|
Post by chang on Mar 16, 2007 3:25:44 GMT 1
....Jesus, I just put this up like, yesterday..
|
|
|
Post by Leon Loire on Mar 16, 2007 3:37:25 GMT 1
End the Human race? Just because a computer will have the mathematical capability of a Human being certainly doesn't mean it'll surpass us. To have a supercomputer that is, through Science, more intelligent than Da Vinci is one thing, but to have an Artificial Intelligence is something else entirely. As long as we don't reach the point of "Playing God" by creating a mind that can make its own choices, then I won't be concerned a bit. One of the major objectives of the Human Race is progress, and with that progress will always come change. If you wish to stop that change, then be ready to delay or halt progress. It's the extremes we meet everyday, and in my opinion, this video was meant to show us a two bladed weapon: the upcoming changes are very real and truly very frightening, but the results will be even more amazing than the greatest Science Fiction novels ever dreamed to believe. I don't believe Fear should be the emotion felt, but rather the exhilaration of progress, and its consequential changes. Accept it, or combat it. That's your choice. As for me, I'm all for it. After all, I'm a Liberal right? You wanted a debate Charlotte, hopefully I started one for you... or completely ended it. I tend to either start arguments, or completely kill them. Depends on the day, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Alkaiser on Mar 16, 2007 4:00:04 GMT 1
Also depends how ballsy your opponent is. Commi. Truth be told, I agree with you on this subject though. China is a country with a billion people and 150 years of technology we didn't have, just now entering the industrial revolution. The potential is amazing, and you need to either embrace it or start stocking your bomb shelter now, because the future is inevitable. Computers are powerful, but they lack abstract reasoning. They will always lack abstract reasoning. All a computer is good for is finding the more efficient answer to a problem, but it will never contradict that conclusion because it cannot think or feel like we can. Emotion isn't programmed, and only a small portion of it is taught. The rest of the equation is nature; your genetics. Without that, a computer is just a box of numbers. I can understand being aprehensive, and on some level I think it's wise to be weary of what the future holds. On the other hand, too much caution is synonymous with paranoia. A healthy medium is key. That, and the videogames in 2012 are gonna be f*ckin' boss. That is all. ~.^
|
|
|
Post by jellar on Mar 16, 2007 4:44:46 GMT 1
Alright, let's debate.
Granted, I agree that technology won't be very threatening until a machine built can reason on its own and et cetera. However, my argument I guess strays slightly from the topic.
The increasing population of humanity is shocking. It may not be felt in the United States, but countries like China and India are definitely suffering, and even continents, like Africa. How do you think a country like China can support one billion people? Does food and water simply come from the sky for them?
The answer, obviously, is no. Aside from their former capitalist government and economy which left almost all of its citizens without a job to support itself, the communist government is providing the entire country with enough food to manage. India, however, is not as lucky as China, and many of them are still suffering along with many in Africa.
Now, considering our population growth, this problem will not only be in China, but in every other country in the world, in the near future. I don't know if you want to be happy about it or not, but overpopulation is NOT what we need. If we need anything from technology, it's for two things.
One: We need energy. What do I mean by energy? I mean a way to manifest energy from an infinite source to the extent we can rely on it. Hey guys, I wonder why gas prices are increasing. Not because we're about to run out of oil or anything, obviously. When we run out fossil fuels, what is going to happen to our economy? It's not going to be a small thing. It's going to have a worldwide effect. Admit it. Daily things are reliant on oil. How many people past the age of twenty don't get in a car every day? In major countries like the U.S., a strikingly low number.
Two: Water. The issue has not been addressed nearly enough. I don't know if any of you have been into special courses about water, but almost the entirety of our usable water will be out in the near future. So far, there are no efficient ways to convert the vast ocean water of salt to usable, drinkable water. Some countries have already began to convert water, but at high expense. Water is not a minor issue, despite how many of you probably take it for granted.
So, what are the solutions to all of this population growth?
Well, there's two that I see.
One: Take technological movements to solve the problems, as I mentioned above. We've been doing that all the time lately, so why can't we do it again to solve the problem with overpopulation? It makes sense, as long as research is well funded and the problem is solved in due time.
Two: If technology fails, then the inevitable result is war. Countries in search of resources and water will attack countries that have them, hoping to take their things. Naturally, population will die down, as it is a war. Small and weak countries will disappear from the face of the earth. Larger, more stable countries will remain. This isn't a small-scale war I'm talking about. This 'war' I speak of is probably going to be World War III. And to add a personal (even more personal than I've been saying) opinion that I have to add, the U.S. will be antagonized heavily due to their current actions. If they continue on this road, the future is not looking up.
No, I don't have citations to give credit to my claims. It's a debate, not a research project.
|
|
|
Post by Leon Loire on Mar 16, 2007 19:17:28 GMT 1
Hence, it's hard to say you're debating Jellar. After all, you're agreeing that technology is progress, and that progress is good and not frightening. Instead, you're attempting to point out another subject, one that I highly doubt anyone would argue are not concerns. The only thing you could argue is the severity of those situations.
In note, it is difficult to place the environment, the Human over-population, and the amount of water as a primary concern, especially when one wrong step in the current world could result in World War III. The key is to stop following the "tradition" of dealing with current issues, and attempting to change into these new progressions. Unfortunately, the United States is one of the most powerful nations of the world, but it is also lagging far behind in carrying its own weight in the concerns for the environment. Of course, it's because of the power of businesses in the United States and the fear of the older generations of "drastic change" and therefore why the United States has yet to sign the Kyoto Treaty, or other environmental related issues.
In reference to severity, I personally do not think that the current environmental issues are at the apocalyptic level. We hear Scientists make reference to these severe changes occurring in 2100... a century from now. These are concerns, but these situations are already on the works of improvement because of the rise of Hybrids and Hydrogen fuel, and the efforts toward alternative fuels - and believe me, when your gas prices are rising up in cost, I think that's a perfect encouragement to invest in solar panels. The Environment must be saved, but it is not something that needs an immediate, worldwide, zealot change. We definitely need more change to help further the aid, but right now we have so many different problems going on that it's rather difficult to keep track.
The spread of AIDs, the genocide of Sudan and Darfur, the corruption of modern industry, the poverty of Africa and other third world lands, the civil war of two subtly different Islamic tribes in Iraq, the return of the Opium trade in Afganistan and the return of the Taliban, the rise of Communism in Central America, the rising power of Russia under a highly aggressive and anti-America "President", the pro-industry rise of China to the Super-Power title, and finally, the fear of nuclear arms in development from Iran, North Korea, and any other third world country that can't afford food for its people, but certainly can afford at least a Chemical Weapons project.
So many various problems to tackle. And yet, we have the environment too? Well, which one's going to destroy the world faster, the ice caps melting, or massive nuclear war? The Environment is worsening at a rate of a century, but all it takes are a few dozen nukes from any nation in the world, and the Earth is completely decimated, with the Human race completely extinct from its own creation.
Which concern do you think is more important than?
|
|
|
Post by chang on Mar 16, 2007 19:49:51 GMT 1
Dont get me wrong, I think a lot of the stuff that the video shows is amazing. By 2013, were gonna be able to achieve game graphics better than CG commercials like the Halo 3 one. Which was pretty damn good. Im not much of a debater, so Im not gonna try to squeeze into somewhere I dont belong. But the fact that we went from carriages to cars in about 2000 years, but then went from cars to flying in only a few years is scary. And a hell of a lot of crap has been discovered in the past 10 years, more than we could have thought of. Im definitely looking forward to the future, as long as the people who are tinking it up, know how they're going to organize it, which I dont doubt too much.
