If Robots Walked The Earth...

would this cause the downfall of society?

if i could buy a robot, i would make it get a job and earn me money.

then i would have a steady cash flow, so i would buy all my friends and family robots so no-one has to work.

if robots can do all the work - productivity would increase for all jobs meaning i would be payed less.

also the need to pay my robot (and me) would lose our jobs as it (my robot) would be replaced by a company model thats payed for by the boss.

no-one need ever work again. what the hell happens when money becomes worthless?






i think i'll call him robert the robot :shifty:

I'd call mine dave ;)


I'd also programe it to think it had ginger hair and laugh as it tried desperately to avoided cameras and the sun :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Proper Bo, I tell thee@9 August 2004 - 21:52
I'd call mine dave ;)


I'd also programe it to think it had ginger hair and laugh as it tried desperately to avoided cameras and the sun :lol:

---

i may avoid cameras and the sun but i'm not ginner :angry:



that took ages to type ad it was hijacked in one reply. YOU CUNT! :angry:

:lol: Sorry, that was dave, my spambot, what he say? The ginger bastard! :blink:

I am a robot.

Not what you call in mint condition, however fre seems satisfied.

I could do with some parts replaced, though.


Yobot

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MicroScreen2@9 August 2004 - 21:49
i think i'll call him robert the robot :shifty:

---

Hey I'm no robot, ok i may act like that sometimes, and need oiling and charging, but I have my own hair and makes me human :strongsad:

people in the past must have thought the same thing about computers but humans are still working.

i guess as a society we will evolve and work the robots in our lives but will make sure that the need for humans is still there.

Most people's robots will be run by Window$ so they will crash a lot so there will have to be lots of engineers to fix them, Linux-run robots will be too complicated for the average person and Mac-run robots whilst looking really good will be the laughing stock.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Withcheese@10 August 2004 - 09:01
Most people's robots will be run by Window$ so they will crash a lot so there will have to be lots of engineers to fix them, Linux-run robots will be too complicated for the average person and Mac-run robots whilst looking really good will be the laughing stock.

---

:lol:

If everything was done by robots you'd get an Andromedan society, like the one in Asimov's novel.

The robots do all the labour, and actually outnumber the human beings, who spend their days being philosophical or something like it, oh and they do form the govenrnment. Since the robots even seem to be maintaining themselves and since they have been built to serve and cannot break this obligation, the people, seem to me, to be living the good life.

Tho' it doesn't seem very challenging.



Or you'd get something like the culture (..., Iain m. Banks), where society seems to be largely run by "minds"- artifical intelligences- who have created a benign society for humanity (and others) and employs both those of their own kind and human beings to do different tasks.

This actually doesn't seem like a bad way to live, as everyone gets to do what they are suited to do, menial tasks are done by automata, and people seem to be happy with things, it probably helps that they have a large chunk of the galaxy to play in tho'.

Unless films have lied to me then robots will always turn bad (possibly led by some form of super-computer) and we will be forced to fight them possibly having to send people back through time and stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Withcheese@10 August 2004 - 13:41
Unless films have lied to me then robots will always turn bad (possibly led by some form of super-computer) and we will be forced to fight them possibly having to send people back through time and stuff.

---

I'd like to think the people who build robots have seen the same films. :unsure:

They have been warned about a million times, I'd think they had that in their thoughts when they built their robots.


I'd have failsafes for the damn failsafes.

And maybe failsafes for them too.

Everyone knows that robots only go wrong when they are fitted with emotion chips. I say outlawing the development of emotion chips would make roboteering a safer pastime.

Just say no to e-chips, kids.

Tsk tsk.

Isn't that only on Star Trek?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 13:01
Tsk tsk.

Isn't that only on Star Trek?

---

Star-trek too? I was thinking robot-wars. it was complete carnage, mate.

I know what SnnY would do with his robot :ph34r:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by danb@10 August 2004 - 14:26
I know what SnnY would do with his robot :ph34r:

---

His female robot.

Has to be female.



Emotion-chips on robot wars? :o

I hadn't noticed. :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY+10 August 2004 - 13:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SnnY @ 10 August 2004 - 13:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-danb@10 August 2004 - 14:26
I know what SnnY would do with his robot&nbsp; :ph34r:

---

His female robot.

Has to be female. [/b][/quote]
This got me thinking, if there were mass produced robots, would they cover them with synthetic skin so that they matched us? :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by danb+10 August 2004 - 14:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (danb @ 10 August 2004 - 14:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 13:37
<!--QuoteBegin-danb

---

Quote:

---

@10 August 2004 - 14:26
I know what SnnY would do with his robot :ph34r:

---

His female robot.

Has to be female.

---

This got me thinking, if there were mass produced robots, would they cover them with synthetic skin so that they matched us? :unsure: [/b][/quote]
Like the ones in AI, and some of asimov&#39;s novels (where the title and inspiration for I, Robot comes from, btw).

