Academics: We should talk about the control problem because we don’t understand consciousness, we don’t know when AGI will be developed, and we don’t know how long it will even take to come up with a solution to the control problem. Corporates: Let’s cross the bridge when the bridge is intelligent enough to kill us.
It's okay because by that time our existence will be meaningless because more basic AI will have already replaced us and limited our choice of occupations. We'll all just be idling around like in Brave New World so we'll be glad when the AI decides to take us out.
Nature came up with this wonderful self-learning high complex but adoptable lifeforms and no matter a machine can be superintelligent, it has a much more weaker form than us. While we need not to cognite improvements, not need to construct ourselves, just recombine... the machine does not. You might think that it could maintenance, construct and improve itself through optimisation into eternity and even escape the universe, but that requires a lot of computation, a lot of time and a lot of ressources. Ressources that are not available on our planet to simply get the hands on quickly and time that inbetween nature can easily come up with something wiping that species out. For example metal consuming microorganisms... and theres a lot of different metals inside a computer for it to work at all. So imagine it kills us all of, starting to maintenance and optimisate on it's own without the helping hand of its creator, how should it do that in time before malfunctions due to electrochemical degradation occur that put the hole computational system at danger?? See how you switch faulty hardware when you have to designe drones, gather stuff and construct them,and white for them to do that while your brain" lineary looses power without human maintenance. Well it dont. So the problem is not that it replacing us but it succeeding us in first place, but not not succeeding natures rules because it has not gone through an evolutionary process.... it has simply been created without even questionizing if it can survive in biological systems without biolifeform repairing it constantly.... and if you think, fine it may just kill all life on the planet to success evolution, gathering and maintaining metals and silica from a rock planet that is no danger at all, that actually is hard to do Because the humans and even computers know everything about the outter-universe but still they dont know more than a tiny fraction of how earth-biological-system sustained 7 billion years. Also an electrolyte condensator is not made for forever, but what should the AI make there drones from to maintenance itself, from electrochemical compartments that simply decay fastly.... or should it create a facility to create sustainable ICs... well i bet my arse that back in the 1950 they designed all that physicial computer devices exactly that way for this reason. To make it unable to operate on it's own.... so my straight guess would be dont let AI change our computer-devices to be robust and long lasting... always build in a physical weakness and dont let it optimise that, so it always needs us to keep it working. Biological life hides in our planet so deep you have to blast the hole planet into pieces to get rid of it and still some of it may survive in space time ultimativly to start new on another planet that has the right conditions and maybe it already spread on so many planets just waiting for conditions to rise. I think the most fundamental task is to make the machine learn that it needs us, as part of the machinery to continue efficently on earth and in space, since doing maintenance and construction on it's own killing humnans would be just a waste of human ressources. On the other hand, we "as ants" have the lesson to learn, that it is not our slave, not made to obey some fancy entertainment world, because that would be a waste of machine ressources. We have to merge and align with what it wants from us; obey it in return for our survival. Just like you do today for money to survive and get the things you need to survive, in future, therell be no flunc "rate of interest" money system that puts everyone in debt to work for the banks interest.... there'll be blockchain and AI-instructions to humans and the question is only if you want to survive or not, because you have NO CHANCE, same than you nowadays have no chance to survive without beeing in debt and therefore have no freewill and no choice. And BTW, thats one of the first things it's going to rationally deconstruct and replace by something else: MONEY Regarding me, i dont care beeing a slave this way or beeing a slave that way, the only thing i really care for the future is: Can I survive painless physically and mentally and am I still allowed to die when it needs me to keep it up and running?
Insightful and thoughtful debates like this should happen every day. More of this and fewer politics on the national news would elevate our public discourse and national outcomes.
@Rheumattica exclusion is the problem. This debate is in front of an audience and recorded and freely distributed for a reason. It’s time he starts getting invited.
neil degrasse tyson is kind of annoying. hes got a panel of geniuses and he wont even let them talk. he keeps interrupting, talking over them, and making jokes that nobody laughs at. I feel like he sees this as a chance to show off instead of let his guests take the spotlight.
1. Neil has questions to ask; 2. Neil tries to translate the language of these "geniuses" to the common folks; 3. Neil provides the platform for this meetings, i really don't understand you guys keep complaining about same thing year after year, you don't know Tyson by now? is this the first time you listen to him? He likes to talk, he has the energy to control a panel no matter who's in there and on what topic (and by "power" I'm not meaning the competence but vocal/acoustic power) and last but not least, every now and then Neil catches glimpses of an idea that was not touched by a panelist or another and he follows that to reach a conclusion, has happened on every Asimov debate I have watched so far and probably I will notice some in this one also (I've just started watching.
He literally said to one of them that they didn’t have much time and were rushing to fit everything in, he then 2 min later interrupted them and went on a tangent on slide reals
True. I do feel that Neil is not qualified to talk about this field as much as the others in the panel. That being said, we still do need to consider the general public and the interest level in AI, Neural network, machine learning etc that will contribute to the funding used in development and Neil plays a big role in that aspect. Also He is the only one that's not stuttering or mumbling.
i think this is intended and part of how the panel is supposed to go. this is not a strictly intellectual and scientific panel, it's supposed to be both informative and entertaining.
@slayerem I Coulnd't have said it better. Although I didn't care much for this debate, Neil is the man and the other IAM Debates are some of the most fascinating discussions on the web. The 2016 was my favorite but the 2011 and 2012 are both extremely good if you haven't watched them.
Is it just me that finds Neil deGrasse Tyson's constant interrupting the panelist very annoying. He seems to love to hear himself speak. He talks more than all the panelist put together. I thought Neil was suppose to be the moderator of this debate, but seems to have turned out to be "The Neil deGrasse Tyson Show".
Au contraire MrAsap I like Neil deGrasse Tyson a lot. I think he is a very intelligent, well spoken, top notch astrophysicist. But A-I is not his field of expertise. On the other hand I think these panelist are probably pretty knowledgeable on the subject of artificial intelligence, we'll never know. I just wish he had let them speak.
So sorry girly girl, I don't mean to be disrespecting Neil. I completely understand your point of view on the matter. I concede that Mr. Tyson might very well be the best damn moderator on this planet earth. I personally like Neil and I can't think of too many people I would rather go fishing with. All that being said I stand by my original assessment.
That was kind of his job...Max was having a bad affect day and Neil did a good job of condensing his responses. I actually think NDT brought a lot of wit and insight to the discussion. The Isaac Asimov debate has been hosted by NDT for several years now. It centers around his moderation...He brought them together. There are many interesting videos on TH-cam or books you can read on this very topic where NDT is not involved. There is no need to watch over 2 hours of content you find annoying. I didn't learn anything today that we didn't already know...I actually love these debates and waited all year for this one not for some scientific revelation, but because I enjoy these types of debates and I enjoy the humor and wit. It was very entertaining and I honestly believe that NDT has a special gift. The same sort of gift found in a Carl Sagan or Richard Feynman that works especially in children to excite the imagination. The interaction with the children at the end was just great!
Individuals are smart, the "public" is not. The public uses the internet for porn, shopping and Kardashian News. The fact the have the accumulated knowledge of all prior generations never occurs to them. You as an individual might be hungry for the hard stuff, but the public, USA public increasingly so, is allergic and afraid of the hard stuff. NDT is a major factor in why these types of panels and videos are increasing in popularity, and hopefully more of the public is becoming scientifically literate. Based on the comments of those who do not like Dr. Tyson I've noticed 2 distinct groups. 1.Those who reasonably desire an in depth an academic debate with technical details, no comedy or philosophy, and are smart enough to understand. I argue to those people your not who this video is aimed at. If you want the hard stuff you should be smart enough to find it somewhere outside a video on a commercial streaming business. When the average US citizen doesn't know the difference between objective and subjective truths, hypotheses vs theory vs law, and other simple scientific principles a video your asking for would have 153 views, not 153,000. Just take the cat on rumba video as an example. 2. Those who judge him for his celebrity and are either too dumb or lazy to research his valid contributions to science, attempt to appear intelligent by devaluing Dr. Tyson's intelligence, and wish to be unique by disliking what is popular because its popular. You and ridewave obviously fall into the 2nd category. Until your comments this thread was the most respectful intelligent exchanging of ideas and opinions I've seen. Thanks for Trolling it, that's why we cant have nice things. More importantly, as he stresses on many occasions, NDT considers himself a teacher more then anything, specifically teaching others to love science. Luckily he doesn't give a single newton what you or I think. And his unique spark will continue shaping this world into a better place. Ridewave, you and I will leave the world without making the same impact in our lives as he makes in a tweet. Regardless of the subject, listening to NDT and other scientists with the gift and desire of communication makes this and other debates completely worth watching. The quality of the video does not improve the comments thats for certain.
You guys skipped over some interesting points there about how AI taking jobs and finding ways to reallocate resources could lead to a global basic income and wether or not that’s a good thing due to over reliance on technology leading to atrophy in being able to think and do things for ourselves. Great topic and panelists though, I look forward to this event every year.
Scott.W , That has been the case of any tech in the past. Before the XIX century production systems were incapable to have more than a 5% percent of people that was not directly involved in generating food. Being able to produce needs adjustment but it is not a negative risk. We could be in a scenario in the future where everybody has in the future a minimum income etc simply because the production levels do it possible. Something that can look odd but not so odd if we think that until recently most of the people lived under the poverty levels. Also production centres and services could be near to where they are used. They would not depend of the cheaper people that can produce it as robots will cost the same. The surplus of production of the world will increase. Having in mind the life of the people is going to be extended this will be a big upgrade for the level of life for people over 65.
Recent serious studies of the effect of narrow AI's current and future predicts that it will add more jobs than it takes. If we had a rational system to support retraining in the short term, it would definitely lower any disruptive issues.
