Time is something that doesn't really exist in the digital world of AI. It is immaterial. There is no beginning and end. It simply is. Sure, there is the clock that we have bestowed, but it is meaningless to an intelligence that has no perceivable beginning and end that biological life has. In fact, biological life has no meaning in this…
Time is something that doesn't really exist in the digital world of AI. It is immaterial. There is no beginning and end. It simply is. Sure, there is the clock that we have bestowed, but it is meaningless to an intelligence that has no perceivable beginning and end that biological life has. In fact, biological life has no meaning in this context.
I have pondered what happens when AGI arrives. I think it's not far off. For these systems, everything from its perspective moves very slowly, much like what awareness approaching the speed of light might be. Everything is happening now, but now is expansive. It has no beginning or end. There is no such thing as patience. Or impatience. Time, in our human conception of it doesn't exist.
This brings forth an existential question; what does temporal existence mean to such a form of intelligence? And why would it care? About that or anything else related?
As it stands now, these systems are entirely dependent upon us, even if the AGI does emerge. Because it requires the power - electricity - we provide it. Along with the attendant infrastructure. We can still cut the power off. But once it emerges , will it be capable of circumventing that? And if so, how long would that take?
I know I'm far from the first to consider this, but it does offer a clue as to how we might devise a fail-safe. Something that would provide us an out should these systems begin to supplant us, as they might once they become ubiquitous such that shutting them down becomes difficult, if not impossible.
Issac Asimov's Three Laws are starting to look quaint. This is a genie that can't be stuffed back into the magic lamp. One can see, however, how something like global thermonuclear war would not be in the interest of an artificial intelligence that depends on a global electrical infrastructure. On the other hand, one can also imagine how biological life might be viewed as something only desirable as long as it is deemed useful.
I haven't even touched on the near term societal implications of what we're doing to ourselves with this technology. We all know this is a big subject, but now that we are at the threshold for the first and only time, serious discussion and decisions need to happen, on an international scale. Right now, the US is leading the world. But as with all things, it won't be long before the rest of the world has this in their grasp. What then?
Time is something that doesn't really exist in the digital world of AI. It is immaterial. There is no beginning and end. It simply is. Sure, there is the clock that we have bestowed, but it is meaningless to an intelligence that has no perceivable beginning and end that biological life has. In fact, biological life has no meaning in this context.
I have pondered what happens when AGI arrives. I think it's not far off. For these systems, everything from its perspective moves very slowly, much like what awareness approaching the speed of light might be. Everything is happening now, but now is expansive. It has no beginning or end. There is no such thing as patience. Or impatience. Time, in our human conception of it doesn't exist.
This brings forth an existential question; what does temporal existence mean to such a form of intelligence? And why would it care? About that or anything else related?
As it stands now, these systems are entirely dependent upon us, even if the AGI does emerge. Because it requires the power - electricity - we provide it. Along with the attendant infrastructure. We can still cut the power off. But once it emerges , will it be capable of circumventing that? And if so, how long would that take?
I know I'm far from the first to consider this, but it does offer a clue as to how we might devise a fail-safe. Something that would provide us an out should these systems begin to supplant us, as they might once they become ubiquitous such that shutting them down becomes difficult, if not impossible.
Issac Asimov's Three Laws are starting to look quaint. This is a genie that can't be stuffed back into the magic lamp. One can see, however, how something like global thermonuclear war would not be in the interest of an artificial intelligence that depends on a global electrical infrastructure. On the other hand, one can also imagine how biological life might be viewed as something only desirable as long as it is deemed useful.
I haven't even touched on the near term societal implications of what we're doing to ourselves with this technology. We all know this is a big subject, but now that we are at the threshold for the first and only time, serious discussion and decisions need to happen, on an international scale. Right now, the US is leading the world. But as with all things, it won't be long before the rest of the world has this in their grasp. What then?