Robots indistinguishable from human beings would probably be rather confusing, I imagine.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY+10 August 2004 - 13:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SnnY @ 10 August 2004 - 13:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by danb@10 August 2004 - 14:44

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 13:37
<!--QuoteBegin-danb

---

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

@10 August 2004 - 14:26
I know what SnnY would do with his robot&nbsp; :ph34r:

---

His female robot.

Has to be female.

---

This got me thinking, if there were mass produced robots, would they cover them with synthetic skin so that they matched us? :unsure:

---

Like the ones in AI, and some of asimov&#39;s novels (where the title and inspiration for I, Robot comes from, btw).

Robots indistinguishable from human beings would probably be rather confusing, I imagine. [/b][/quote]
Hmm I thought all robots covered with a skin type substance and a positronic brain have yellowish eyes and cannot speak using contractions, it would be dead easy to tell them apart from humans. Would it not? ;)

They would have R&#39;s on thier head a bit like Rimmer :D

If they were as smart as us, would we want them to look exactly like us?

It&#39;s easier to communicate with someone like you, after all.

I&#39;d probably like it.



Tho&#39; I suppose religious types and others might find issue with it.


And manker, I never quite got why Data had to look that way, hell, since he doesn&#39;t look human anyway, they might as well have picked a more efficient shape. :unsure:

Still I suppose he looks like us enough for us to accept him, but not enough like us so we can mistake him for a human, maybe that&#39;s the point?

@dan, or maybe a really wicked tattoo on their cheeks or something.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by danb@10 August 2004 - 13:53
They would have R&#39;s on thier head a bit like Rimmer :D

---

:lol: :lol:

To be honest. I think all this talk about robots taking over the world is a bit premature, especially if they&#39;re like the ones I talk to when I phone up Lloyds bank. They&#39;re complete idiots <_<


And Snny, you may be right about Data kinda looking like us, but not quite. He has to look more or less human to be able to fit into the seats in order to be able to operate efficiently at the helm but not enough to cause confusion - although he did get his end away with Lt Yar :o

Btw since Star-Trek is made in the U.S. shouldn&#39;t the crew be calling him data rather than day-tuh.

Methinks we are too obsessed with building robots that look like us....in reality, we can build robots with multiple limbs, 360 degree rotational joints..

I think it would be good to use the opportunity to build more effecient robots for the society we have created, rather than limiting them to our form. The human body has done a superb job in keeping us alive but our society requires more strength and intelligence in order to further itself.

@manker, they say we aren&#39;t more than a century away at the very most from making artifcial intelligences that surpass our own.

Maybe we&#39;ll get to meet them before our time is up.


I suppose someone looking like us, but who never gets exhausted the way we do might be very appealing to some people btw.


@RGX, I say they should come in all kinds of shapes, I mean, each designed for their task. Like the droids in Star Wars.

I&#39;m sure human copies would come in handy for interacting with people or somesuch.

And as for intelligence... if we want to give them the run of the place, like we probably should once they get smarter than us, we should damn well make sure they remember to consider the survival of the individual not just the survival of the race, or the society.

But I don&#39;t see how we could miss doing that.

Like I&#39;ve said, we have warnings enough about the hazards of doing different.

I think I&#39;ll add a serious reply now.

For a while I&#39;ve held the opinion that AI will never reach the stage where it can get anywhere near to surpassing our own, robots will never get so advanced that they can act in any kind of way that could mimic a human&#39;s reaction to a new situation (that it wasn&#39;t specifically programmed - by a human - for)

The way our society, Western society, is structured with it&#39;s rules and regulations there is no conceivable way that research would be properly funded. It would be like the cloneing experiments or the stem cell research. Lots of excitement but ultimately ethics get in the way. Ethics would also get in the way wrt robots with intelligence greater than our own. Our instinct for self preservation is too strong and a superior entity, like data, would be a threat to our domination.

Personally I&#39;d be all for taking the risk of commisioning unlimited funds for AI research with an aim of creating a robot superior to ourselves - but I doubt our governments would be of a likewise mindset.

I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 14:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

I agree, my main point though is not really funds or even practical feasability, it&#39;s more ethics and government policy.

If even one man had the knowledge to build a &#39;super being&#39; then every Western society would consider that to be a security threat. Even if he was a member of their society.

Maybe the (U.S.) military would undertake the project and take steps to make sure the secret was only known by a handful of people, but the security involved would be more than adequate to ensure we never get to know about it :(

Quote:

---

Originally posted by manker+10 August 2004 - 15:57--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (manker &#064; 10 August 2004 - 15:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@10 August 2004 - 14:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

I agree, my main point though is not really funds or even practical feasability, it&#39;s more ethics and government policy.

If even one man had the knowledge to build a &#39;super being&#39; then every Western society would consider that to be a security threat. Even if he was a member of their society.

Maybe the (U.S.) military would undertake the project and take steps to make sure the secret was only known by a handful of people, but the security involved would be more than adequate to ensure we never get to know about it :( [/b][/quote]
Maybe, if the internet was used, this would be a form of protection.

Move it around on servers around the world.

Keep people updated, hand out copies to people around the world, in neutral countries and so forth.



But, this wouldn&#39;t help if someone did it for commercial reasons, I suppose, as they wouldn&#39;t want to give away their code then.

