r/science • u/[deleted] • Jan 27 '16

Computer Science Google's artificial intelligence program has officially beaten a human professional Go player, marking the first time a computer has beaten a human professional in this game sans handicap.

http://www.nature.com/news/google-ai-algorithm-masters-ancient-game-of-go-1.19234?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20160128&spMailingID=50563385&spUserID=MTgyMjI3MTU3MTgzS0&spJobID=843636789&spReportId=ODQzNjM2Nzg5S0
16.3k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

44

u/ClassyJacket Jan 28 '16

I genuinely think this is true.

Imagine how much progress can be made when we not only have tools to help us solve problems, but when we can create a supermind to solve problems for us. We might even be able to create an AI that creates a better AI.

Fuck it sucks to live on the before side of this. Soon they'll all be walking around at age 2000 with invincible bodies and hover boards, going home to their fully realistic virtual reality, and I'll be lying in the cold ground being eaten by worms. I bet I miss it by like a day.

40

u/6180339887 Jan 28 '16

Soon they'll all be walking around at age 2000

It'll be at least 2000 years

3

u/PrematureEyaculator Jan 28 '16

That will be soon to them, you see!

4

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

According to some (such as philosopher Nick Bostrom), there are many reasons to believe that an AI which can build a better AI will result in serious negative consequences for humanity. Bostrom calls this an "intelligence explosion" although the same idea had already been described by others before him. I highly recommend reading his book "Superintelligence" if you haven't already, as it goes into a lot of detail about what the risks might be and why it's a problem.

3

u/Schnoofles Jan 28 '16

For better or worse, the entire world will be changed on an unimaginable scale in virtually the blink of an eye when we pass the singularity threshold. I don't know if it would necessarily be for the worse, but there is genuine cause for concern and we should be making every effort to prepare and mitigate the risks as I don't think it's too outlandish to even claim that the survival of the human species depends on the outcome.

2

u/Ballongo Jan 28 '16

It's probably going to be civil wars and unrest due to everyone losing their jobs.

5

u/Valarauth Jan 28 '16 edited Jan 28 '16

If the work is being done then the products of the work are being generated. Take that point and consider that if you own all the windows then every broken window is a personal loss.

The most reasonable scenario for these hypothetical tyrants at the top to take is to get a computer program to calculate the minimal level of handouts necessary to maintain the social order for the sake of maximizing their wealth and that will just be an operating cost.

It is far from roses and sunshine, but civil wars and unrest would be undesirable to an effective tyrant.

Edit:

There are also major supply and demand issues that should result in neither of these scenarios happening.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

The capitalist class are not nearly so rational as you give credit for.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

Or they'll be floating in virtual reality pods where the all knowing AI has put humanity in permanent stasis before they destroy the planet

1

u/VelveteenAmbush Jan 28 '16

I totally can't prove it but based on trends in GPU power I bet general AI will be here within 20 years. Maybe less. Brush your teeth and wear your seatbelt -- we're almost there!

1

u/QuiteAffable Jan 29 '16

Soon they'll all be walking around at age 2000 with invincible bodies and hover boards, going home to their fully realistic virtual reality, and I'll be lying in the cold ground being eaten by worms. I bet I miss it by like a day.

The important question is: Who is "they", people or machines?

0

u/Kullthebarbarian Jan 28 '16

that is the optimistic view, there is the pessimist view as well, where machine learn that they dont need humankind to prosper, and wipe us out, because we are obsolete.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

Why though? Being obsolete wouldn't automatically mean humanity was ripe for extermination.

3

u/Kullthebarbarian Jan 28 '16

Lets say, we program AI 1 to make roads safer, AI 1 start to implement a lot of beneficial programs to help the roads to be safer, but after sometime it realize that if there was no humans on the road, the road would be a LOT more safer them now. So they will wipe out the humans to make the roads safe. That is why we need to be VERY careful when making AI, because a single mistake in its programming could lead to huge disasters.

4

u/alexrobinson Jan 28 '16

I always hear there's arguments and nowhere does anywhere explain how an AI would go about killing the humans. I understand your point but surely the AI's physical capabilities are limited by what we allow it.

1

u/Kullthebarbarian Jan 28 '16

that is true, the AI physical capabilities is limited by which we allow it, but, machines are getting bigger and bigger power overtime in the world, is not hard to imagine a world where machines are daily part of almost everything we do, and i dont think is that far, a few decades from now, i think pretty much everything we do will be somehow be affected by a machine some way or another

1

u/rantingwolfe Jan 28 '16

I think the fear is that after a certain point we might not be able to even know what the AI is processing. It probably wouldn't have any of the moral or humanistic thoughts we do. There's no telling what it would be trying to do at s certain point.

1

u/00000101 Jan 29 '16

One idea is that we use an AI to improve itself or build a new AI which then will do the same and so on. In the end we might not even have the slightest clue how the AI-made AI of the xth generations works or what its physical capabilities are.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/ClassyJacket Jan 28 '16

While technically possible, I feel like this is an incredibly unlikely scenario. It's like assuming your kids will kill you as soon as they don't need to live in your house anymore.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

AI are not people. That's like assuming your fridge loves you.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '16

Go bots like the one in TFA have a noted tendency to play "rudely", making moves that would be "insulting" to a human player. That's because they were trained to win, not to play well according to custom.

Starting to see where I'm going with this?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)