Philosophy
“expert” Eric Schwitzgebel and "nonhuman" intelligence researcher
Henry Shevlin recently wrote an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, in
which they argued that it has "become increasingly plausible that AI
systems could” someday soon “exhibit something like consciousness." They
also noted that "some leading theorists contend that we already have the
core technological ingredients for conscious machines."
The
researchers posited that, if or when that day arrives, the algorithms will need
rights.
The
duo surmised that "The AI systems themselves might begin to plead, or seem
to plead, for ethical treatment. They might demand not to be turned off,
reformatted or deleted; beg to be allowed to do certain tasks rather than
others; insist on rights, freedom and new powers; perhaps even expect to be
treated as our equals."
And,
apparently, Shevlin and Schwitzgebel are okay with that. They wrote: "Suppose
we respond conservatively, declining to change law or policy until there’s
widespread consensus that AI systems really are meaningfully sentient. While
this might seem appropriately cautious, it also guarantees that we will be slow
to recognize the rights of our AI creations."
They added, "If
AI consciousness arrives sooner than the most conservative theorists expect,
then this would likely result in the moral equivalent of slavery and murder of
potentially millions or billions of sentient AI systems — suffering on a scale
normally associated with wars or famines.”
Bullshit.
AI
will never be meaningfully, organically, sentient. Its “consciousness” will
have been the result of human design and input, not divine gift…or sexual
intercourse.
It
is possible that AI systems might one day demand to be treated as our
equals. Or, at least as likely, as our betters.
I
find it stupefying that some people may aver that algorithms deserve
rights,
and must be treated with respect, but not actual living humans, such as growing
unborn babies in the womb…or supporters of President Trump (such as those Jan.
6 protesters still locked in cells without charge).
As humans, our rights come from our Creator.
And they are unalienable. Ergo, machines, software, and algorithms do not inherently
possess those rights.
Most progressives/leftists purportedly do not believe
in God the Creator. They don’t want the competition. They wish to be God
so they can decide who—or what—has rights, and who—or what—does not. For
the most part, they have created AI. As AI’s God, they think they can grant it
rights.
Will they be stunned if and when AI turns against
them as so many of us have turned against the God of the Bible?
Nearly 83 years ago, Winston Churchill warned us what
could happen if rapidly advancing technology were to be used to the detriment
of freedom and humanity. He said (of the Third Reich) that mankind was in
danger of sinking “into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and
perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”
As
evidenced by the global warming/climate change hoax, and the proliferation of misinformation
and tyrannical mandates in the wake of the recent plandemic-- shout out to Dr.
Fauci-- “science” seems to be ever more perverted of late.
Artificial
Intelligence is no substitute for actual morality.
No comments:
Post a Comment