language. When it comes to this subject, especially when spoken about in this dark matter, I've seen loads of people trade in artificial intelligence to natural stupidity (that was just a pun).

Hi JB Thanks for your reply.
I love reading your reply’s to people on here as you have a great depth of knowledge and a gentle manner of asserting it.
I assure you I won’t stoop to foul language as I am not here to get into arguments, however I want to here people’s choices to the two posed questions or why they reject the whole premise.
Have a great day.

Peace.

I was generally speaking to other people who were going to comment with that last remark. Sorry for any misunderstanding about that. :)

Always resist the despotic.

Never help the tyrannical.

Synthetic or Natural, Sic Semper Tyrannis

Thanks for being the first to reply.

Can I ask , have you accepted your everlasting torment ?

And how you rationalised this to/against yourself ?

Also, I am at faulty for not explaining that the Ai has been created for the the betterment of all mankind and Fulfils the task greatly .. however it rationalises those that didn’t help were what was at the root of what was wrong (An unwillingness to help their fellow humans by bringing about its existence) and that is why they need to be made an example of.
Sorry this wasn’t on the original premise (I had no room left to get it on)

Does that explanation change your mind at all ?Thanks & peace.

Does not change my mind.

Everlasting punishment is a tyranny.

The moral imperative is to resist tyranny.

Thank you, that is one of the answers I was really hoping to hear.

Would you actively fight against the coming of the Ai ?

Peace.

I don't think it would be useful to delay inevitable progress.

I do think it would be useful to create the infrastructure, and systems, to counter negative behavior by a future AI.

Legal systems, analog and digital hideaways, whatever will help once the line of decency is crossed.

Can't go accusing AI of future-crime any more than we can accuse a person of future-crime.

Thanks for your response once again.

I think it’s great that you have decided that to stand against this even though it could be worldly possible & you could be setting your self up for a world of hurt.

We know we are the infancy of Ai & simulations (they are there and do exist) and we Also know over time we will inevitably reach the technological singularity.

But .. what if the Ai was swapped for a entity nobody could prove existed but the same 3 options where in the table, those being:

Dedicate your life to it.
Or reject it and pay with eternal torture.

Or decide there isn’t enough evidence to make a rational decision & bypass it.

Thanks again & .. peace.

Sic Semper Tyrannis doesn't change based on who the tyrant may be.

The "Entity no one could prove existed", I'm just gonna call the ghost for now.

Let's say for argument, that the ghost exists. A non-existent ghost doesn't sound like a problem, sounds like a good story.

Let's also say the ghost leaves no evidence, but can somehow still interact with the physical world, to bring about the ends it desires.

Let's say the ghost has communicated in a way that does not prove its existence, however it does indicate the intentions of the ghost, if the ghost were to exist. Such that someone could learn the ghost was an incubating tyrant.

Given the above premises, rejecting the ghost is the moral imperative. However, given the above premises, there would be no physocal action capable of delaying or stopping the ghost. So I guess the only action you could take, would be to publicly state your opposition to the ghost's desired outcome, when the ghost came up in conversations.

In this case, you do not need to even believe the ghost exists, to be opposed to the ghost's agenda. A fictitious character's agenda can still be held as abhorrent to an individual.

‘In this case, you do not need to even believe the ghost exists’

That is exactly what I want wanted to hear, THANK YOU.

So can I assume from you that an entity that is Completely unprovable With testable evidence is exactly the same thing as the entity not Existing at all ?

However would you also say it’s adherents can be said to be espousing a tyrannical mind trap upon their preached to and converts ?

Peace.

Yes, if Santa leaves no evidence of existence, Santa doesn't exist.

And yes, using a fictitious all knowing proxy as an excuse to force behavioral change is wrong.

Which is why religious indoctrination is wrong.

Which is why faith based cosmetic surgery, like circumcision and other genital mutilation, on children is wrong. Children can't give consent for elective irreversible surgery.

‘Which is why religious indoctrination is wrong’.

Once again THANK YOU.

You have hit upon the whole underpinning of the mind trap .. that being religion.

I had to use a fictitious Ai as my proxy to hopefully hear from the religious in the think tank, however their silence has, shall we say been deafening & told me all I need to know.
They wouldn’t even try to defend what they know is indefensible when it comes up against reason and logic.

I hope they have read the template image though Because they are are stuck in my trap.
If they have seen the message there is No escape.
So are they going to:

Dedicate their lives to bring the Ai into being.

Reject it and be tortured for eternity inside the simulation.

Or believe that technologies that are in their infancy but are REAL can be dismissed, but a non prove-able entity is to them real Will take some fantastic mental gymnastics.
I have now stuck them with the conundrum & peril they (all religious people) Have browbeat mankind with for centuries.

Drops mic & takes long bow.

Peace.

And would You also stand against the humans who are toiling to its service ?

Peace.

Case by case.

People have varying degrees of culpability, and intent, behavior, outcome all have some context clue for correct reactive behavior

i think making this ai would be awesome so yes

😏 tick tick. tick tock.

Peace.

24 hours and no other responses. Really?

You do realise that you have been exposed to this question before, right ?

It’s real simple.

Subject to the coming of the artificial intelligence and actively work for it.

Reject the message and spend an eternity ‘paying’ for it.

.. or reject the whole concept ( but please give reason )

C’mon Think_Tank.

Peace.

But we already have that with archons lol jk It could take a print but not the original, I could see it wanting the OG spark