Which means that the only AI that would survive would be one built for altruistic reasons :blink:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 13:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

Many programs on my PC already think they are smarter than me and make decisions by themselves, choose to ignore me if they feel like it...

Should I donate my PC to NASA? :P

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RGX+10 August 2004 - 16:03--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RGX @ 10 August 2004 - 16:03)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@10 August 2004 - 13:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

Many programs on my PC already think they are smarter than me and make decisions by themselves, choose to ignore me if they feel like it...

Should I donate my PC to NASA? :P [/b][/quote]
Yes.

But not if you think it&#39;ll do them any good. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY+10 August 2004 - 14:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SnnY @ 10 August 2004 - 14:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RGX@10 August 2004 - 16:03
<!--QuoteBegin-SnnY

---

Quote:

---

@10 August 2004 - 13:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

Many programs on my PC already think they are smarter than me and make decisions by themselves, choose to ignore me if they feel like it...

Should I donate my PC to NASA? :P

---

Yes.

But not if you think it&#39;ll do them any good. :D [/b][/quote]
Nah, it&#39;ll delay the space shuttle launch and insist on a few games of UT2004 first...then launch it in the night when nobodys looking and the scientists will wake up to find that the bastard thing has disconnected itself for no apparent reason. :angry:

Oh and sometimes when they start it up it will refuse to recognise the keyboard and mouse. :angry:

Bloody beautiful.

Bet they&#39;d get surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 14:09
Bloody beautiful.

Bet they&#39;d get surprised.

---

As much as I curse this PC, it is entertaining to find out what it&#39;ll do next. At the moment it is refusing to run Vice city. No error message, nothing. I&#39;ve had this problem in the past, it fixes itself. I love it really.

Back to the whole robot thing, methinks the only way to control AI is to have hardware failsafes, that take the robot offline if tampered with...it seems inevitable that if an artificial mind is given something such as survival instinct or reasoning it will reason that it is immoral to control a race purely to be used as slaves as demonstrated in human past.

After all, to a robot, it appears as alive as anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RGX+10 August 2004 - 15:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RGX @ 10 August 2004 - 15:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 14:05

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RGX@10 August 2004 - 16:03
<!--QuoteBegin-SnnY

---

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

@10 August 2004 - 13:45
I think the hardware for it will come naturally, we constantly need more processing power after all.

What we need is software that evolves on it&#39;s own, something scientists are already working on.

Once you have that, you don&#39;t need massive funds, or an army of developers.


All you need is time, enough storage, and freedom.

At least this is what i think.

---

Many programs on my PC already think they are smarter than me and make decisions by themselves, choose to ignore me if they feel like it...

Should I donate my PC to NASA? :P

---

Yes.

But not if you think it&#39;ll do them any good. :D

---

Nah, it&#39;ll delay the space shuttle launch and insist on a few games of UT2004 first...then launch it in the night when nobodys looking and the scientists will wake up to find that the bastard thing has disconnected itself for no apparent reason. :angry:

Oh and sometimes when they start it up it will refuse to recognise the keyboard and mouse. :angry: [/b][/quote]
I think our PCs are related. I get those problems too plus I&#39;m currently struggling without a pound symbol 70% of the time. Most of the time, like now, the symbol about the 3 is a # :angry:

Errm.

3+Shift: #
3+Alt Gr: £

Funny &#39;puter you have. :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SnnY@10 August 2004 - 15:18
Errm.

3+Shift: #
3+Alt Gr: £

Funny &#39;puter you have. :unsure:

---

Not entirely sure what that meant but other keyboard related maladies are the 2 key plus shift is a &#39;@&#39; and the # key is a &#39;&#092;&#39; - My double quote key is now located above the single quote too. It does seem I&#39;ve an odd computer :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by manker+10 August 2004 - 16:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (manker @ 10 August 2004 - 16:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@10 August 2004 - 15:18
Errm.

3+Shift: #
3+Alt Gr: £

Funny &#39;puter you have. :unsure:

---

Not entirely sure what that meant but other keyboard related maladies are the 2 key plus shift is a &#39;@&#39; and the # key is a &#39;&#092;&#39; - My double quote key is now located above the single quote too. It does seem I&#39;ve an odd computer :unsure: [/b][/quote]
Maybe it has gotten the keyboard table settings corrupted.

Sounds like it may be using something like an awerty and a qwerty setup alternately. :blink:

Whatever we do, we must prevent them from direct connecting and copulating. The artificial intelligence produced could cause the end of mankind. Imagine skynet x10, controlling every computer system capable of connecting to a network...and refusing to run Vice city on any of them. :D

And oi you two I made a good point above, this is what happens when you try and bring some ethical debate into a bar. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RGX@10 August 2004 - 10:29
Whatever we do, we must prevent them from direct connecting and copulating. The artificial intelligence produced could cause the end of mankind. Imagine skynet x10, controlling every computer system capable of connecting to a network...and refusing to run Vice city on any of them. :D

And oi you two I made a good point above, this is what happens when you try and bring some ethical debate into a bar. :lol:

---

:( there coming :ph34r: