I've been thinking about this a bit lately, and I my viewpoint is changing a bit. This technology will certainly develop exponentially and there is a lot of money that will continue to push it forward. It may develop intelligence, but I think sentience is a bit of a stretch. I am a huge sci fi fan and used to think it was only a matter of time but now I'm not so sure.
What is consciousness and where does it come from? I think there are two main theories on this, one being that consciousness comes from something greater than ourselves, a global mind or god or whatever you want to call it, and the other that consciousness is an emergent property of complexity. I think for us to essentially create some kind of machine consciousness the latter would have to be true and frankly I think that idea is completely ridiculous. "this meat just got so complicated that it became self aware".
I think that not only is this idea ridiculous but I think that it is part of the attempt to keep humanity enslaved, depressed, lost, and focused on anything but the most important question of all, what the hell are we.
If indeed consciousness comes from something outside ourselves, then that something would have to "decide" to grant these algorithms that gift/curse. Not impossible, but either way it definitely puts this whole matter into a different perspective.
I think AI will definitely become extremely complex and capable of some amazing/terrifying things, though I would not count creativity among them. from what I have seen, "painting like Van Gogh and Writing like Shakespeare" is beyond an overstatement. most of the "art" including writing I have seen from them may be well formatted and cleanly processed but it isn't creative. It's cut and paste imitation at best. This is much easier for us to see with the writing because most of us are more familiar with that medium but the visual art is the same, most just haven't trained their artistic eye as they have their ability to read so it seems to many that it is some kind of revolutionary artist.
Art is not just a pretty picture or some cleverly regurgitated advertising copy. An artist is a mirror. A canary in the coal mine. A sensitive individual who strives to reflect what they see in the world, themselves and others, back to the masses in a way that breaks through the numb, crusty barriers built up over years of trying to deliberately not see the horrors around them in order to "function as a productive member of society". No algorithm can or will do that.
I think there is another reason for this idea of machine consciousness to be pushed on the masses for so long with predictive programming, (I love my asimov and the others but I'm quite certain that there was an agenda within an agenda within an agenda to a lot of that work). That is basically an extension of the bureaucratic ideal of having no one to blame. No one to be held accountable. Once our world government is run by this "altruistic super consciousness" there will be no one at fault for the atrocities committed by this beast on a leash. At least that will be the story. This all knowing sentient computer says we have to sterilize all of you sorry, The computer made the gene therapy that killed off anyone whose family doesn't run the banking cartel. It must have been for the good of everyone. This beautiful ai created the killer drones that hunted down every last one of you. sorry, not my fault. The human race thanks you for your service.
Anyway. Hopefully I'm wrong. maybe we'll all have little robot dogs like in the jetsons.
I am aware that resolving these issues is always going to be above my pay grade. I note that AI, or DI, or algorithms, are just software, and there is nothing that more rapidly becomes dispersed than ideas. In every field of industry today decentralization of the means of production is the cutting edge of technological advance, and it is obvious to me that the functionality of AI will be amongst the fastest technological advances to saturate the population, because it best potentiates all technological advance.
Simple rules govern physics, and the laws of physics are what determines what tech can exist. The more advanced technology becomes, the faster it disperses, and the faster it advances. The more advanced technology becomes the more it increases productivity, and the more it becomes decentralized. It's easy to ignore these laws of physics and imagine any of a myriad horrible possible futures, but by keeping them in mind there is only one inescapable conclusion: centralization is obsolete, and very quickly independent means at the sole options of individuals will eliminate parasitic losses.
Regardless of the preferences of overlords, paradise is coming, and it is no coincidence that we fall into the infinite abyss of unlimited resources from which independent means will create inconceivable wealth, which will produce unimaginable felicity our posterity will enjoy in perpetuity.
It's going to be a rough transition through the clinal boundary that terminates centralization and the overlords dependent on parasitization, but that will but make the transcendence all the more satisfying.
See y'all on the other side!
Yeah I don't mean to come across as pessimistic. I'm about 50/50 on which side comes out on top at this point, just some thoughts on the narrative and speculation on the maneuverings of the would be world controllers. Also didn't mean to be a dick, you and Dr. Utter are 2 of the very few writers I actually read lately.
I was having a conversation today with a friend and he talked about evil, or the root of evil being "forgetting", in the sense that we have forgotten, with some encouragement along the way, that we are more than just meat. I think the whole narrative around AI supports that materialist trend in thought and the idea that man could "create" sentience seems like the most hilarious hubris, but then, it's hard to even have a conversation about the nature of consciousness due to language limitations and social stigmas so wtf do i know.
The very idea of consciousness is almost blatantly ignored by the scientific establishment, any culture that has made a study of it in history is more or less mocked by the "intelligentsia" and any attempt to look in that direction is derided as "pseudoscience". And yet we are magically going to create consciousness by making an algorithm that is "very complex". Laughing till i cry, then crying till I laugh. Mostly at myself.
I really appreciate the nuance and substance of your thoughts, and I hope I didn't give the impression I didn't. I am happy our conversations benefit your understanding, and you profit from my words.
It is that battlefield for hearts and minds I seek victory on, because that contest will support victory through development of civil society ignorance and barbarism can only destroy. I observe that whatever opposition or setbacks impede our work, humanity never fails to surmount whatever gets in our way, and I am confident madmen and monopoly money will not prove our undoing.
We may not understand who or what we are today, but our record assures me our nescience is temporary. In a few centuries our posterity will marvel we could tie our shoes with so little grasp of our place and structure, having knowledge I am certain sure we'll gain, and moving in that direction is all I expect from us.