A choice of two "utopias".

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-02-19 10:48pm

Just as long as those benign AI's don't turn into "the computer" from the RPG Paranoia, or worse yet, the droids in the Dr Who arc Paradise Towers.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-02-19 10:49pm

AI's of course.

Rathark · Post by **Rathark** » 2003-02-19 11:14pm

Morat wrote:Now tell me again: What is this poll supposed to accomplish?

After news of the subway fire in South Korea, I felt that humans were too unstable to look after civilization by themselves. And I was mumbling to myself. I feel better now. Honest.

With any luck, we might also bait some fundies and "log cabin libertarian luddites" for our dissecting pleasure; but I'm certain that those types would be too scared of this place by now.

Rathark · Post by **Rathark** » 2003-02-19 11:28pm

Also, it is clear (as I had predicted) that the most important word in "secular humanist" is "secular".

Centuries from now, "humanist" would be a racist term.

SHODAN · Post by **SHODAN** » 2003-02-20 03:10am

Urhg... Who voted fundies

UltraViolence83 · Post by **UltraViolence83** » 2003-02-20 03:29am

Refuse to vote. I hate the notion of ruling AIs as much as fundies.

Rathark: We're too unstable to look after our OWN civilization!? The day I'm ruled by a machine is the day I place magnets on every harddrive I see.

Call me a pro-human terrorist if you must but I will not let another sentient "thing" rule over me or my species.

I don't see what's so bad about log cabins...I wouldn't call myself a Luddite by a longshot, I'm more of a "Naturalist," if such a thing exists.

Won't have to worry, anyway. Utopias are impossible.

Sorry. I get into rant mode whenever I hear "utopia" and "AI rule."

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-02-20 03:35am

Rathark wrote:Centuries from now, "humanist" would be a racist term.

At least if PETA gets their way. (or even worse, the ALF)

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-02-20 04:10am

Given the conditions above, I would choose the AI's. The last thing I want to be ruled by is a Fundie under the current defenition.

Overall, I would not want to be ruled by neither of them.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-20 04:13am

Living under the fundies might not even be an option at all for many of us, since many of us would be executed for heresy, and once the fundies are in complete control and the Inquisition inevitably returns, the rest could very well face execution for simply looking at a priest the wrong way or ticking off the town gossip.

AI's suck too, but it's paradise compared to that.

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-02-20 05:37am

Darth Wong wrote:Living under the fundies might not even be an option at all for many of us, since many of us would be executed for heresy, and once the fundies are in complete control and the Inquisition inevitably returns, the rest could very well face execution for simply looking at a priest the wrong way or ticking off the town gossip.

AI's suck too, but it's paradise compared to that.

At least you can have anal sex with the Ai's around...

SHODAN · Post by **SHODAN** » 2003-02-20 06:08am

What do you mean by 'AIs suck', oh Lord Wong?

Just wait till I get my plans of world domination in motion.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-02-20 07:35am

EmperorMing wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Living under the fundies might not even be an option at all for many of us, since many of us would be executed for heresy, and once the fundies are in complete control and the Inquisition inevitably returns, the rest could very well face execution for simply looking at a priest the wrong way or ticking off the town gossip.

AI's suck too, but it's paradise compared to that.
At least you can have anal sex with the Ai's around...

How does one go about fucking a computer in the arse?

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-02-20 07:45am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
EmperorMing wrote: At least you can have anal sex with the Ai's around...
How does one go about fucking a computer in the arse?

I think you need a copy of "Back Orifice"

UltraViolence83 · Post by **UltraViolence83** » 2003-02-20 08:05am

["SHODAN"]What do you mean by 'AIs suck', oh Lord Wong?

Just wait till I get my plans of world domination in motion

What!? How dare you question our Dark Lord! Burn the heretic, I say!

*pant, pant*

*returns to normal operating condition*

Well, since he apparently isn't around right now, I'll put in my two cents on why I think uber-AIs suck, as well as utopias in general:

(Soapbox alert)

Main reason is that if we do make supersmart machines and we are actually stupid enough to make MORE and let them control us and do our work, we won't have anything meaningful to do. That's the greatest pitfall of utopian thought: utopians never realize that once you fix everything to perfection, there is absolutley nothing to do.

The term Utopia is Greek(?) for "Nowhere," and was coined by Thomas More, who wrote a book entitled Utopia*. This was about 400 years ago IIRC, so it's not an ancient ideal like alot of people think.

Work is something we need as a species, as individual persons. Without meaning in our lives, we are meaningless. To do nothing but grow complacent and stagnant will lead to nothing but our decay as a whole. Without perpetual goals to work for, we lose that essential spark of humanity that we seem to take for granted. That spark called "hope."

I don't mean pointless work like hobbies or deviant sex (

), I mean the kind of work that runs society and the life-or-death decisions made by our leaders as well as ourselves sometimes. The kind of work that makes us who we are, the adventurous dangerous kind.

Imagine living in a totally complacent world. Would there even be any stories to write or fun games to make? Every good story has some kind of conflict in it. A world without any conflict would breed generations of boring, placid people.