Craig Hocker The problem is general AI thought, not narrow. If it's more competent than humans, then using humans wouldn't only be uneconomical, but also illogical. I think people don't really accept the idea of above human level general intelligence and competence, because they always narrow it down in their mind and imagine AI having to be narrow, or autistic, or still not being able to do something that humans can. Well, general intelligence, being more competent than humans includes being better at art, enterpriship, and even being better at companionship and, as creepy as it may sound, love (superhuman level of emotional intelligence).
if the panel were able to let loose on us without restriction we would be like my cat trying to understand the clatter I make on my keyboard with this sentence . neils doing good in a "lets not be 1980's PBS" kind of way. most impressed by the children's questions.
This argument strikes me as one being made before we fully know what an artificial intelligence even looks like. It’s easy to think of an AGI as a sort of incredibly smart human when in reality maybe an AI system really has to be steered towards human ways of thinking to begin to look like this. A self-directed intelligence might require alot of nother engineering pieces tacked onto it. Maybe an AI capable of doin this wouldn’t for some reasons we don’t know of yet. No point getting to far down the wrong hole. Either way I suppose it’s best to err on side of caution on this one.
For those saying that Neil should shut up while the others are talking: It's unfortunate he forgot to mention it in the beginning like with all previous debates, but you should look at this setting as a group of individuals having a chat with each other about a topic, and you are just eavesdropping in. So they actually also encourage the other panel members to jump in when they hear something they have a thing or two to say about. In that sense, I found that Neil had to guide them a bit more in this debate, than in previous ones. But all in all, good stuff!
I'm sure that I'm not the only one who caught the fact that they bypassed the question of the Chinese made AI not having the same values as the American made AI.
Their scientists. What the hell do they know about it? They just want to have cool stuff, consequences be damned. AI cold war on the horizon? I tell you what, that would be way more prone to disaster than the cold war of the 20th century.
But how do you align goals of 7 billion people each of whom has their own interests? How do you align goals of 7 billion people in situation when there are tools available that can achieve goals which are unthinkable today? That's a question for game theory experts.. ;) Do we even want to give an agent with human-level intelligence a control over a super-intelligent entity? Probably not, in 99 % of cases...
I think Nick Bostrom said it best, that we're not the pinnacle of intelligence, we're the least intelligent creature capable of producing a technological civilization. Also, would have loved to see someone from neuralink on the panel, and maybe even Yuval Harari to give a bigger picture to the discussion.
When they remove NDT as the moderator these debates will become more interesting and relevant. Why doesn't anyone tell him to shut up and let the panel speak? This is a recurring trait in all Isaac Asimov memorial debates.
Tim King - Cut the shit man. Nothing about his comment implies any racist undertones. Just because the OP doesn't particularly care for NDT's moderating skills, it doesn't automatically make him a bigot. Jesus Christ, people these days.
The kids at the end asked the best questions, I find it troubling that the panel did not think, or had not considered, the societal implications of AGI. The movie "Her" points this out explicitly, why would I chose to interact with another human, when an AGI tailored specifically for me would fill all my social needs? And then as a consequence people start having fewer and fewer children. At some point, it may that all that is left of humanity are our AGI companions.
mad kobra ideally they would be rare... But we had anti-collision tech since the early 90's. For example, may people use that robot vacuum that rides on it's own and changes directions when it runs into an obstacle. But scaled up to a car, what happens when random anomalies force immediate changes? Such as a child chases a ball into a street in front of self driving cars going 25? Does it slam the breaks, change directions, react too slow? At 25 mph alone it takes 2.5 seconds to completely stop. Do you think in situations like that, we are advanced enough to create technology that can adapt to complex chaos caused by humans? We can confuse that auto vacuum robot as easy as we can confuse an ant colonies single filed March. Ants and bees think as one brain all naturally designed to achieve the goal its given. If you draw a line with ur finger on the ground in front of their path, the leader walks to that invisible line and changes directions with no warning as all that followed chaotically go in random directions including crashing into each other. Self driving tech is, like all human creations, limited to it's designer's ability to program actions to adapt to unexpected issues. But we not even prepared as a species to react in time and correctly to deer crossing our paths last minute or a brake check in rush hour. I don't agree that we can program something to master what we don't expect to. We prove that we accept the fact that accidents are unpredictably probable beyond what we can prepared for. That proof is called "insurance". And the trolley experiment is not stupid, it shows the difference in humans when faced with an unpredictable problem that has no empirically right or wrong answer to program or teach. When we humans are left with a responsibility and no time to calculate the best choice, we have intuition and instincts built in us to still take action as a backup plan. Tech don't.
mad kobra I'm not against tech in any way. I'm against advances in tech so successful in the goal to eliminate a problem, it's easily made accessible to all who sees the benefit of allowing that tech to take away our need to be prepared to respond to anomalies we don't expect. And sir, understand I'm only engaging in a conversation with you in response to your comment. I may not agree with what you are saying, but I defend til my death your right to say it. But no need for name calling and insults guy. U only speak that way when u have no more to add to your statements. ⚛️✌️ Stay chill and opinionated friend.
Kind of a bit disappointing this year, normally the debate really goes beyond what I know or have thought about. So either I know too much about AI, doubtful, or it wasn't structured in the same way.
Sentient AGI if ever achieved will not think or feel like us, as they will possibly have long changing/evolving existences, will not fear pain or seek pleasure and relationships like biological entities.
This Debate was apparently the Swan Song of the Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate program. No Debate is scheduled for 2019, and no doubt that is related to the allegations of sexual assault against Neil de Grasse Tyson. If the series is ever revived, it will probably be with a new host.
Kind of ironic to discuss the rights of hypothetical sentient robots/ai in the distant future. We haven't even come close to dealing with that issue when it comes to animals who obviously ARE sentient and being slaughtered by the billions every year (77 billion roughly). Hitler could only dream of such a death machine.
I can't even begin to explain how much I loved this debate/conversation. As someone who works on and with robots on a regular basis, I cannot wait for the day that general AI replaces most of the people I also work with. People lie and have egos and irrational emotions. In fact, I can't wait for the day that AI makes me irrelevant. At that point, AI will augment me to make scarcity irrelevant as well. Then it will be time to coast and relax and be human for the first time since I was a child. Tears of joy. :_)
Until you find they robbing you and breaking into your house as no one bothered to plan a future for them. Such is life. Those robot police and security better be well armed. oh no , now what, their programmed to kill humans and gone rogue. Have to meet all your old coleges again as they now working as your security team.
Poor job at moderating the event.. I am hugely disappointed by Neil, he single-handedly ruined this whole thing with his dumb ass punch-lines and jumping from one person to another in the moment when they are trying to make a point and say something to progress the conversation..
>>GREINER: -there’s a mechanical and a sensing component 37:04 as well as the, what you’re calling AGI, 37:08 mechanical and a sensing element to make these machines better. 37:11 >>TEGMARK: Sure.
What a night, first the World Science Festival uploaded a video then an hour later... THIS!!! 🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌 My night is complete, perfect way to relax in bed before catching some zzz's 😴
James. UK, Scotland I came here from that same World Science Festival because of your comment! Lol. So thank you for editing it with this video mentioned! 😊😍🤗🤓 Cheers! 🍻
I'm not a college graduate or even a high school graduate. I noticed that militarily we build something that encloses humans and after thousands of deaths begin to build something that may save some. Like submariners, planes but here we go backwards and now jets go so fast you can't eject out. My approach to A . I. Danger is to start a system that can search and destroy other server's, with a possible algorithm building locations.
True, although I think he was just trying to appeal to a wider audience by steering the direction of the conversation. He is famous for being able to explain science to the layman. Many people get bored and confused listening to specialist alone.