Flying cars: There's definitely the possibility of a crash, boom, immediately dead if youre falling from a height. But, I recall hearing that flying cars are going to have supercomputers to basically drive themselves. But, computer malfunction, again, kaboom. So IM not sure about this, but I definitely look forward to seeing how the human race is going to be living in the next 15 years (My 30th birthday)
|
|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Mar 16, 2007 21:27:33 GMT 1
I havent been on the board that long sorry Mayo =3... Not funny.
|
|
|
Post by chang on Mar 16, 2007 22:31:46 GMT 1
OH ROAST!
|
|
|
Post by king on Mar 16, 2007 22:51:06 GMT 1
I find that despite holding this view, Leon himself contradicts it several times in his own statements.
He does this on moral grounds though, which don't have to make sense. My major demands that I point out this sort of thing though. It's like a moth to a flame.
The fact that your projections are not substantiated by logical arguements means you pretty just admitting your throwing a random guess out, since since your not going to show any data means your not even making an educated guess.
There is no difference between an debate and a research project. Learn that now or flunk out of college.
Anyway, enough picking apart little things, I have to say what I'm going to say. I'm not debating this time, I'm just full out ranting, and for good reason.
Bull shit, absolute bull shit.
That's what the modern enviromental view is today. People are constantly talking about how humanity is damaging the enviroment, but they never stopped to poke thier damn skin an realize humans are still part of it. The view that humanity is above nature is flawed, and enviromental change will not sweep the foundation out underneath us, it will cause us to change.
If the enviroment changes, shit will die, humans included. When organisms multiply so much that thier rate of comsumption overtake the reasources they have avialable, they die out. humanity is not going to go extinct anytime soon....we already have the technology to avoid that. A bunch of us are just going to die, and the eco-system will return to "normal" in time. People are always "well you can't make more fossil fuels" and "we only have a limited supply of water" when they don't realize that shit came from somewhere already. Sure, a good percentage of humantiy will die, but we're no different from any other creature on Earth.
In fact, my money is probably one those earth ruining machines saving are ass eventually.
Another thing, I hate all this bullshit talk about WW3. It's not going to happen soon, know why? Because people have the bomb. The reason you don't see wars between major nations these days is because they don't want to be blown up. People are always "but something will happen and somebody will do something stupid." You may notice they don't let crazy people get the bomb, in fact, they have elections and invasion for that same damn reason. You do realize that people who get governemtn jobs are not stupid, and if they are they are obviously figureheads. You know what happens in countries that have stupid, ineffective leaders? They have revolutions. There is a reason the cold war didn't get hot, and it's because governments don't liked getting bombed to hell and back. Everything else people say did things was caused by the very understanable feeling.
Sure, people will eventually get anti-nuclear weapons, and they will probably start shit when they do, cause not getting nuked is a good thing. Eventually everyone will get it though, and we'll hopefully get back to the natural order of people killing each other on a reguler basis.
Also, I'm fucking tired of all this anti-america talk. As far as I know, unless Dubya punched your grandmother, I'm the only one who has a legitimate reason to be pissed at the government. Guess what, we started this shit years ago, and you can't get out of a swimming pool with being wet. If your country has joined the war it started, guess what, you elected them, it's your own damn fault. Don't give me that "well I voted Demomcrat" bullshit, because the legistlative body of whatever you live in approved too.
Furthermore, I doubt everyone is going to be bashing America for years to come. Your ass isn't getting bombed, and third worl nations are all about american loans. They tend to hate thier own governements usually because they suck at govnerning. Hell, they're playing world police.
Also, I hate how people get pissy at countires that have weapons programs....people don't let crazy assholes lead thier governments...because they'd revolt. "But they have all the power" is a bullshit exscuse to, because it wouldn't be hard for the sane person in the group to take over. They want weapons because they want power, namely the power to be soveriegn in thier borders without someone waving thier newest bomb at them going "hey, that'll make a rubber bands cost more, cut that out"
Also, I hate the constant bitching about how the world is in so much peril these days...we have shit pretty good. I don't have to spend the nest three days hunting meat because we went ahead and domesticated the living hell on whatever we could. We have wars, genocide, discrimination, and tyranny in the world....by a porportion that your viking ancesotrs would kick your ass for being a whiny bitch about. "You get to choose you leader, how novel","You actually have a cure for that!?!", and "The pill makes it bigger?" would follow soon after. Sure, we have AIDs....but it is not the god damn plague. At least we're smart enough now to think "hey, may I shouldn't share needles and have a bunch of sex with random people"
Sure, some people ignore that, but if they're that dumb I don't really care, as it's thier own damn fault. Efforts have been made to educate people in less provilaged countries about such matters as well....the fact they choose to ignore them like the idiots that ignore them here is not suprising. Of course if we believe the math it these measures will definatly have a completely different effect than what history has shown us.
Another thing, and something I've been going on with already, how come nobody bothers to check the math on figures anymore. Sure the math says at the current rate Aids will be everywhere, but that's at the current rate. YOu don't think aducation on the subject won't take effect, or that people will continue to do shit when they go "hey, everybody is dying. What's up with that?". Worse of all, when these exponential equations are actually true, people automatically get emo and assume it's mankinds fault. "Look at the worlds climate, it's getting hotter, clearly that's humanities outputs fault for the sudden increased rate.". Instead of actually observing the process and going "hey look, water vapor is a greenhouse gas, and that evaporates at natural tempartures. This porcess is naturally occuring and exponential by nature", we'll have a big meeting in france where a bunch of scientists who follow the orignal random guess and about two who don't will meet, agree that they are all right, incredibly attractive, and smart, then write a nice report that so blatantly doesn't include any of the opposition say that they have to leave the whole thing and publicly call it bullshit.
Of course, no one will believe them since there are a bunch of people saying different....lets plan to jump around to the other side of the disk we call earth and live there.
Also, why the hell do people hate playing god? Don't give me that Mary Shelly bullshit, good fiction does not a case study make. I have yet to hear a single example of actual attempts at playing god going wrong. Vaccines have yet to start a super plague, genetically faltered fruit has not caused people to become the incredible hulk, and Dolly didn't shoot out tenctacles from beneath it's wool and do unspeakable things to the reasearchers within grasp. Hell, even the fictional accounts of these problems didn't occur. Terminator had bad beta testers, Frankensien was an egotistical dick who shouldn't be allowed near a laboratory at all, and Icarus was just a fucking retard.
The Matirx's exscuse was just poor writing, because they too are under the hippy bullshit I'm talking about here.
So yeah, I have no probelm with anyone holding any of these positions, but everyone always seems to hold them all at once. They can't go "hey gloabl warming's a probelm, but at least we're on top of that AIDS thing already", they just have to bitch about everything at the same time. I have to worry if everyone actually bothers to read up on both sides before they make thier opinion, cause I don't see how the optimists could lose everytime unless your a pessimist....and I'm a completely cycnical asshole saying this.
So if your going to argue over this kind of shit, at least address the opposite view occasionally. Otherwise, your not arguing , your just being a whiny, hippy, emo little bitch who needs to cheer the hell up.
I recommend educating yourself to allieve the symptoms. Take two doses of reality and call me in the morning.
.....Sorry, that had been building up over the last couple of days....the youth of this nation used to have such fight in them, but these days......
|
|
|
Post by Director Troutman on Mar 16, 2007 23:18:17 GMT 1
I think Foamy just found a true competitor....
Yeah, I'm the big gooey centre of this argument. We call me 'ambivalence'....
|
|
|
Post by king on Mar 16, 2007 23:39:21 GMT 1
Robot Wrath!
Feel the wrath of my nuts!.....and bolts!
|
|
|
Post by charlotte on Mar 17, 2007 5:26:59 GMT 1
Oh, fantastic rant! And Kurtz ... you frighten me. You are literally terrifying.
|
|
|
Post by John Smith on Mar 17, 2007 22:49:59 GMT 1
Excellent rant, just a bit flawed and contradicting at places, otherwise excellent.
|
|