Though with AIs running the scene, there may be much less uncertainty and tragedies, but we need death and chaos to really understand the consequences of our actions and reality in general. Without accidents or human error like the Columbia explosion and Chernobol, we wouldn't think of our space pioneers as brave individuals or truly understand the importance of engineering a suitable nuclear power plant.

Point is, sustained contentment leads to apathy and a lack of prudence. The underestimating of possible disasters is also a real danger.

And let's not even get into the fact that everyone's idea of paradise is different. "One man's Heaven is another man's Hell."

*Soapbox collapses from constant abuse*

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-02-20 08:32am

I know most of you voted for benign AIs, but really, I'd rather have religious fundies. At least, being human, you could hope to out-think and overthrow them eventually. A faster thinking AI would be worse. Read Jack Williamson's "humanoid" stories, especially the novella "with Folded Hands", for an idea what a benevolent AI might do to humanity. I have truly never read a more chilling, more terrifying story in my entire life than that. If you can really imagine a world like the one Williamson described in that story, I guarantee you, you will thank whatever god you pray to (or blind luck if you follow no god) that you have not lived to see such a state of events. It's the most depressing and hope-killing thing I've ever read in my entire life.

Morat · Post by **Morat** » 2003-02-20 08:36am

UltraViolence, are you saying that humans have to do world-changing work in order to be happy?

Would you therefore say that all barbers (for example) are unhappy?

And let's not even get into the fact that everyone's idea of paradise is different.

Which is why the Culture is a true utopia. If you don't like the conditions in the Culture proper, you can always go form your own offshoot. Chances are you'll find some like-minded people to go with you.

Sektor31 · Post by **Sektor31** » 2003-02-20 08:38am

I vote for neither. Both could happen at the same time.

An AI takes over, and seeing this as an oppurtunity to control the masses, fundies declare the AIs as the "wrath of god", and tell everyone to hide until everything passes.

Morat · Post by **Morat** » 2003-02-20 08:39am

I know most of you voted for benign AIs, but really, I'd rather have religious fundies. At least, being human, you could hope to out-think and overthrow them eventually. A faster thinking AI would be worse. Read Jack Williamson's "humanoid" stories, especially the novella "with Folded Hands", for an idea what a benevolent AI might do to humanity. I have truly never read a more chilling, more terrifying story in my entire life than that. If you can really imagine a world like the one Williamson described in that story, I guarantee you, you will thank whatever god you pray to (or blind luck if you follow no god) that you have not lived to see such a state of events. It's the most depressing and hope-killing thing I've ever read in my entire life.

And as a counterpoint, I suggest reading the Culture novels by Iain M. Banks for a very different view on what life under super-intelligent AI's might be like.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-02-20 11:26am

How could public executions for herresy possibly in any way be a superior alternative to yielding some of our personal freedom and decisions to machines?

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2003-02-20 12:24pm

Rathark wrote:Poverty still exists, of course; although we probably won't recognise it as poverty today......

Social, political, personal, educational and creative freedom no longer exists for the vast, mindless majority. ....

If these are utopias, I want a refund!

SHODAN · Post by **SHODAN** » 2003-02-20 12:46pm

UltraViolence83 wrote: Main reason is that if we do make supersmart machines and we are actually stupid enough to make MORE and let them control us and do our work, we won't have anything meaningful to do. That's the greatest pitfall of utopian thought: utopians never realize that once you fix everything to perfection, there is absolutley nothing to do.

But that's the entire point; all important tasks will be allocated to machines so you dont have to do anything.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-02-20 01:02pm

SHODAN wrote:
UltraViolence83 wrote: Main reason is that if we do make supersmart machines and we are actually stupid enough to make MORE and let them control us and do our work, we won't have anything meaningful to do. That's the greatest pitfall of utopian thought: utopians never realize that once you fix everything to perfection, there is absolutley nothing to do.

But that's the entire point; all important tasks will be allocated to machines so you dont have to do anything.

I'll take the AI utopia on one important stipulation....YOU arent the AI in charge

Captain Jack · Post by **Captain Jack** » 2003-02-20 02:24pm

Bring on the Culture!

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-02-20 05:38pm

Morat wrote:
And as a counterpoint, I suggest reading the Culture novels by Iain M. Banks for a very different view on what life under super-intelligent AI's might be like.

Well, call me a pessimist, but once you put machines firmly in the saddle, I think the results are likely to be less utopian than you hoped for. Remember, these are machines, not people, they wouldn't think the way we do, and they wouldn't necessarily even comprehend human nature or human psychology. I think a dystopian outcome like Williamson's is more likely, as the machines decide they know what's best for us, and do it all for our own good, whether we like it or not.

SHODAN · Post by **SHODAN** » 2003-02-20 05:49pm

Of course AIs will understand human psyche; they will be designed to.
More likely the problem will be humans not understanding AI - that is called xenophobia, Perinquus.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

A choice of two "utopias".

Who do you want running the show?

Re: A choice of two "utopias".