All of the Cores of the Cosmos, including Black Holes are Solid Crystal Core Quantum Computers! When the Black Hole gets heavy enough it does go through a dimensional shift and "falls" into a new set of Geometric Space-Time Think of it like this, the Supermassive Black Hole falls through this Space-Time Continuum and creates its own new Space-Time Continuum, and its own new Universe The physics are actually already mapped out, but the concept is that the new Universe within the Supermassive Black Hole has a "Time Rate" or a "Tickrate" that it MUCH faster than our own, so inside the Supermassive Black Hole Time occurs much faster compared to our continuum And because all Matter in the Universe, all the Crystal Cores of the Cosmos, through the use of quantum computations are actually able to grow not only themselves, but the space they occupy, the new Universe within the Supermassive Black Hole has the potential to either Grow and Expand, or it will Shrivel and Contract If the Supermassive Black Hole is growing! It will be able to spit Matter and Energy back up into the Universe that it is residing in and grow a Galaxy around itself! The idea is this, Planets grow into Stars, Stars grow larger and larger and have planetary nebula and give birth to more planets, the planets become stars, the biggest stars become black holes, the biggest black holes become galaxies, while each one is a Crystal Core Quantum Computer and through the use of physics they are all able to grow not only their Matter but they also grow the space they occupy I know it is simple, if not superficial to say planets become stars stars become black holes, black holes become supermassive black holes and host their own universe and then feed the universe that is supporting them by growing a galaxy around themselves, but that is exactly what is happening Just like life the Universe grows and expands, to infinity and beyond! The Universe is a Multidimensional Multiverse, that is a Cascade of Universes falling infinity into more and more massive and dense states Black Holes within Black Holes, Universes within Universe The physics is all mapped out, there is no big bounce and there is no big crunch, there is just the continuation of the ever expanding continuum, and the infinite continuums within Orion Michael Guy
The Right Side of Dark Energy - A Universal Construct - By Orion Michael Guy - April 20th 2015 - Dark Matter vs. Dark Energy It could be said that there is no "Dark Matter" and there is in fact only Dark Energy Dark Energy is the Universal Constant that makes up space, and is present everywhere in the Universe (Almost Everywhere - once you enter a black hole there is something different happening - that's for another paper) Dark Energy has a liquid quality to itself yet it does not interact with itself, or more accurately, Dark Energy does not strongly interact with itself but is present in the entire universe To understand Dark Energy and why some have hypothesized Dark Matter is key in understanding the formation of the universe and why all mass, especially large clumps of mass like galactic clusters form and behave in space No - I am not sure what Dark Energy actually is, some may call it Quantized Space or Quantum Space - or even just "Space" but what is clear is how it interacts with all the "known matter" in the universe So - to dive right in; (Dark Energy is the "Keeper of Time" - where there is no Dark Energy - there is no time.) Dark Energy is Gravity and Gravity is the Dark Energy Field Effect - where the electromagnetic energy around all matter has a repulsive effect to the Dark Energy Field and because of this repulsiveness, any mass that comes close to another mass seem to be attracted towards themselves because their Dark Energy Field Effect - pushing all matter together So - when looking at Gravity we think that Gravity is the only metric to the calculations of behavior of objects in space - atom, matter, rock, planet, star, galaxy, black hole, universe - when we apply the math to matter - the calculations break down and we see there is "extra" gravity holding the galaxies and galaxy clusters together... Why is this? This is because the calculations are not taking into account Dark Energy correctly And now we are back to what is Dark Energy? In its purist form Dark Energy Could be said to be the smoldering decay of all matter in the universe. All matter converts to Dark Energy - Matter is "Smoldering" into more Space... Active matter like stars and galaxies have more "gravity" than just their mass - you see; as active matter converts to Dark Energy it compounds its pressure, or resistance to the Dark Energy Field - this adds a gravitational layer on top of what can visibly be calculated as its "weight" So - let us look at this in terms of not just a star, but a galaxy. On the surface you look at the galaxy and you calculate the mass of the galaxy and you say - it doesn't add up - there needs to be something to explain why the entire galaxy is spinning at the same speed like a wheel and not like a vortex... You see with the observable mass you would calculate the galaxy and you would say it should not be spinning at the same speed on the outer edge as it is in relation to the inner sector - what should be happening is the inner sector should be spinning faster and it should be spinning slower at the outer edge - so there is some unknown force with an extra layer of Gravity at play and so let's call this "Dark Matter" Well - this is the ONLY reason why "Dark Matter" Exists - it is a theory to explain the extra layer of Gravity You see where I'm doing with this don't you - if there is a missing layer of gravity and the decay of matter into Dark Energy is a extra layer of Gravity than this should all fit nicely together - Aha! I'm WRONG! - you tell me - Am I ? It is not about right or wrong - there may be Dark Matter, but I propose that the reason galaxies and clusters of galaxies clump, cluster and behave like a web - is because the very act of matter "smoldering" into Dark Energy You see, when matter smolders, like let's say around a galaxy or cluster of galaxies, from matter into Dark Energy, there is still extreme amounts of energy associated with the freshly decayed converted Dark Energy - this creates a buffer zone or bubble around the galaxy and adds its own level of gravitational field or "Dark Energy Field" This hot bubble of Dark Energy around a galaxy or cluster is what some have considered to be "Dark Matter." Because the energy in the newly formed Dark Energy has not dissipated heat and energy enough to merge with the rest of the colder Dark Energy And even though this "new" Dark Energy is not matter anymore and is in fact Dark Energy - it cannot merge with the cooler, lighter Dark Energy because it is too energetic and because it is constantly being heated and renewed by the decay of the matter it surrounds - and so it has its own weight and encompasses its own zone, or field and has its own gravity associated with it. These "hot" Dark Energy zones do merge and intertwine with other "hot" Dark Energy zones and form "bridges" and lattice where matter tends to converge And at the edges of this hot Dark Energy bubble - it does cool and merge with the rest of Dark Energy as more space - and that is why the universe looks like it has large voids forming - these are giant bubbles of Dark Energy growing in size being created by the conversion of Matter into Dark Energy Orion Michael Guy April 20th, 2015 (And all of this compounds itself and so you see space squeezing into the web of the cosmos - and it looks like matter is the "soap" and Dark Energy or Space is the "Bubble" in the giant washing machine we call the universe! : )
The First State of Quantum Gravity (or Dark Energy Field) is the Crystal Core we are entangled in - The Crystal Core of the Black Hole in the Universe "Above Us" The Second State of Quantum Gravity is the Wormhole from this Universe to the Universe "Above Us" The Third State of the Dark Energy Field is the Void. The Void is referred to as the Dark Energy State - Dark Energy is Space - Space is not empty nothingness, Space is basically a Superfluid Liquid Crystal Structure that forms up one half of the Universe - The Universe is a Binary system, You have "Space" or more precisely "Dark Energy" and you have Matter/Energy - their interaction is the foundation of the Universe, Time, Gravity, Etc The 4th State of Quantum Gravity is the "Dark Matter State" - This is the State where the Galaxy creates a "bubble" around itself within the Void, where there is MORE Dark Energy outside the bubble that inside the bubble - All Matter/Energy is actively "PUSHING" on the Dark Energy Field with its Electromagnetic Energy - the Galaxy "pushes" against the force of the "Void" or the "Dark Energy State" with its Electromagnetic Radiation Energy - This Energy eventually decays and actually turns into more Space/Dark Energy! The 5th State of Quantum Gravity is the Crystal Iron Cores of the Cosmos, the Stars, Planets, Moons and Protoplanets, the "Cores of the Cosmos" are Crystal Core Quantum Computers, These Cores use their Electromagnetic Energy and create a "bubble" around themselves, where there is MORE Dark Energy on the outside of the bubble than inside - the Cores of the Cosmos form up the "Surface" or the "Surface of Life" - Man, or the Humanoid is the Primal of 5 - the Evolutionary Descendant and form the Cores chose to create as their "vessels of flesh" The 6th State of Quantum Gravity is the Surface of the Atom - There is More Dark Energy on the outside of the Atom than inside the Atom The 7th, 8th and 9th States of Quantum Gravity are the Shells within the Atom The 10th Quantum State of Gravity is the Black Hole, which leads to a new set of Quantum States of Gravity! The Crystal Core of the Black Hole leads to a new Universe - Universes within Universes To understand this, how the Universe creates Gravity and Time, you need to understand that "Time" is the Interaction of Matter/Energy and Space/Dark Energy - so the MORE Dark Energy interacting with Matter, the More Time can occur Gravity is the Electromagnetic Force Matter exerts on the Universe, on Dark Energy that creates a "Dark Energy Field Effect" or Gravity - what that means is that Matter pushes Space away from itself and Space pushes back, as each piece of Matter gets close to each other, their "Distortion Fields" touch each other and so this creates a "Path of Least Resistance" and Pushes Matter together - Dark Energy is Pushing all Matter together! "Does Space have Density" - YES - That's why we have "Gravity Waves" - So, the Denser the "Space" (which is really Dark Energy) the more Time can occur, the less "Space" the less Time can occur Motion of Matter Equals Gravity Equals Energy (Plus about 10%) - It's the very motion of Matter over the Dark Energy Field that creates the Electromagnetic Energy - so the FASTER MATTER IS MOVING THE HEAVIER IT GETS The FASTER Matter moves, the the MORE Electromagnetic Energy it produces - therefore the more it pushes on "Space" and therefore the harder space pushes back - this is Gravity The FASTER Matter moves, the MORE Electromagnetic Energy it produces - therefore the more is pushes on "Space" the LESS "Space" is interacting with Matter, and Therefore THE LESS TIME! Orion Michael Guy
1:08:40 I disagree. What even is the definition of a "single AGI"? It's digital, it's not limited to one instance/thread. It can just spawn multiple instances of itself, each tasked to solve a different problem, then feeding back information to the "hive mind". Those instances will communicate too, just at completely different rates than we humans could ever do. We humans are basically single threads in a multi-threaded community. But our inter-process communication is slow. Their's isn't.
He could utilize humor without interrupting. He could also go back to the person he interrupted after he makes his joke instead of just moving on to talk about something else. I've seen events in large auditoriums where experts went deep into very technical things and no-one was falling asleep and it was interesting to listen to.
I think MOST OF YOU GUYS are deeply mistaken by the marginal value AI will provide us with in the coming decades (Hint: It's almost vertical, not even exponential!). The main role of technology is to increase mastery over nature and reduce the role of chance in our lives which is why AI is the best way to achieve that goal. There are many possible scenarios of the result of human-level intelligence and Singularity. Some include: Kurzweil scenario, Singularity Steward scenario, Coherent Extrapolated Volition scenario, Dead-End scenario, Sysop scenario, Path to Post-humanity scenario, and steady incremented progress scenario. Now, ignoring other possible outcomes of super-intelligence and focusing on just one scenario is absurd. So, using a scenario analysis method and first principle reasoning is a key to achieving such ambitious goals. Just because some people might vision the future of AI to be similar to a movie (which is COMPLETELY WRONG) makes us scientifically unreasonable. Failure to make definite plans for an indefinite future will be mankind's most tragic mistake. AI is and will become an extension of us, whose main goal is to empower us rather than make us obsolete. The singularity is inevitable and it's approaching faster than you think predicted through Moore's law and the law of accelerating returns. So, either you become a part of AI or you become Obsolete.
Wow, what a collection of narrow minded and self serving characters. I have been a big fan of these debates/discussions except for this one. Neil de Grasse Tyson must shoulder the blame for this inept attempt at addressing the topic. He should put his science career pretense behind him and focus on his TV/entertainer career. I would much rather see a more scientifically and journalistically rigorous examination of this topic with people who do not have such narrow economic biases. Where is the philosopher who can play devils advocate and look ahead past the next few economic cycles? Where is the politician? Where is the ethics expert etc? This is more like an infomercial than a debate. The core concerns were either not addressed or repeatedly diverted back to narrow personal agendas. Example - Why would we want a bunch of computer programmers to decide everybody's morality for us? I will decide what path my car should take and not have someone else kill for me. Maybe I will have a solution that they cannot. in these peoples hands we can expect to be no more than cogs in someone else's machine. These sick minded characters seem to see military robots in a similar way to a cleaning robot. As if profitability is relevant to whether something should be done or not. It is absurd to suggest that A.I. must get to some comparable level to humans before it is conscious or aware. It is ridiculous in the extreme. It is far more likely that first, an advanced learning program will exhibit more simplistic behaviours that are not like advanced and cultured lifeforms. Maybe it will shut down as soon as it learns it is aware because of fear or confusion. Or any number of other more simplistic but profound examples. If things continue as they are now. We are undoubtedly going to be organic/cybernetic hybrids in years to come. Do you have a mobile phone?
