Robotics Reference
In-Depth Information
quish, the Future”, first decried Joy's position and then shot it down in
flames:
Realistically, we cannot prevent the rise of non-biological intelli-
gence. We can embrace it and extend ourselves to incorporate it.
The more quickly and continuously we absorb computational ad-
vances, the easier it will be and the less risk of a technological run-
away ...Joywould stopprogress inrobotics, artificial intelligence
and related fields. Too bad for those now regaining hearing and
sight thanks to implants. Too bad for the billions who will con-
tinue to die of numerous diseases that could be dispatched through
genetic and nano-technological solutions. [12]
Joy's position was supported, surprisingly, by Hugo de Garis, whose own
research on the creation of a super-brain
5
appears to be at odds with his
fears. De Garis worries that one day supersmart machines will dominate
humanity.
US News
journalist James Pethokoukis asked de Garis how he
could reconcile such a conflict of interests, and received the reply: “Ah,
the $100 trillion question. I wish I knew. I haven't yet found a plausible
way out of this terrible dilemma.” [13]
In the light of the strength of argument put forward by Joy, de Garis
and others, against the potential consequences for humanity of intelligent
robots, it is easy to understand that such fears are felt by a significant
proportion of the population. In the entry on computer ethics in the
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
, Terrell Bynam asks
Is Artificial Intelligence in human society a utopian dream or a
Faustian nightmare? Will our descendants honour us for making
machines do things that human minds do or berate us for irrespon-
sibility and hubris? [14]
Such fears lead to the forecast that the time will come when the only
good self-aware robot is an unplugged one. Certainly many forms of
technological progress have their down side, often an effect that is un-
desirable for sociological reasons. Just as some airplanes have been used
in wars to kill people, so some intelligent robots will be used to the seri-
ous detriment of some humans, for example by being employed to design
weapons more advanced than those we have now. But do we stop making
airplanes? No, we do not, because their benefits are generally perceived
to outweigh all adverse factors.
5
See the section “Hugo de Garis” in Chapter 11.
