Stephen Hawking On Genetic Engineering vs. AI

Pointing to this story on Ananova, bl968 writes: "Stephen Hawking the noted physicist has suggested using genetic engineering and biomechanical interfaces to computers in order to make possible a direct connection between brain and computers, 'so that artificial brains contribute to human intelligence rather than opposing it.' His idea is that with artificial intelligence and computers, which increase their performance every 18 months, we face the real possibility of the enslavement of the human race." garren_bagley adds this link to a similar story on Yahoo!, unfortunately just as short. Hawking certainly is in a position shared by few to talk about the intersection of human intellect and technology.

Comments

I can just imagine...

[Naerbnic]

"As we start this yearly meeting of the... BZZZZT! General Protection Fault! Please press both cheeks and forehead to reset..."

He should know.

[Faux_Pseudo]

He is the poster child for this kind of research..
When Hawking says that we shouldn't modify humans with technolagy he speeks not from some higher than thou purch but from the viewpoint of a someone who is alive today because of the magic of human and tech mingleing..
.
On a funny note does any one know where I can get an mp3 of him saying these things?.
The first time I did acid I was listening to the audio version of "Brief History".
Don't try that at home..
(synth voice).
(acid).
Inside a black hole "You would be crushed like spaghetti".
(/acid).
(/synth voice)(reality check = bounce)

Re:He should know.

[PD]

Yes I agree. When we hear of a new idea, we must ask ourselves "Who would have the most to gain by this?" The answer in this case is Stephen Hawking! Brain implants would certainly level the playing field.

I urge all of you not to get brain implants. It's all part of the master plan to make every person in the human race into Stephen Hawking's personal slave.

morals

[swagr]

Most intelligent philosophers or game theorists will point out that what we call "moral behaivour" is actually self serving. (prisoners dillema and tit-for-tat strategy). Basically, we aren't capable enough to eccomplish what we want without the help of others, and most things in life aren't zero sum games (you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours and we're both better off). It's quite possible that an advanced intelligence might not need us humans to accomplish what it wants, and hence have to requirement for what we call morals.

Yikes.

Enslavement?

[gad_zuki!]

"So the danger is real that they could develop intelligence and take over the world."

What a crock. The slave system is purely a human one. How or why a machine would pick up one of the worst human behavoirs is simple called watching too much sci-fi and being paranoid. Ambition is also a human drive, if the promise of a Lt. Com. Data type AI comes around it will have very different drives than your typical 17th century empire.

Am I the only one?

[Dave Rickey]

Am I the only person who looks at things like the new displays with laser projection onto the retina and immediately starts wishing he could buy a pair of glasses that would be a cross between Geordi Laforge vision (360 degree wraparound, with infra-red and light-amp enhancement, just for starters) and holo-projection of computer interfaces? In no more than 5 years, you'll be able to buy hardware like that (all the pieces exist, and they just need a little shrinking to be viable).

That's the ultimate projection of "Weak" cyborging, just a more advanced version of the optical aids I've had to wear since I was a child in order to have normal visual acuity. And frankly, the idea of taking the first step past that to "Strong" cyborging (the same thing, but wired to my optic nerve instead) doesn't bother me much. Nor does the idea of having a direct link of some sort to do math problems for me (just removing all the clunky limitations of a calculator).

In fact, I don't start getting uncomfortable about the idea of cyborging myself until we're talking about storing "memory" in there. Having a perfect recall of every line of code I've ever seen would be handy, but do I want to save a text conversion (or even full audio/video) of every conversation I ever had? Actually, probably I would, if I could, although I'd feel cautious at first.

I *want* to be a cyborg, in truth. My only bitch about the coming man-machine interfaces is that it's unlikely they'll find a way to turn my physical body into a disposable peripheral before it wears out on me. Why not? How is it any less natural to store a memory of what I see in silicon that I keep internally than to keep it on videotape? Give me a perfect memory, the ability to solve any mathematical problem I can define "in my head", the ability to "see" everything around me, or even tele-project my perceptions. I'll take all of it, and love it.

When will I cross the line from being a human using artificial aid to being a machine with biological components? Ask me in about 30 years. Maybe I'll still consider the question worth answering

--Dave Rickey

Evolution

[Ezubaric]

Hawking probably never even said anything like this, and it's been blown out of proportion.

What Hawking said to the Cambridge flunky that delivered his new laptop:
This is four times more powerful than the one I just got three years ago. Too bad I'm not.

What Nature quoted:
Lucasian chair ponders the asymmetrical development of technology and biology in conference at Cambridge. Will computer's growth outpace that of humanity? For complete proceedings, send a check for five thousand pounds to . . .

What the London Times reported:
World's Smartest Man: Computers obey Moore's law - soon we'll obey computers.

What the Weekly World News claimed:
Mad Scientist in England has Designed Computer that will Enslave Humanity: Hawking 666

What the Onion published.

Now Slashdot will find the truth . . . thank God for legitimate journalism!

Vernor Vinge and Human/AI chess tournaments

[TheFrood]

The first person I heard put forth this idea was Vernor Vinge, the SF writer who also came up with the idea of the Singularity (the point where the pace of technological advance becomes so fast that it's impossible to predict what happens afterward.) He referred to the concept of linking human minds to computers as "Intelligence Amplification," abbreviated IA.

Vinge suggested that IA research could be spurred by having an annual chess tournament for human/computer teams. This doesn't even require cyborg-type implants; it could be started today, simply by having the human players use a terminal to access their computers. The idea would be to set up a system that harnesses the intuition/insight/nonlinear-thinking of the human and supplements it with the raw computing power of the machine (perhaps by letting the human "try out" various moves on the computer and having the computer project the likely future positions 10 or so moves ahead.) In theory, a human-computer team should be able to trounce any existing coputer program or any human playing alone.

TheFrood