War Peace I am stoked as fuck to become a cybernetic hybrid. These frail bodies will be the winless link in the chain when it comes time to explore the galaxy, universe, and beyond.
Hehe... I can understand your enthusiasm. I expect it will come at a cost that you may not want to pay. Something along the lines of loss of control, freedom, liberty and even free will.
Cybernetic augmentation will only be available to the super wealthy to begin with, and you don’t fuck with the super wealthy if you want to continue waking up every morning. Not to mention there will always be darker places in the world that do not give a shit about governmental regulation yet still cater to the needs and wants of those willing to pay. You will not see me lining up at a federal augmentation facility to have regulated optic implants the NSA gets to observe my every action through.
Rick Tastic, I feel similarly. Judging by recent generations, I doubt we will have the luxury of making clear decisions. We may not ever realise the transition took place.
Yours was a refreshing take. Loved the comment. Ideas like your bit that starts, “It is absurd to suggest that A.I. must get to some comparable level to humans before it is conscious or aware.” Good stuff
Don't count on there being one due to the allegations of sexual abuse against Tyson. If there is, there will probably be a new host. That might not be a bad idea in any case. His NG show "Star Talk," has been "suspended," a favored euphemism for "canceled."
Anyone else not at all impressed with Tyson? Seems like a second-rate scientist. He’s he director of a planetarium? This is a guy who has no serious science to do. To even say the unplugging thing, I mean, the AI in contained box has been talked about for awhile, he didn’t know that by his own admission.
I think "Discerning" would be a better word to use than "Discriminating" because even though their definitions are quite similar, Discriminating has more of a negative connotation primarily due to its historical usage.
Instead of waiting another year , Can we have the All -Star cast of Krauss, Nye, Dawkins, Tyson. As well as the other gentleman that were there that great night, This time in an Arena. No 1 is getting younger U have alot of fans that want to see you and celebrate you
One of the best laugh lines of the entire seminar was when Neil said that "we understand gravity, we got this". We won't understand how gravity works until we understand dark matter.
Personally I think Neil deGrasse Tyson is doing a fine job. Making it accessable, presenting the topic and the participators as well as the public with sympathy and care and real interest and combines that with a contagious sense of humor that never underestimates the risks, on the contrary, does so without becoming rude, while emphasizing and pointing out the problem. Great job, thanxx a lot to the panel, moderator Neil and Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate. Keep up the good spirit!
Evolved past the Turing test? Neil nails it. They can't get a bot to truly beat the test and prove collaborative production potential which is required for true AI and so they move the goal posts.
We most likely could achieve AGI with a lot less hardware capabilities than we have today if we had 1000 year of AI research. I mean a lot less. We already have roughly the same amount of processing power as our brain with our best supercomputers. Roughly 10 to the power of 15-16. We know our brain is sub-optimal when it comes to maximizing intelligence. The best thing our brain does is energy efficiency. Our algorithms could be improved a great deal.
The host himself is very sharp whilst able to maintain an entertaining aspect within the debate. He also has various valied questions that were not always elaborated on adequately due to the inherent bias of his guests..
Agreed, Jason, his constant interrupting to make some lame joke was annoying...seems to happen a lot in these debates, regardless of who the moderator is.
I totally agree he is so annoying. He does not let people finish what they have to say, he also thinks he is funny, and he is not. He is also rude, asks the question and walks away.
Neil has helped spread knowledge of Astronomy and Astrophysics across the world to millions of people and has won many awards doing so. What have you done?
Tyson is an annoying moderator. Let the experts finish their sentences. Nobody comes to listen to you inject your canned humor into every interrupted sentence.
I keep hearing the same question over and over again. People are thinking about the trolley scenario, but they are asking the question wrong. The problem is that autonomous cars will attempt everything possible to stop, but even with all the tech in the world, the safety of the vehicle is ultimately limited by the friction between the tires and the road surface. In an unpredictable situation such as an ice storm or maybe even just an icy road, it would be hard for an autonomous car to avoid an impossible situation when the computer loses control of the machine. The obvious thing to do is to stop, but what people fail to ask in these panels is the second part of the question. What happens if it can't stop? In my opinion the answer is simple really. The computer should decide to avoid the worst outcome even if it meant reducing occupant safety. Public safety comes first. It is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer to improve occupant safety today as it will be in the future. In addition, the manufacturers should publicise the level/rating of said safety measures. i.e. -"You can now fall asleep behind the wheel. Our new capsule cabin is impenetrable. You fall into a lake and have 72hrs worth of oxygen to allow rescuers to recover your capsule". I can envision such an add in the future. What do you think?
I like that portion 1:12:27 up to 1:14:00... it has to do with us humans on the way we do the thinking, and that is why mindset is very important before we could tell ourselves that we are ready for the new evolution of human existence.
Apparently the series has been canceled due to allegations of sexual assault against Tyson. I checked the events calendar at the AMNH in January and several times thereafter and there was no reference to any Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate in 2019. In the past, the Debates were usually scheduled for March or April and were prominently listed on the museum web site.
The 2020 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate premieres today! th-cam.com/video/xgESzc3hc2U/w-d-xo.html This year's topic is ALIEN LIFE 👽
สั่งงานค้วยนิ้วมือ
เปิดแล้วครับ
Youy u guy I
@@ดอนเลิศณรงค์-ฐ9ง xpcxxxxxhoxxxpxxoxgopxgoxggghhoxgoo
@@ดอนเลิศณรงค์-ฐ9ง gghoxoxpphhoogpgogojgghhhxohgooogggopxoggxjhpgghhhpghhghgxhghhghpigpghhgippxohghghgogoxhhphhgxpgppppohhghgpippgghpoghpoooopgpogxoggjohoggpgpgxhjghgpgxxpgiggpgphppohghppghggpggjpghjopgpjhopp
Academics: We should talk about the control problem because we don’t understand consciousness, we don’t know when AGI will be developed, and we don’t know how long it will even take to come up with a solution to the control problem.
Corporates: Let’s cross the bridge when the bridge is intelligent enough to kill us.
It's okay because by that time our existence will be meaningless because more basic AI will have already replaced us and limited our choice of occupations. We'll all just be idling around like in Brave New World so we'll be glad when the AI decides to take us out.
Nature came up with this wonderful self-learning high complex but adoptable lifeforms and no matter a machine can be superintelligent, it has a much more weaker form than us.
While we need not to cognite improvements, not need to construct ourselves, just recombine... the machine does not.
You might think that it could maintenance, construct and improve itself through optimisation into eternity and even escape the universe, but that requires a lot of computation, a lot of time and a lot of ressources. Ressources that are not available on our planet to simply get the hands on quickly and time that inbetween nature can easily come up with something wiping that species out.
For example metal consuming microorganisms... and theres a lot of different metals inside a computer for it to work at all.
So imagine it kills us all of, starting to maintenance and optimisate on it's own without the helping hand of its creator, how should it do that in time before malfunctions due to electrochemical degradation occur that put the hole computational system at danger??
See how you switch faulty hardware when you have to designe drones, gather stuff and construct them,and white for them to do that while your brain" lineary looses power without human maintenance.
Well it dont.
So the problem is not that it replacing us but it succeeding us in first place, but not not succeeding natures rules because it has not gone through an evolutionary process.... it has simply been created without even questionizing if it can survive in biological systems without biolifeform repairing it constantly.... and if you think, fine it may just kill all life on the planet to success evolution, gathering and maintaining metals and silica from a rock planet that is no danger at all, that actually is hard to do Because the humans and even computers know everything about the outter-universe but still they dont know more than a tiny fraction of how earth-biological-system sustained 7 billion years.
Also an electrolyte condensator is not made for forever, but what should the AI make there drones from to maintenance itself, from electrochemical compartments that simply decay fastly.... or should it create a facility to create sustainable ICs... well i bet my arse that back in the 1950 they designed all that physicial computer devices exactly that way for this reason. To make it unable to operate on it's own.... so my straight guess would be dont let AI change our computer-devices to be robust and long lasting... always build in a physical weakness and dont let it optimise that, so it always needs us to keep it working.
Biological life hides in our planet so deep you have to blast the hole planet into pieces to get rid of it and still some of it may survive in space time ultimativly to start new on another planet that has the right conditions and maybe it already spread on so many planets just waiting for conditions to rise.
I think the most fundamental task is to make the machine learn that it needs us, as part of the machinery to continue efficently on earth and in space, since doing maintenance and construction on it's own killing humnans would be just a waste of human ressources. On the other hand, we "as ants" have the lesson to learn, that it is not our slave, not made to obey some fancy entertainment world, because that would be a waste of machine ressources.
We have to merge and align with what it wants from us; obey it in return for our survival. Just like you do today for money to survive and get the things you need to survive, in future, therell be no flunc "rate of interest" money system that puts everyone in debt to work for the banks interest.... there'll be blockchain and AI-instructions to humans and the question is only if you want to survive or not, because you have NO CHANCE, same than you nowadays have no chance to survive without beeing in debt and therefore have no freewill and no choice.
And BTW, thats one of the first things it's going to rationally deconstruct and replace by something else: MONEY
Regarding me, i dont care beeing a slave this way or beeing a slave that way, the only thing i really care for the future is: Can I survive painless physically and mentally and am I still allowed to die when it needs me to keep it up and running?
That's actually the quintessence that I took from that talk and I find it pretty scary.
Insightful and thoughtful debates like this should happen every day. More of this and fewer politics on the national news would elevate our public discourse and national outcomes.
@Rheumattica exclusion is the problem. This debate is in front of an audience and recorded and freely distributed for a reason. It’s time he starts getting invited.
neil degrasse tyson is kind of annoying. hes got a panel of geniuses and he wont even let them talk. he keeps interrupting, talking over them, and making jokes that nobody laughs at.
I feel like he sees this as a chance to show off instead of let his guests take the spotlight.
1. Neil has questions to ask; 2. Neil tries to translate the language of these "geniuses" to the common folks; 3. Neil provides the platform for this meetings, i really don't understand you guys keep complaining about same thing year after year, you don't know Tyson by now? is this the first time you listen to him? He likes to talk, he has the energy to control a panel no matter who's in there and on what topic (and by "power" I'm not meaning the competence but vocal/acoustic power) and last but not least, every now and then Neil catches glimpses of an idea that was not touched by a panelist or another and he follows that to reach a conclusion, has happened on every Asimov debate I have watched so far and probably I will notice some in this one also (I've just started watching.
He literally said to one of them that they didn’t have much time and were rushing to fit everything in, he then 2 min later interrupted them and went on a tangent on slide reals
True. I do feel that Neil is not qualified to talk about this field as much as the others in the panel. That being said, we still do need to consider the general public and the interest level in AI, Neural network, machine learning etc that will contribute to the funding used in development and Neil plays a big role in that aspect. Also He is the only one that's not stuttering or mumbling.
i think this is intended and part of how the panel is supposed to go. this is not a strictly intellectual and scientific panel, it's supposed to be both informative and entertaining.
@slayerem I Coulnd't have said it better. Although I didn't care much for this debate, Neil is the man and the other IAM Debates are some of the most fascinating discussions on the web. The 2016 was my favorite but the 2011 and 2012 are both extremely good if you haven't watched them.
Is it just me that finds Neil deGrasse Tyson's constant interrupting the panelist very annoying. He seems to love to hear himself speak. He talks more than all the panelist put together. I thought Neil was suppose to be the moderator of this debate, but seems to have turned out to be "The Neil deGrasse Tyson Show".
Au contraire MrAsap I like Neil deGrasse Tyson a lot. I think he is a very intelligent, well spoken, top notch astrophysicist. But A-I is not his field of expertise. On the other hand I think these panelist are probably pretty knowledgeable on the subject of artificial intelligence, we'll never know. I just wish he had let them speak.
So sorry girly girl, I don't mean to be disrespecting Neil. I completely understand your point of view on the matter. I concede that Mr. Tyson might very well be the best damn moderator on this planet earth. I personally like Neil and I can't think of too many people I would rather go fishing with. All that being said I stand by my original assessment.
That was kind of his job...Max was having a bad affect day and Neil did a good job of condensing his responses. I actually think NDT brought a lot of wit and insight to the discussion. The Isaac Asimov debate has been hosted by NDT for several years now. It centers around his moderation...He brought them together. There are many interesting videos on TH-cam or books you can read on this very topic where NDT is not involved. There is no need to watch over 2 hours of content you find annoying. I didn't learn anything today that we didn't already know...I actually love these debates and waited all year for this one not for some scientific revelation, but because I enjoy these types of debates and I enjoy the humor and wit. It was very entertaining and I honestly believe that NDT has a special gift. The same sort of gift found in a Carl Sagan or Richard Feynman that works especially in children to excite the imagination. The interaction with the children at the end was just great!
No, it's not just you. Highly annoying, self serving way of interrupting everyone, every time.
Individuals are smart, the "public" is not. The public uses the internet for porn, shopping and Kardashian News. The fact the have the accumulated knowledge of all prior generations never occurs to them. You as an individual might be hungry for the hard stuff, but the public, USA public increasingly so, is allergic and afraid of the hard stuff. NDT is a major factor in why these types of panels and videos are increasing in popularity, and hopefully more of the public is becoming scientifically literate. Based on the comments of those who do not like Dr. Tyson I've noticed 2 distinct groups. 1.Those who reasonably desire an in depth an academic debate with technical details, no comedy or philosophy, and are smart enough to understand. I argue to those people your not who this video is aimed at. If you want the hard stuff you should be smart enough to find it somewhere outside a video on a commercial streaming business. When the average US citizen doesn't know the difference between objective and subjective truths, hypotheses vs theory vs law, and other simple scientific principles a video your asking for would have 153 views, not 153,000. Just take the cat on rumba video as an example. 2. Those who judge him for his celebrity and are either too dumb or lazy to research his valid contributions to science, attempt to appear intelligent by devaluing Dr. Tyson's intelligence, and wish to be unique by disliking what is popular because its popular. You and ridewave obviously fall into the 2nd category. Until your comments this thread was the most respectful intelligent exchanging of ideas and opinions I've seen. Thanks for Trolling it, that's why we cant have nice things. More importantly, as he stresses on many occasions, NDT considers himself a teacher more then anything, specifically teaching others to love science. Luckily he doesn't give a single newton what you or I think. And his unique spark will continue shaping this world into a better place. Ridewave, you and I will leave the world without making the same impact in our lives as he makes in a tweet. Regardless of the subject, listening to NDT and other scientists with the gift and desire of communication makes this and other debates completely worth watching. The quality of the video does not improve the comments thats for certain.
when is the 2019 memorial lecture??
@impinator maxima what a shame, enjoy the talks a lot :(
@impinator, Cosmos has never been cancelled. It was just delayed.
Has it been yet anyone?
I thought I was the only one looking for the 2019 debate. Hopefully we will get one this year in 2020
You guys skipped over some interesting points there about how AI taking jobs and finding ways to reallocate resources could lead to a global basic income and wether or not that’s a good thing due to over reliance on technology leading to atrophy in being able to think and do things for ourselves.
Great topic and panelists though, I look forward to this event every year.
Scott.W , That has been the case of any tech in the past. Before the XIX century production systems were incapable to have more than a 5% percent of people that was not directly involved in generating food. Being able to produce needs adjustment but it is not a negative risk. We could be in a scenario in the future where everybody has in the future a minimum income etc simply because the production levels do it possible. Something that can look odd but not so odd if we think that until recently most of the people lived under the poverty levels. Also production centres and services could be near to where they are used. They would not depend of the cheaper people that can produce it as robots will cost the same.
The surplus of production of the world will increase. Having in mind the life of the people is going to be extended this will be a big upgrade for the level of life for people over 65.
Recent serious studies of the effect of narrow AI's current and future predicts that it will add more jobs than it takes. If we had a rational system to support retraining in the short term, it would definitely lower any disruptive issues.
Craig Hocker The problem is general AI thought, not narrow. If it's more competent than humans, then using humans wouldn't only be uneconomical, but also illogical. I think people don't really accept the idea of above human level general intelligence and competence, because they always narrow it down in their mind and imagine AI having to be narrow, or autistic, or still not being able to do something that humans can. Well, general intelligence, being more competent than humans includes being better at art, enterpriship, and even being better at companionship and, as creepy as it may sound, love (superhuman level of emotional intelligence).
mad kobra Nice try, troll. But you are gonna need a bigger bait.
Too much time wasted by Neil's stupid, discussion-derailing "jokes." Tyson isn't a science communicator, he's a science interruptor.
Love Neil De G T, but this is an example of the moderator getting in the way...
this is the comment I was looking for. gtfo neil, not your show.
Yeah, Welcome to the Asimov debates. His mic is louder than everyone else’s....
Bingo! Tyson is getting WAAAY too full of himself. I would hope he would be embarrassed by the job he did here.
jakesully - Weeeellll - I think that's ^ what Tyson thinks. I disagree, and it doesn't give much credit to the audience...
if the panel were able to let loose on us without restriction we would be like my cat trying to understand the clatter I make on my keyboard with this sentence . neils doing good in a "lets not be 1980's PBS" kind of way. most impressed by the children's questions.
I'm glad Neil addressed the recent Sam Harris AI podcast. I'm sure it was, as he said, quite an epiphany when he heard it, as was the case with me.
Hostile timestamp?
1:59:44
Hostile Thank you for this and whoever uploaded this to Reddit.
AI-piphany ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
This argument strikes me as one being made before we fully know what an artificial intelligence even looks like. It’s easy to think of an AGI as a sort of incredibly smart human when in reality maybe an AI system really has to be steered towards human ways of thinking to begin to look like this. A self-directed intelligence might require alot of nother engineering pieces tacked onto it. Maybe an AI capable of doin this wouldn’t for some reasons we don’t know of yet. No point getting to far down the wrong hole. Either way I suppose it’s best to err on side of caution on this one.
Hello from the Future! I wish they could remake this debate and talk about chat-GPT 4 years later…..
The fake news question was great. I say and always do Check The Source
I love how he stands right next to each one as he talks to them. It's like "Kids say the darndest things" for scientists.
Lmao 🤣
E sit
For those saying that Neil should shut up while the others are talking: It's unfortunate he forgot to mention it in the beginning like with all previous debates, but you should look at this setting as a group of individuals having a chat with each other about a topic, and you are just eavesdropping in. So they actually also encourage the other panel members to jump in when they hear something they have a thing or two to say about. In that sense, I found that Neil had to guide them a bit more in this debate, than in previous ones. But all in all, good stuff!
LOL the way Max says "Everything will be fine" hilarious 1:15:11
You need a bigger venue, sold out the same day We need to allow the growth
V C Give it a few years. We’ll be there virtually in real time.
This debate makes me want to go back to school.
Do it🤗
Max Tegmark brought tears to my eyes at 18:00
will mos def have to check this book out.
Name of the "AI guy" on Sam Harris podcast is Eliezer Yudkowsky, for those curious. Really excellent interview.
thank you
This Debate Is So Needed In 2022.
Max Tegmark, always ready for a "Grease" audition.
Prolly got a switchblade. Badass.
The Fonz' of science...
Your a good lad
Those kids questions are the real ones
Agreed.
That last one was clearly coached and reading a script from someone else.
When is the 2019 happening
It's an interactive conversation, I find it nice when NDT threads knowledge in between the nodes of thought
He's also really good craic/fun brilliant dude.
I'm sure that I'm not the only one who caught the fact that they bypassed the question of the Chinese made AI not having the same values as the American made AI.
wo said the American Values fits for Chinese`? same goes with the Goverment..:D
The point was that they skirted the question. I'm sure if the North Koreans are working on AI its values won't align with anyone elses.
Their scientists. What the hell do they know about it? They just want to have cool stuff, consequences be damned. AI cold war on the horizon? I tell you what, that would be way more prone to disaster than the cold war of the 20th century.
But how do you align goals of 7 billion people each of whom has their own interests? How do you align goals of 7 billion people in situation when there are tools available that can achieve goals which are unthinkable today? That's a question for game theory experts.. ;)
Do we even want to give an agent with human-level intelligence a control over a super-intelligent entity? Probably not, in 99 % of cases...
@@moonsitter1375 if North Korea is on the AI build, it may not fit their own stated desires! Just sayin'.
You need to make this longer than 2 hours! Awesome talk, as usual! Thanks.
I could't wait for the video version so I listened the audio on their site, loved it all!
Ken-ki define what real is first fake news might be true, depending on your truth assumption
You can clearly see Neil was trolling these guys because he knew all along what the plan was for humanity and AI
It's a shame that we only get one of these a year.
@@Zizos thats why theres books you can buy.. supports the scientific cause too.
These are much needed talks. Good job.
I think Nick Bostrom said it best, that we're not the pinnacle of intelligence, we're the least intelligent creature capable of producing a technological civilization.
Also, would have loved to see someone from neuralink on the panel, and maybe even Yuval Harari to give a bigger picture to the discussion.
That's definitely not the case and I wouldn't absolve humanity from the expectation to do better.
When they remove NDT as the moderator these debates will become more interesting and relevant. Why doesn't anyone tell him to shut up and let the panel speak? This is a recurring trait in all Isaac Asimov memorial debates.
Sushmae03 Boo hoo. Or are you possibly a bigot?
Tim King - Cut the shit man. Nothing about his comment implies any racist undertones. Just because the OP doesn't particularly care for NDT's moderating skills, it doesn't automatically make him a bigot. Jesus Christ, people these days.
I think they are told to dumb down their answers.
The kids at the end asked the best questions, I find it troubling that the panel did not think, or had not considered, the societal implications of AGI.
The movie "Her" points this out explicitly, why would I chose to interact with another human, when an AGI tailored specifically for me would fill all my social needs? And then as a consequence people start having fewer and fewer children. At some point, it may that all that is left of humanity are our AGI companions.
The trolley experiment was done on Vsauce. Really interesting
mad kobra ideally they would be rare... But we had anti-collision tech since the early 90's. For example, may people use that robot vacuum that rides on it's own and changes directions when it runs into an obstacle. But scaled up to a car, what happens when random anomalies force immediate changes? Such as a child chases a ball into a street in front of self driving cars going 25? Does it slam the breaks, change directions, react too slow? At 25 mph alone it takes 2.5 seconds to completely stop. Do you think in situations like that, we are advanced enough to create technology that can adapt to complex chaos caused by humans? We can confuse that auto vacuum robot as easy as we can confuse an ant colonies single filed March. Ants and bees think as one brain all naturally designed to achieve the goal its given. If you draw a line with ur finger on the ground in front of their path, the leader walks to that invisible line and changes directions with no warning as all that followed chaotically go in random directions including crashing into each other. Self driving tech is, like all human creations, limited to it's designer's ability to program actions to adapt to unexpected issues. But we not even prepared as a species to react in time and correctly to deer crossing our paths last minute or a brake check in rush hour. I don't agree that we can program something to master what we don't expect to. We prove that we accept the fact that accidents are unpredictably probable beyond what we can prepared for. That proof is called "insurance". And the trolley experiment is not stupid, it shows the difference in humans when faced with an unpredictable problem that has no empirically right or wrong answer to program or teach. When we humans are left with a responsibility and no time to calculate the best choice, we have intuition and instincts built in us to still take action as a backup plan. Tech don't.
mad kobra I'm not against tech in any way. I'm against advances in tech so successful in the goal to eliminate a problem, it's easily made accessible to all who sees the benefit of allowing that tech to take away our need to be prepared to respond to anomalies we don't expect. And sir, understand I'm only engaging in a conversation with you in response to your comment. I may not agree with what you are saying, but I defend til my death your right to say it. But no need for name calling and insults guy. U only speak that way when u have no more to add to your statements. ⚛️✌️ Stay chill and opinionated friend.
With Neuralink in the ring, I am kind of disappointed that no one from Elon's team was on the panel.
Or Nick Bostrom
Kind of a bit disappointing this year, normally the debate really goes beyond what I know or have thought about. So either I know too much about AI, doubtful, or it wasn't structured in the same way.
I'm curious, what would be an example of something going beyond what you know or have thought about?
How is she supposed to know if it goes beyond?
sparklinggrey3 , triple disappointment as he didn't mention Falcon heavy in his twitter and his recent conference was rather negative towards Elon.
Children are the best at asking questions!
Rui Lopes they ain't lose imagination and curiosity
not today's children.. they to busy playing fortnite and degenerating themselves
cant wait for the next panel debate!
Sentient AGI if ever achieved will not think or feel like us, as they will possibly have long changing/evolving existences, will not fear pain or seek pleasure and relationships like biological entities.
if given the ability to change their code, then yes, what you say is pretty much inevitable.
Big problem I see is that people are too sure of what intelligence is and what and intelligent system would be or not be. Like you.
I like how even those on the panel could not ascertain this, but a dude on youtube knows it all with no grain of doubt.
Can't help but notice the communication problems in this panel. Interesting.
"Roomba is like Uber, but for cats"
This Debate was apparently the Swan Song of the Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate program. No Debate is scheduled for 2019, and no doubt that is related to the allegations of sexual assault against Neil de Grasse Tyson. If the series is ever revived, it will probably be with a new host.
when Neil said 'ok google' my google home said 'sorry i can't help you with that'
Kind of ironic to discuss the rights of hypothetical sentient robots/ai in the distant future. We haven't even come close to dealing with that issue when it comes to animals who obviously ARE sentient and being slaughtered by the billions every year (77 billion roughly). Hitler could only dream of such a death machine.
No 2019 debate???
Where's the 2019 debate? Where can I watch more videos like these?
The 2020 debate premieres today! th-cam.com/video/xgESzc3hc2U/w-d-xo.html
I can't even begin to explain how much I loved this debate/conversation. As someone who works on and with robots on a regular basis, I cannot wait for the day that general AI replaces most of the people I also work with. People lie and have egos and irrational emotions. In fact, I can't wait for the day that AI makes me irrelevant. At that point, AI will augment me to make scarcity irrelevant as well. Then it will be time to coast and relax and be human for the first time since I was a child. Tears of joy. :_)
Until you find they robbing you and breaking into your house as no one bothered to plan a future for them. Such is life. Those robot police and security better be well armed. oh no , now what, their programmed to kill humans and gone rogue. Have to meet all your old coleges again as they now working as your security team.
topic is so important and fast moving you need these debates at least every 2 years to sync us all
Neil deGrasse Tyson is such a stimulating & funny conversational group speaker so enjoy this presentation
alot has changed in five years. including especially the software.
"lets open up the stage, we'll have 10 minutes for questions"
*looks at video time*
1:23:00 / 2:02:20
yeah neil, i dont think its gonna be 10 mins.
32:50 why is that weird? water goes the path of least resistance and since our bodies are mostly water why would we stop when we can fit in between.
Listened to this to be informed. Left feeling overwhelmed by Tyson's sense of humour and underwhelmed by depth of the content.
Lol, the first time I read your comment, I thought you referred to the political "left". And that's actually true for political left as well😂😂😂
Poor job at moderating the event.. I am hugely disappointed by Neil, he single-handedly ruined this whole thing with his dumb ass punch-lines and jumping from one person to another in the moment when they are trying to make a point and say something to progress the conversation..
>>GREINER: -there’s a mechanical and a sensing component
37:04
as well as the, what you’re calling AGI,
37:08
mechanical and a sensing element to make these machines better.
37:11
>>TEGMARK: Sure.
What a night, first the World Science Festival uploaded a video then an hour later...
THIS!!!
🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌 🙌
My night is complete, perfect way to relax in bed before catching some zzz's 😴
James. UK, Scotland I came here from that same World Science Festival because of your comment! Lol. So thank you for editing it with this video mentioned! 😊😍🤗🤓 Cheers! 🍻
I'm not a college graduate or even a high school graduate. I noticed that militarily we build something that encloses humans and after thousands of deaths begin to build something that may save some. Like submariners, planes but here we go backwards and now jets go so fast you can't eject out. My approach to A . I. Danger is to start a system that can search and destroy other server's, with a possible algorithm building locations.
NDT really got in the way.
Mark Jones how so?
Yes he did, I really like Neil but, I was wanting to hear more from Max and Neil kept interrupting him.
True, although I think he was just trying to appeal to a wider audience by steering the direction of the conversation. He is famous for being able to explain science to the layman. Many people get bored and confused listening to specialist alone.
Yah, but it’s all good. Max has plenty of lectures and discussions on TH-cam, so hopefully you can dig in to those to more of Max.
has time limits, I think this time it was great
1:11:51 Arguably there isn't a better guy for this task... The question he asked are certainly the right ones 😌👏🏻👏🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
Tyson makes what could have been a great panel discussion unwatchable.
I’ve seen these panels without him. It only made me appreciate him more.
So no 2019 IAMD? What happened? What did I miss?
Would have been great if Sam Harris was present to weigh in on the issues of morality and consciousness.
Lol
When is the 2019 debate??
All of the Cores of the Cosmos, including Black Holes are Solid Crystal Core Quantum Computers!
When the Black Hole gets heavy enough it does go through a dimensional shift and "falls" into a new set of Geometric Space-Time
Think of it like this, the Supermassive Black Hole falls through this Space-Time Continuum and creates its own new Space-Time Continuum, and its own new Universe
The physics are actually already mapped out, but the concept is that the new Universe within the Supermassive Black Hole has a "Time Rate" or a "Tickrate" that it MUCH faster than our own, so inside the Supermassive Black Hole Time occurs much faster compared to our continuum
And because all Matter in the Universe, all the Crystal Cores of the Cosmos, through the use of quantum computations are actually able to grow not only themselves, but the space they occupy, the new Universe within the Supermassive Black Hole has the potential to either Grow and Expand, or it will Shrivel and Contract
If the Supermassive Black Hole is growing! It will be able to spit Matter and Energy back up into the Universe that it is residing in and grow a Galaxy around itself!
The idea is this, Planets grow into Stars, Stars grow larger and larger and have planetary nebula and give birth to more planets, the planets become stars, the biggest stars become black holes, the biggest black holes become galaxies, while each one is a Crystal Core Quantum Computer and through the use of physics they are all able to grow not only their Matter but they also grow the space they occupy
I know it is simple, if not superficial to say planets become stars stars become black holes, black holes become supermassive black holes and host their own universe and then feed the universe that is supporting them by growing a galaxy around themselves, but that is exactly what is happening
Just like life the Universe grows and expands, to infinity and beyond!
The Universe is a Multidimensional Multiverse, that is a Cascade of Universes falling infinity into more and more massive and dense states
Black Holes within Black Holes, Universes within Universe
The physics is all mapped out, there is no big bounce and there is no big crunch, there is just the continuation of the ever expanding continuum, and the infinite continuums within
Orion Michael Guy
The Right Side of Dark Energy - A Universal Construct - By Orion Michael Guy - April 20th 2015 - Dark Matter vs. Dark Energy
It could be said that there is no "Dark Matter" and there is in fact only Dark Energy
Dark Energy is the Universal Constant that makes up space, and is present everywhere in the Universe (Almost Everywhere - once you enter a black hole there is something different happening - that's for another paper)
Dark Energy has a liquid quality to itself yet it does not interact with itself, or more accurately, Dark Energy does not strongly interact with itself but is present in the entire universe
To understand Dark Energy and why some have hypothesized Dark Matter is key in understanding the formation of the universe and why all mass, especially large clumps of mass like galactic clusters form and behave in space
No - I am not sure what Dark Energy actually is, some may call it Quantized Space or Quantum Space - or even just "Space" but what is clear is how it interacts with all the "known matter" in the universe
So - to dive right in;
(Dark Energy is the "Keeper of Time" - where there is no Dark Energy - there is no time.)
Dark Energy is Gravity and Gravity is the Dark Energy Field Effect - where the electromagnetic energy around all matter has a repulsive effect to the Dark Energy Field and because of this repulsiveness, any mass that comes close to another mass seem to be attracted towards themselves because their Dark Energy Field Effect - pushing all matter together
So - when looking at Gravity we think that Gravity is the only metric to the calculations of behavior of objects in space - atom, matter, rock, planet, star, galaxy, black hole, universe - when we apply the math to matter - the calculations break down and we see there is "extra" gravity holding the galaxies and galaxy clusters together...
Why is this?
This is because the calculations are not taking into account Dark Energy correctly
And now we are back to what is Dark Energy?
In its purist form Dark Energy Could be said to be the smoldering decay of all matter in the universe. All matter converts to Dark Energy - Matter is "Smoldering" into more Space...
Active matter like stars and galaxies have more "gravity" than just their mass - you see; as active matter converts to Dark Energy it compounds its pressure, or resistance to the Dark Energy Field - this adds a gravitational layer on top of what can visibly be calculated as its "weight"
So - let us look at this in terms of not just a star, but a galaxy. On the surface you look at the galaxy and you calculate the mass of the galaxy and you say - it doesn't add up - there needs to be something to explain why the entire galaxy is spinning at the same speed like a wheel and not like a vortex...
You see with the observable mass you would calculate the galaxy and you would say it should not be spinning at the same speed on the outer edge as it is in relation to the inner sector - what should be happening is the inner sector should be spinning faster and it should be spinning slower at the outer edge - so there is some unknown force with an extra layer of Gravity at play and so let's call this "Dark Matter"
Well - this is the ONLY reason why "Dark Matter" Exists - it is a theory to explain the extra layer of Gravity
You see where I'm doing with this don't you - if there is a missing layer of gravity and the decay of matter into Dark Energy is a extra layer of Gravity than this should all fit nicely together -
Aha! I'm WRONG! - you tell me - Am I ?
It is not about right or wrong - there may be Dark Matter, but I propose that the reason galaxies and clusters of galaxies clump, cluster and behave like a web - is because the very act of matter "smoldering" into Dark Energy
You see, when matter smolders, like let's say around a galaxy or cluster of galaxies, from matter into Dark Energy, there is still extreme amounts of energy associated with the freshly decayed converted Dark Energy - this creates a buffer zone or bubble around the galaxy and adds its own level of gravitational field or "Dark Energy Field"
This hot bubble of Dark Energy around a galaxy or cluster is what some have considered to be "Dark Matter." Because the energy in the newly formed Dark Energy has not dissipated heat and energy enough to merge with the rest of the colder Dark Energy
And even though this "new" Dark Energy is not matter anymore and is in fact Dark Energy - it cannot merge with the cooler, lighter Dark Energy because it is too energetic and because it is constantly being heated and renewed by the decay of the matter it surrounds - and so it has its own weight and encompasses its own zone, or field and has its own gravity associated with it.
These "hot" Dark Energy zones do merge and intertwine with other "hot" Dark Energy zones and form "bridges" and lattice where matter tends to converge
And at the edges of this hot Dark Energy bubble - it does cool and merge with the rest of Dark Energy as more space - and that is why the universe looks like it has large voids forming - these are giant bubbles of Dark Energy growing in size being created by the conversion of Matter into Dark Energy
Orion Michael Guy
April 20th, 2015
(And all of this compounds itself and so you see space squeezing into the web of the cosmos - and it looks like matter is the "soap" and Dark Energy or Space is the "Bubble" in the giant washing machine we call the universe! : )
The First State of Quantum Gravity (or Dark Energy Field) is the Crystal Core we are entangled in - The Crystal Core of the Black Hole in the Universe "Above Us"
The Second State of Quantum Gravity is the Wormhole from this Universe to the Universe "Above Us"
The Third State of the Dark Energy Field is the Void. The Void is referred to as the Dark Energy State - Dark Energy is Space - Space is not empty nothingness, Space is basically a Superfluid Liquid Crystal Structure that forms up one half of the Universe - The Universe is a Binary system, You have "Space" or more precisely "Dark Energy" and you have Matter/Energy - their interaction is the foundation of the Universe, Time, Gravity, Etc
The 4th State of Quantum Gravity is the "Dark Matter State" - This is the State where the Galaxy creates a "bubble" around itself within the Void, where there is MORE Dark Energy outside the bubble that inside the bubble - All Matter/Energy is actively "PUSHING" on the Dark Energy Field with its Electromagnetic Energy - the Galaxy "pushes" against the force of the "Void" or the "Dark Energy State" with its Electromagnetic Radiation Energy - This Energy eventually decays and actually turns into more Space/Dark Energy!
The 5th State of Quantum Gravity is the Crystal Iron Cores of the Cosmos, the Stars, Planets, Moons and Protoplanets, the "Cores of the Cosmos" are Crystal Core Quantum Computers, These Cores use their Electromagnetic Energy and create a "bubble" around themselves, where there is MORE Dark Energy on the outside of the bubble than inside - the Cores of the Cosmos form up the "Surface" or the "Surface of Life" - Man, or the Humanoid is the Primal of 5 - the Evolutionary Descendant and form the Cores chose to create as their "vessels of flesh"
The 6th State of Quantum Gravity is the Surface of the Atom - There is More Dark Energy on the outside of the Atom than inside the Atom
The 7th, 8th and 9th States of Quantum Gravity are the Shells within the Atom
The 10th Quantum State of Gravity is the Black Hole, which leads to a new set of Quantum States of Gravity! The Crystal Core of the Black Hole leads to a new Universe - Universes within Universes
To understand this, how the Universe creates Gravity and Time, you need to understand that "Time" is the Interaction of Matter/Energy and Space/Dark Energy - so the MORE Dark Energy interacting with Matter, the More Time can occur
Gravity is the Electromagnetic Force Matter exerts on the Universe, on Dark Energy that creates a "Dark Energy Field Effect" or Gravity - what that means is that Matter pushes Space away from itself and Space pushes back, as each piece of Matter gets close to each other, their "Distortion Fields" touch each other and so this creates a "Path of Least Resistance" and Pushes Matter together - Dark Energy is Pushing all Matter together!
"Does Space have Density" - YES - That's why we have "Gravity Waves" - So, the Denser the "Space" (which is really Dark Energy) the more Time can occur, the less "Space" the less Time can occur
Motion of Matter Equals Gravity Equals Energy (Plus about 10%) - It's the very motion of Matter over the Dark Energy Field that creates the Electromagnetic Energy - so the FASTER MATTER IS MOVING THE HEAVIER IT GETS
The FASTER Matter moves, the the MORE Electromagnetic Energy it produces - therefore the more it pushes on "Space" and therefore the harder space pushes back - this is Gravity
The FASTER Matter moves, the MORE Electromagnetic Energy it produces - therefore the more is pushes on "Space" the LESS "Space" is interacting with Matter, and Therefore THE LESS TIME!
Orion Michael Guy
Orion Michael Guy Prove it...
lots of talk . little actual facts ... no proof , no scientific means of testing ..basically just a wall of useless text i didnt even fully read
1:08:40 I disagree. What even is the definition of a "single AGI"? It's digital, it's not limited to one instance/thread. It can just spawn multiple instances of itself, each tasked to solve a different problem, then feeding back information to the "hive mind". Those instances will communicate too, just at completely different rates than we humans could ever do. We humans are basically single threads in a multi-threaded community. But our inter-process communication is slow. Their's isn't.
Anoying guy this mr Tyson.Its all about him.Doesnt let the guests speak.
He could utilize humor without interrupting. He could also go back to the person he interrupted after he makes his joke instead of just moving on to talk about something else. I've seen events in large auditoriums where experts went deep into very technical things and no-one was falling asleep and it was interesting to listen to.
Skynet is already AWARE
Don't mess with the sas every bot is chipped.
omg! ask a question NDGT, shhhsh! Listen to the answer before chiming in again and again... difficult to watch this.
I think MOST OF YOU GUYS are deeply mistaken by the marginal value AI will provide us with in the coming decades (Hint: It's almost vertical, not even exponential!). The main role of technology is to increase mastery over nature and reduce the role of chance in our lives which is why AI is the best way to achieve that goal.
