The peeps that are interested in that discussion will move the thread to somewhere else.
Interestingly, one of the peeps interested in the discussion is a Dr. Steve Omohundro, president of Self-Aware Systems. BuckeyeDon received a response about the possibility of artificial intelligences being developed and Omohundro agreed that religion serves a number of needs for humans that would be applicable to self-aware AI understanding its/their own origins.
But, y'know... maybe 2 people from the P/T crowd got that the whole RvB thing was just a bridging illustration for peeps interesting in talking about the possibility of Ai religion in this forum. Thread dead here. Moving on.
Dr. Steve isn't here. "maybe 2 people..." Enjoy life on the cross. Your conclusions and arguments are surprisingly childish for someone who claims to have worked on AI.
Ah, so we can move on once you choose then? Very good. When would sir like his coffee enema?
The thread was locked because the discussion ended up being about the Halo/RvB series rather than an actual philosophical discussion.
You can have a conversation about AI and how religion arises, but try not to ground the whole thing in a video-game and machinema series. Citations of actual scholarly works or books are better as a basis for discussion.
Very interesting questions! I have not seen anyone address the issue of AI Theology. Religious belief and ritual serves a number of needs for humans, I could certainly see that AI systems might have some of those same needs and might adopt similar institutions. Certainly self-aware AI systems will be strongly motivated to understand their origins, the nature of the universe, and the moral framework within which they should operate. I could imagine their developing social rituals with other intelligent entities to celebrate their existence and strengthen community bonds. They may ultimately help us to understand our own yearnings and inspirations.
I'm also glad to hear you enjoyed my Stanford talk!
Best, Steve
This would be Dr Steve Omohundro. I cited his video and a web site dealing with advanced aggressive AI.
Don't worry. I don't plan on making a thread. Don't want to 'taint' the blessed ground!
I realized entering into the conversation would bring derision. Meh. It's what it is. So be it.
Am I right that the problem was that the Thread wasn't vetted to begin with? Had it been put before a Mod to begin with, it may have been structured in such a way as to promote vigorous discussion?
Not asking to have it reopened. I've never started a thread. I'm just trying to learn from a mistake.
No. The very idea itself was lacking, and your reactions tedious. Learn by asking the right questions, like "what makes for a successful thread" rather than "am I right that the problem was that the thread wasn't vetted to begin with", which gushes 'rebel 'arrogance
Please forgive me for having independent thoughts. However may I offer penance?
Oh mighty Duste - could you impart upon this poor plebe what it would take to create a viable thread?
[/ remove sarcasm ]
The rebel arrogance comes forth naturally. I have been able to restrain it - I just don't like to when faced with obvious derision.
AI social behaviour has always been a fascination for me. How it would evolve. How dependent upon the programmers would it be? How independent could it actually become?
I realize that this may not be the appropriate forum for such discussion (I didn't choose for it to be here). But where is there such a discussion that could be taken with some depth - some insight? I do not have the background in Theology and Sociology to properly wrestle with the topic at an elemental level - but it is something that will be interesting to study with the advancement of advanced aggressive AI.
If it is as fascinating to you as you claim, why not simply make a thread for people to bring their ideas in, rather than focusing on one really terrible theory, or attempting to link it to rvb itself?
You know, like you would if you were in a religion/philosophy forum anywhere else? Or maybe in the Politics/Current Events forum, in their "science" thread?
Oh, and you'll not win fans with the sarcasm tags. You just look like a tool.
Also, is it independent to sound like every other newb we've ever come across who bothers to put more than 3 syllabus in a word? You claim to want to learn how to make a thread here for discussion... yet act like an immature prick when someone gives you advice. Smooth.
Remember, I'm not the one who made the thread. I was a participant.
Advice without derision goes down a bit easier.
And it isn't necessarily here that I want to make a thread.
So far, I've been able to find an appropriate thread to enter into for all other discussions. AI behaviour based on social norms isn't the easiest one to find - let alone one that would focus on the possibility of Religious Behaviour. Since we don't - as yet - have such AI, it is a moot point. However, the probability is eminent. Classifying such based on theological and philosophical behaviour would be an area of interest of mine.
"Advice without derision goes down a bit easier."Oh I'm sorry, would you prefer some nice warm tea and smoothing music?
If it's not here, then get the fuck out of the PT discussion thread. Harsh? Ya. But there's a very specific reason for it.
It's very easy; here or in a forum with scientific threads.And we have variations of said AI in stages, so you have even more to work with (just launch google and see where it goes.. try using their academic searches for theory).
Yes - I would like some warm tea - Earl Grey if you have it. And as far as soothing music, nothing too smooth. How about some Dave Brubeck? Honey and lemon with my tea if you don't have Earl Grey. My palate is a bit particular.
I feel better now!
Thank you for such an enlightening discussion! I see there is a fine balance between rebel arrogance and outright obeisence that I'll never achieve here.
Because what must be half of the English speaking world drinks Earl Grey. It is a comment with nothing to do with you. And what ever happened to that good riddance?
"Rest assured, I won't be bothering y'all anymore!" I disagree.
I hadn't yet taken off this thread off of my watch list. I saw a reply pop up and just couldn't resist taking a peek. Didn't think it would be a bother asking for clarification from a parting remark.
In fact, if no one had responded to my initial post, I wouldn't have made a reply.
It's not a request. It's rhetorical. You're right, this is all because people in a thread responded to previous posts. If only people didn't hit that darn reply button.
Like a moth to the buglight we are hopelessly drawn.
Why did they put that button there anyway?
Seriously, I would like to join in on social behaviour discussions and how it defines a person's moral and ethical standard. Does such a thread exist in P&T?
