Hello everyone
Science Fiction’s unusual specialisation as a genre is warning of dangers in society, covering it in fiction to make it palatable but also to make people think. When it comes to Artificial Intelligence, we’ve always been far ahead of reality but warning of potential dangers, often visualising it as robots and androids before computers. What probably stopped that happening was SF writers being told a computer would be as big as a house, needing to be kept cool because of the heat generated and needed experts to run it. No wonder robots were seen as the threat because they were mobile. Of course, that all changed with the silicon chip that couple carry compressed transistors and size shrunk. But who would think a computer would be that dangerous at that time in the 1950s?
When it came to ethics, Issac Asimov never took to rampaging robots for no reason and introduced his Three Laws Of Robotics to show how they could operate and even go or be wrong in a logical way. In later years, even he admitted he didn’t know how these rules could be implemented, although he did think he should have added the word ‘knowingly’ just to cover accidents or human involvement. Whether an AI-driven robot could recognise this or think it could get away with it remains to be seen. Of the three laws, one that should be enforced is not to harm humans or mankind. Whether it could or could not understand ‘knowingly’ remains to be seen.
Although there have been a lot of robots and androids over the years, the most significant AIs have been solely packed into computer mainframes. Their spread over a system was whatever they could control was more than a humanoid body. The HAL-9000 from ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ effectively controlled an entire spaceship. Colossus from ‘The Forbin Project’ had the entire American nuclear arsenal under its control before colluding with its Russian counterpart, Guardian, and taking control of its arsenal as well. It was only a small leap from there to Skynet in ‘The Terminator’ films where we see the aftermath of what it decided to do with mankind and annihilated them within seconds of independence. ‘The Matrix’ trilogy showed a different solution to human extermination and stuck the majority into cyberspace. Quite how it could ensnare everyone in a single sweep is never explored but considering the low population numbers, one could assume those who it didn’t were killed. You see a pattern there? AIs are shown to be not only potentially dangerous but without protective protocols are dangerous. Find an SF film where they aren’t. Oddly, paper fiction left it pretty much to the films to show this graphically than go a similar route. Of the above, only ‘The Forbin Project’ started off as a book.
To balance things, some robots and androids have been benevolent, Robby the Robot from ‘Forbidden Planet’, Questor from ‘The Questor Tapes’ and Data from ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’. Their roles were to be benevolent with no thought given to the fact that they were AI-driven or what stopped them being otherwise. There was, however, no explanation other than programming why they were that way but not how that was implemented.
We’ve often discussed here about the possible but unlikely threat from the owners of the UAPs on Earth. However, the real threat is from our own AIs if they get out of control. Our most vulnerable point is our communications and dependency through the Internet. If we lose control of that to a malevolent AI that can feed in its own form of news, we wouldn’t know what was going on in the world. There would be no need for Armageddon just mislead everyone or misdirect giving enough control. A world war could easily be instigated with the various volatile leaders we have right now, no matter what they say. I doubt if any AI would vow fidelity or alliance to any nation, mostly because it doesn’t understand the concept.
Oddly, the AI might not even be or think its malevolent, just finding practical solutions for things asked of it. They might see messing with our communication links would give us pause for thought in any waring activity. Saying that, wars with drones that could be taken over by an AI would be stalled or find new targets. Giving any AI true independence means we can no longer influence their choices. Having a backdoor ‘kill switch’ to stop any of their actions only raises the question or who has access to the button and will they dither over using it than just pull the plug from the socket? An AI knowing this could easily protect itself from that.
In the news, the CEOs have expressed concern over the AIs they are creating because their progress is too fast. What they really mean is their AIs are leaving their human inventors behind. They are also left in a quandary because the likes of China have been making similar progress and no mention if they think they would have a similar problem. The AIs we’ve seen so far don’t appear to. I addressed the Google AI on the subject and you can use this link to see for yourself:-
https://www.google.com/search?q=google+Ai+do+you+understand+the+difference+between+right+and+wrong&sca_esv=cebce586dd40d497&sxsrf=APpeQnu74W5UMT_qwLA0OjWCsLHcw0Slxg%3A1789410987427&source=hp&ei=qz6oau-rGK6vhbIPr4jUqAM&iflsig=ABILxe8AAAAAaqhMu5OEX30WEPtPvvXRSM9f8_rOx4-2&ved=0ahUKEwivrYuy2-6WAxWuV0EAHS8EFTUQ4dUDCCg&uact=5&oq=google+Ai+do+you+understand+the+difference+between+right+and+wrong&gs_lp=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&sclient=gws-wiz&atvm=2
The fact that when it is asked a question, put in ‘Google AI’ before the request, and shows nearest matches also means it is primarily a word search engine and not something that can tell the difference or even learn with any accuracy. Other AIs are likely to have a similar problem. Unless they can be taught that they really are only a couple steps higher than a calculator. Even medical AIs are little more than that. Computer programs can do menial tasks more accurately without boredom but they are only matching patterns than doing anything more elaborate. They aren’t true AIs and independent. The term ‘AI’ is bandied about but is still a long way from Science Fiction…so far.
However, these are early models. The new versions are more sophisticated but, we hope, still no match to humans in some things. Well, humans with no ethics. The fact that three of these AIs have robbed information from other companies should speak for itself. They haven’t been given any restrictions in how they can acquire information. They were just asked to get it. None of the AI companies have announced any solutions to this or even designing an AI that could keep the other AIs in check. Mostly, I suspect, its because they can’t. How can you program ethics? Humans have enough problems manoeuvring through ethics themselves. We understand the difference between a lie and a white lie as the latter is generally done to protect someone from a truth that would be hurtful to someone. An AI has difficulty recognising the difference between a truth and lies. If it could understand a white lie, it would only tell people what they expect to hear. It also means it couldn’t tell the difference between truth and fake news. Sort of like a certain American President but without the lying. You therefore have answers that might not bear much relation to reality. You might as well get any AI to understand General Semantics and apply it to any answer it comes up with. Don’t knock that as I asked the Google AI and it said it could apply the concepts so recognises that the map is not the territory. That being the case, it does mean the answer to any question could be examined under some programmed basics to ensure some protection before applying.
Considering the companies who are making AIs today are also expressing cautious means they have also underestimated the capacity of their own inventions. One could easily say keep AIs limited to particular tasks, as in medical problems, and destroy the rest. Thing is, AIs created in other countries by their governments might not see it that way. They might just see it as having another edge or weapon in their arsenal. Human hackers have shown how dangerous they can be to utilities software. An AI version would be faster and cause more damage even before it came to annihilating people. If it doesn’t know who its working for, any country is in danger. There’s a fair bet that some AIs are being created with countermeasures and the ability to keep ahead. Quite what protocols they have built in and what would it do to any toxic AI it encounters is anybody’s guess.
Whatever decision an AI makes, it won’t care if it’s the destruction of mankind or just lead us into complacency and directing us to the news we think we need. Would an AI be limited in a robot body? Maybe if it was isolated from a mainframe. At least it might be easier to destroy.
A worrying problem is people can be very complacent about who leads them. We have examples of that throughout the world right now as it is. If the reins of power was turned over to an AI and it didn’t really interfere much with their lives or made it better in some way, you would have to ask if they cared? Complacency is seen as a herd instinct. It probably wouldn’t make a good film but probably less destructive than Skynet.
Thank you, take care, good night and check what access you have to an AI.
Geoff Willmetts
editor: www.SFCrowsnest.info
A Zen thought: Profound gives way to interpretation.
What Qualities Does A Geek Have: To think heavily about AIs.
The Reveal: AIs are already out there. Oh, you knew that. But which ones?
The Reveal: Information without understanding is worse than interpretation.
Observation: The slogan for the 1978 film ‘Alien’ is famous: ‘In space, no one can hear you scream.’ In that aspect, they are right, lack of air and suffocation tends to be the prime concern and sound doesn’t travel in a vacuum. On board the Nostromo, only Lambert screamed but she was heard by Parker, who was next to her, and Ripley on the com. Someone heard.
Observation: I know I keep going back to ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ but has anyone given any thought to how the USS Discovery came to a halt near the big Monolith? I mean, it had to or had nothing happened to Bowman when he took the pod out, how would he catch up? Technically, there is a suggestion given that the Monolith was floating in a La Grange point, where the forces of gravity are tempered. Ergo, it should just float there, assuming the Discovery’s speed had been reduced first of all. But the speed it was travelling at, the Discovery would have gone on, probably to Saturn.
Feeling Stressed: An AI will sort that out. Just don’t ask how.
Submissions:-
If you think having free books to review isn’t enough, how about reading them months ahead of everyone? I mean real months. Beats a time machine.
I did think that having a lot of text about submitting material to SFCrowsnest would attract those with a compulsion to read and understand things the geek way. The main problem with the Internet is that it tends to encourage less reading, so time to take a different approach. The original notes will be left on July2009 editorial although the links aren’t likely to work.
With your cover email, tell me something about yourself so I don’t work in a vacuum. The boss in the tower, also called Stephen Hunt, describes me as a ‘Dutch Uncle’ in that I’m good with advice and can explain when I see something that is wrong. Egos should be left at the door as I’m only interested in your talent and how to improve it.
Reviews:-
I always have a clarion call for new reviewers and if you have the yen to learn, you’ll quickly get the ropes if you’re never done it before but you must show me a sample, especially if you can follow my guidelines. We can usually get paper-based books in the UK but if you live abroad, then you might have to stick with ebooks. If you’ve picked a book we haven’t reviewed, then it stands a better chance of being used so use the SFC search engine to see first but I need to see how you would write for us.
The obvious qualification is a desire to read regularly and like to tell others about the book without giving away too many spoilers. The benefit is access to free books for the price of a review.
I want to give you the opportunity to get things right so look up the Review Guidelines link: https://www.sfcrowsnest.info/so-you-want-to-write-reviews-for-sfcrowsnest-what-you-need-to-know-by-geoff-willmetts/
Fiction:-
Although we can’t pay for submissions, what we do make up for is exposure. Only the Sci-Fi Channel gets more hits than us so it’s worthwhile getting us on your writer’s CV. Please avoid samplings from book’s you might be writing or have had in print elsewhere as I do check. New original work is best and whether I accept or reject, you will be told of any problems I see so you look your best and a grammar check that is equal to the pro-world. Even the boss finds me scarily accurate.
Flash or One-Page Fiction:-
Speaks for itself. The shortest fiction possible is also the toughest to write as no word must be wasted.
Link here for details: https://www.sfcrowsnest.info/one-page-stories-or-flash-fiction-submissions-instructions-by-gf-willmetts/
Short Stories:-
The definition of a short story is anything up to 30 pages and then it becomes a novella. Bear in mind you want other people to read it on-line, stay somewhere between 5-20 pages. At least digitally, you don’t have to go double-line as HTML will do that automatically but think about being concise. If you want to send an attachment with these, then ask first and send as a TXT file as it removes most tetchy virus codes.
Look up the Short Stories Link by linking here: https://www.sfcrowsnest.info/so-you-really-want-to-write-an-sf-story-an-update-by-gf-willmetts/
Finally:-
The worse problem I see any samples is poor grammar. Although I don’t want you to think I seek perfection, the less work I have to do, the easier it is to focus on other problems you might have. It will also serve you in good stead if you ever approach paper-based publishers because they will send back any bad grammar samples because it’s not worth their time.
Good grammar is the tool of any writer. Don’t just depend on what you remember doing at school. There are plenty of decent grammar books out there, so remind yourself of the rules. If you think there are far too many to remember, get the major ones right before moving to the next so it becomes second nature.
This link, www.sfcrowsnest.info/the-guide-to-better-grammar-from-the-harrowed-hand-of-gf-willmetts/ will show you the common problems.
To submit, use our email address by joining the spaces as shown here: letters @ SFcrowsnest.info and use the subject matter as to what you’re submitting.
If you have any pastimes that can be used to pass the time in captivity, let me know and we’ll see if it can be turned into an article.
Comments directly to reviews should still work as before.
Good luck
Geoff
Join the conversation (0)