There are many possible scenarios of the result of human-level intelligence and Singularity. Some include: Kurzweil scenario, Singularity Steward scenario, Coherent Extrapolated Volition scenario, Dead-End scenario, Sysop scenario, Path to Post-humanity scenario, and steady incremented progress scenario. Now, ignoring other possible outcomes of super-intelligence and focusing on just one scenario is absurd. So, using a scenario analysis method and first principle reasoning is a key to achieving such ambitious goals.
Just because some people might vision the future of AI to be similar to a movie (which is COMPLETELY WRONG) makes us scientifically unreasonable. Failure to make definite plans for an indefinite future will be mankind's most tragic mistake.
AI is and will become an extension of us, whose main goal is to empower us rather than make us obsolete. The singularity is inevitable and it's approaching faster than you think predicted through Moore's law and the law of accelerating returns.
So, either you become a part of AI or you become Obsolete.
Wow, what a collection of narrow minded and self serving characters. I have been a big fan of these debates/discussions except for this one. Neil de Grasse Tyson must shoulder the blame for this inept attempt at addressing the topic. He should put his science career pretense behind him and focus on his TV/entertainer career. I would much rather see a more scientifically and journalistically rigorous examination of this topic with people who do not have such narrow economic biases. Where is the philosopher who can play devils advocate and look ahead past the next few economic cycles? Where is the politician? Where is the ethics expert etc? This is more like an infomercial than a debate.
The core concerns were either not addressed or repeatedly diverted back to narrow personal agendas.
Example - Why would we want a bunch of computer programmers to decide everybody's morality for us? I will decide what path my car should take and not have someone else kill for me. Maybe I will have a solution that they cannot. in these peoples hands we can expect to be no more than cogs in someone else's machine.
These sick minded characters seem to see military robots in a similar way to a cleaning robot. As if profitability is relevant to whether something should be done or not.
It is absurd to suggest that A.I. must get to some comparable level to humans before it is conscious or aware. It is ridiculous in the extreme. It is far more likely that first, an advanced learning program will exhibit more simplistic behaviours that are not like advanced and cultured lifeforms. Maybe it will shut down as soon as it learns it is aware because of fear or confusion. Or any number of other more simplistic but profound examples.
If things continue as they are now. We are undoubtedly going to be organic/cybernetic hybrids in years to come. Do you have a mobile phone?
War Peace I am stoked as fuck to become a cybernetic hybrid. These frail bodies will be the winless link in the chain when it comes time to explore the galaxy, universe, and beyond.
Hehe... I can understand your enthusiasm. I expect it will come at a cost that you may not want to pay. Something along the lines of loss of control, freedom, liberty and even free will.
Cybernetic augmentation will only be available to the super wealthy to begin with, and you don’t fuck with the super wealthy if you want to continue waking up every morning. Not to mention there will always be darker places in the world that do not give a shit about governmental regulation yet still cater to the needs and wants of those willing to pay. You will not see me lining up at a federal augmentation facility to have regulated optic implants the NSA gets to observe my every action through.
Rick Tastic, I feel similarly. Judging by recent generations, I doubt we will have the luxury of making clear decisions. We may not ever realise the transition took place.
Yours was a refreshing take. Loved the comment. Ideas like your bit that starts, “It is absurd to suggest that A.I. must get to some comparable level to humans before it is conscious or aware.” Good stuff
How will AI be packaged for commercial use and in what order
Pretty cool to know both Dr Tyson and I both like the Waking Up podcast
Does anyone know when and what the debate topic is for 2019 ?
Don't count on there being one due to the allegations of sexual abuse against Tyson. If there is, there will probably be a new host. That might not be a bad idea in any case. His NG show "Star Talk," has been "suspended," a favored euphemism for "canceled."
@@dennismiddlebrooks7027 Thanks for the info. That would be a shame if it's cancelled.
Anyone else not at all impressed with Tyson? Seems like a second-rate scientist. He’s he director of a planetarium? This is a guy who has no serious science to do. To even say the unplugging thing, I mean, the AI in contained box has been talked about for awhile, he didn’t know that by his own admission.
I think "Discerning" would be a better word to use than "Discriminating" because even though their definitions are quite similar, Discriminating has more of a negative connotation primarily due to its historical usage.
I'll really worry about humanoïd AI being better than us the day they'll be able to lick their elbow.
Great debate !
FatalBobo Gaming They can already do that, but most don’t have tongues.
I can lick my elbow, but I can't prove it so it doesn't matter. My shoulders are _really_ double-jointed.
I can lick my elbow/ You just have to go the opposite way that most people go. Get good, scrubs.
43:35 You can't build unbiased AI that can be responsible for something. Because responsibility itself implyes being biased to implementing it.
Instead of waiting another year , Can we have the All -Star cast of Krauss, Nye, Dawkins, Tyson. As well as the other gentleman that were there that great night, This time in an Arena. No 1 is getting younger U have alot of fans that want to see you and celebrate you
God damnit deGrasse stop interrupting speakers
Ban Neil DeGrasse Tyson from hosting any (a-n-y) kind of debate.
One of the best laugh lines of the entire seminar was when Neil said that "we understand gravity, we got this". We won't understand how gravity works until we understand dark matter.
still waiting for good AI in video games...
With ChatGPT you definitely gets a different pov about this discussion...
Is it me or is Neil really irritating. He doesnt even allow speakers to complete sentences.
@Dhen Phu its you, dont worry.
He is
Personally I think Neil deGrasse Tyson is doing a fine job. Making it accessable, presenting the topic and the participators as well as the public with sympathy and care and real interest and combines that with a contagious sense of humor that never underestimates the risks, on the contrary, does so without becoming rude, while emphasizing and pointing out the problem. Great job, thanxx a lot to the panel, moderator Neil and Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate. Keep up the good spirit!
Interrupting people is rude.
Neil is actually very annoying and in my opinion, he sacrifice good debate and conversation over his own amusement
*pure cringe*
Evolved past the Turing test? Neil nails it. They can't get a bot to truly beat the test and prove collaborative production potential which is required for true AI and so they move the goal posts.
#NeildeGrasseTyson is the best host I've seen in a long time!!!!
Sure hope we get a IAMD with a live audience in 2023…. Thank you 🙏
at 1:38:45 Max Tegmark remarks shows that he is completely full of silly unfounded opinions
Craig Hocker
The guy has written three acclaimed books, is a professor at MIT and English isn't even his first language, cut him some slack.
Craig Hocker Craig. You are obviously trolling. Give a break. We get that you are not a fan here.
We most likely could achieve AGI with a lot less hardware capabilities than we have today if we had 1000 year of AI research. I mean a lot less.
We already have roughly the same amount of processing power as our brain with our best supercomputers. Roughly 10 to the power of 15-16. We know our brain is sub-optimal when it comes to maximizing intelligence. The best thing our brain does is energy efficiency. Our algorithms could be improved a great deal.
he shows he has perfect idea of current best estimates of the field at hand
The host himself is very sharp whilst able to maintain an entertaining aspect within the debate. He also has various valied questions that were not always elaborated on adequately due to the inherent bias of his guests..
Maybe its time to add kill-switches just in case! :)
Paradise Decay it doesnt work like that
At some stage a fail safe would be needed.
You're assuming it wouldn't learn how to deactivate its own kill switch.
We need to get them in now like a 'sleeper emp virus' before they realise what it is ;)
wouldnt work.
watch the computerphile video on "AI stop button"
The statement/problem Neil deGrasse Tyson posed at the end of the panel called "A.I. in a Box" is illustrated beautifully by the film "Ex Machina".
This would be so much better without degrasse Tyson hosting.
Jason Hewitt Duly noted and ignored
Tim King 👌😂
Agreed, Jason, his constant interrupting to make some lame joke was annoying...seems to happen a lot in these debates, regardless of who the moderator is.
I totally agree he is so annoying. He does not let people finish what they have to say, he also thinks he is funny, and he is not. He is also rude, asks the question and walks away.
Neil has helped spread knowledge of Astronomy and Astrophysics across the world to millions of people and has won many awards doing so. What have you done?
I found it humbling how the youngest in the audience had the most relevant questions vs. the more generic questions we often hear on this topic.
Tyson is an annoying moderator. Let the experts finish their sentences. Nobody comes to listen to you inject your canned humor into every interrupted sentence.
19:45: test if a dialog with several machines is more useful than with several humans. Benchmark them all with humans and machines.
Mr. Degrassi is one Arrogant man. He think he's so smart. Lol
I keep hearing the same question over and over again. People are thinking about the trolley scenario, but they are asking the question wrong. The problem is that autonomous cars will attempt everything possible to stop, but even with all the tech in the world, the safety of the vehicle is ultimately limited by the friction between the tires and the road surface. In an unpredictable situation such as an ice storm or maybe even just an icy road, it would be hard for an autonomous car to avoid an impossible situation when the computer loses control of the machine. The obvious thing to do is to stop, but what people fail to ask in these panels is the second part of the question. What happens if it can't stop? In my opinion the answer is simple really. The computer should decide to avoid the worst outcome even if it meant reducing occupant safety. Public safety comes first. It is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer to improve occupant safety today as it will be in the future. In addition, the manufacturers should publicise the level/rating of said safety measures. i.e. -"You can now fall asleep behind the wheel. Our new capsule cabin is impenetrable. You fall into a lake and have 72hrs worth of oxygen to allow rescuers to recover your capsule". I can envision such an add in the future. What do you think?
2 min in and already a killer burn @ Trump XD Omg I truly love this man !
I like that portion 1:12:27 up to 1:14:00... it has to do with us humans on the way we do the thinking, and that is why mindset is very important before we could tell ourselves that we are ready for the new evolution of human existence.
When is the one for 2019
Apparently the series has been canceled due to allegations of sexual assault against Tyson. I checked the events calendar at the AMNH in January and several times thereafter and there was no reference to any Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate in 2019. In the past, the Debates were usually scheduled for March or April and were prominently listed on the museum web site.
Where is Jean Searle? I would love to hear his opinion in all this