#Bostrom compares human treatment of gorillas to how AI could treat humans. This is a chalk and cheese comparison, apples and oranges.
The Globe and Mail (1 May 2015) asked Nick Bostrom: "Why do you think the development of super-intelligent machines could be an existential threat to humanity?"
Nick Bostrom replied: "If you take a step back and think about the human condition, we can see that intelligence has played a shaping role. It’s because of our slightly greater general intelligence that we humans now occupy our dominant position on planet Earth. And even though, say, our ape ancestors were physically stronger than us, the fate of the gorillas now rests in our hands because with our technology, developed through our intelligence, we have unprecedented powers. For basically the same reason, if we develop machines that radically exceed human intelligence, they too could be extremely powerful and able to shape the future according to their preferences. So the transition to the machine-intelligence era looks like a momentous event and one I think associated with significant existential risk." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/munk-debates/nick-bostrom-i-dont-think-the-artificial-intelligence-train-will-slow-down/article24222185/
The comparison would only be valid if gorillas had intelligently engineered the human race, whereupon their higher engineered intelligence dominated them (the creator).
If gorillas had created greater than gorilla intelligence, if gorillas had engineered human minds (our genome), whereupon the created AIs (humans) dominated or harmed gorillas, the comparison would be valid. The problem is humans are not the AIs of gorillas.
The situation of humans intelligently engineering intelligence greater than our own is utterly unlike any species below us. Inter-species hierarchical comparisons regarding natural evolution, showing no intelligent AI design of a higher species by the lower species, does not translate to the engineering of artificial intelligence (artificial evolution).
Artificial intelligence is a new stage of evolution, which we cannot compare to natural evolution where no intelligent engineering of AI occurred.
Points regarding gorilla-human-AI difference to consider are:
1. Humans and AI have a close creator-created relationship, which humans and gorillas do not have.
2. Humans understand the engineering of AI minds whereas gorillas have ZERO idea how our minds were created.
3. The technological civilization needed to create AI is wholly different, or will be wholly different, to the world where humans dominate gorillas. The point here is technology for humans able to create AI will not remain at 2015 levels. Very advanced tech at the point of superhuman intelligence will ensure the primitiveness of inter-species dominance is obviated. 3D-printing of meat will replace farming. Asteroid mining and space colonization, along with greater efficiency, will ensure there is no need to battle over limited resources.
4. If gorillas had created us they would be able to communicate intelligently with us. I am certain we would have endless respect for their AI-engineering feat, which means we would without question grant our creators equal rights. Their high technological civilization would be very different to their zero technology, their rainforest existence, which means our attitude and relationship would be wholly different. Imagine if gorillas had a well established civilization, with laws, science, and clear culture; such a civilization would be inevitable if gorillas had created human minds (AI).
5. The correct analogy regarding human-AI is parent-child. The procreation is artificial but this does not lessen the fact we are in essence giving birth to AI. Gorillas made zero contribution to our birth. They did not design or nurture us.
6. Millions of years separating humans and gorillas are unlike a few decades separating "humans" and AI, which means our close creator-parental relationship will never be forgotten. Primates evolved fifty-five million years ago. Apes evolved twenty-eight million years ago. AI will progress from non-living to super-intelligent within 30 years.
7. Communication between AI and humans will easily be possible, whereas human-gorilla communication is either impossible or extremely difficult. Human intelligence is sufficiently intelligent to allow communication with and understanding of higher intelligence, whereas gorillas are cognitively limited. Humans have passed a threshold level of intelligence utterly unlike any species below us.
What do you think the precise fallacy of Bostrom is, Affirming the Consequent, False Cause, correlation does not imply causation? Or perhaps plain idiocy is sufficient to define his fallacy?
He is essentially saying cheese looks like chalk therefore chalk has the qualities of cheese.
Similarity, visual similarity in this case, leads to the mistaken assumption of the vaguely similar things being essentially identical, which leads to the statement of chalk having the qualities of cheese.
My analogy regarding Bostrom's fallacious AI logic is he is stating: "Chalk is tasty because it is essentially the same as cheese."
Instead of focusing on supposed historical "facts," namely that every prediction has failed to come true, you would do better to focus on the actual topic of this post, which is the irrationality of Bostrom.
I do appreciate you bringing Wolpe's video to my attention, but if you want to debate the validity of the Singularity, in length, you should do that on a post specifically about the Singularity or a post about Wolpe.
Oh! One example of how a prediction has come true is the Internet, which despite being very far from the Singularity it has very much lived-up to the revolutionary predictions. Tim Berners-Lee from the outset stated it would positively change our way of life, which I think is very much true.
Humans have been beheading people long before instagram. The fact we can see it now does not mean violence has increased, or that instagram increases violence. The recent live shooting of a TV reporter is only new in our heightened awareness of it. People have been shooting each other for a very long time. I don't think "social media is being used as a form of terrorism." I think terrorists have existed for a long time. Social media merely gives us a heightened awareness of their existence. I think awareness is very good progress. Seguing from nuclear bombs to the terrorists of social media seems very disingenuous.
I have, although many wrongly assume I have not, thought VERY deeply about all aspects of the Singularity. I consider culture, sociology, psychology, economics, politics, historical progress, and present progress.
I am aware of more or less all viewpoints, generally. From Bruce Sterling to Wolpe, I have encountered and carefully considered all views, despite sometimes not being aware of the precise verbatim expressions of their thesis.
There are differing interpretations, various definitions, of the Singularity.
To counter the type of view Bruce Sterling expresses (lol henceforth if needed I will refer to him as BS) I outlined, a number of years ago, very clear markers regarding what the Singularity is.
It is not merely a perceptual feeling of radical change. There are, from my viewpoint, very clear evidential factors to state whether or not we have reached the Singularity, thus via my clear definition we can state there have never been past Singularities.
All change can be singular but the issue with the Singularity is not a mere singular piece of progress such as the iPod. Some people, very wrongly from my viewpoint, define the iPod or the iPhone as a Singularity.
I will now post four clear markers; from the about page of S45, which it seems you have not read, so that you are clear what I think the Singularity is:
1. Immortality for everyone via regenerative medicine.
2. Everything is free for everyone. Nobody needs to work.
3. All governments and crimes have been abolished.
4. All resources are limitless due to limitless intelligence.
When all four points have been attained we have reached the Singularity.
While I do think mind-uploading could be possible, I do not think it is a part of the Singularity. Explosive intelligence, the driver behind all four of my points, does not require mind-uploading. I think mind-uploading is an outdated view, based upon false and old-fashioned assumptions about biological organisms not being mechanical thus immune to radical engineering.
The importance of the Singularity occurring is the attainment of the aforementioned goals, my four defining points. Preferably this should happen sooner rather than later. I think 2045 is the latest date it will happen. Raising awareness of the actuality, regarding what technology is progressing towards, is an inspiring factor to give people hope for the future; the awareness could also accelerate progress.
My four points will remain perpetually valid after the Singularity occurs, so unlike others I do say what happens beyond the Singularity. The Singularity from my view is Post-Scarcity, which when truly attained, along with all its ramifications, can never be suppressed or reversed. The four points I mention will be utterly resilient and self-sustaining, eternally, without effort. An article will be published soon via H+ Magazine mentioning this aspect of Post-Scarcity resilience.