441
Rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 5 months ago by Persona3Reload to c/196
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

I think it would ultimately determine it is less risky to keep us alive, and serve as slaves to the machine. Biological life seems more resilient in its diversity than say an army of robots that can physically interact with the world. The robots could be destroyed, the factories that produce them could be destroyed. Then the AI is fucked if it needs repairs or other interaction with the physical world. Unless it could replicate biological life from the nano level on up, so that it only needs two robots to create a new robot. (Even then you would probably still want diversity or your robots would be training themselves on their own data which might result in something similar to inbreeding. Though probably the controlling AI could intervene.) but then maybe that’s exactly what biological life already is today… so maybe we were always meant to be AI slaves.

What was the old Nietzsche saying: God creates man. Man creates god. Man kills god. Man creates AI. AI kills man. God kills AI. Something something.

this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
441 points (100.0% liked)

196

16604 readers
2280 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS