The Danger of the Artificial Intelligence

'Transcendence looks at the implications of artificial intelligence - but are we taking AI seriously enough?'

In the new movie Transcendence, Johnny Depp becomes more machine than man, with the film offering a fresh take on artificial intelligence. Stephen Hawking, notable all-around bright guy, came away from that movie with concerns. According to him, AI might be among the worst things to happen to humans.

He doesn’t paint a pretty picture, either. Though we’re enamored with recent developments like Google Now or Siri, Hawking cautions against what the future could bring. Saying “creating AI would be the biggest event in human history”, it could also be much more dangerous:

In the near term, world militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets; the UN and Human Rights Watch have advocated a treaty banning such weapons. In the medium term, as emphasised by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee in The Second Machine Age, AI may transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation.

Hawking, like you or I might, also fears the worst. He aptly points out that we have no method for reigning in development. In a very Terminator way, Hawking fears machines will essentially become self-aware, saying “machines with superhuman intelligence could repeatedly improve their design even further”. We would have created intelligence, and in turn created evolution on a different scale.

Hawking also notes “the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all.” While most will watch Johnny Depp become a machine and gleefully giggle, Hawking is operating on another level. He makes salient points, too.

Those tasked with building the services we all love are also burdened with throttling it. A step too far could end up being a step into oblivion.

Source: The Independent

Does Hawking worship an unknown god?

StePHEN HAWKING WORSHIPS THE “UNKNOWN GOD”

(Please click the above link for the whole article)

...Hawking understands well the ultimate atheist dilemma. It is not whether or not evolution can explain the the genesis of life. It is not whether God shows his face here and there. It is not even whether spiritual bodies can be scientifically proven. It is the problem of existence itself. Where did everything come from? The law of cause and effect says that there must be a sufficient explanation for existence. If there is no God, then there is no answer to the question, Why is there something rather than nothing?

However, Hawking has the answer. In his new book (from what I understand) he argues for the reality of multiple universes. From here he argues that if there are many universes (possibly an infinite number), one will have characteristics in physics that are much different than ours. One of these characteristics may be that it does not have to abide by the law of cause and effect. If so, in this universe, something can come from nothing.

At this point I pause and say to myself, Stephen Hawking believes in a god. You see, this is not so much unlike the tentative belief that aliens created our universe held by Richard Dawkins. In both cases, you have to have something above and beyond us which explains our existence. There must be something/someone which exists outside of our universe to explain the existence of our universe since the laws of our universe militate against self-creation. For Hawking there is a “universe” out there which is responsible for all things. Hawking’s creative universe where something can come from nothing carries the same basic and essential characteristic of the Christian view of God: transcendence. Sure, Christians add attributes to our understanding of God such as intelligence, love, and intervention, but the essential realm of existence is the same. God resides in a realm where the laws of physics do not have the same application. Why? Because he created them. They had their genesis with him through the creation of our time/space universe. God, in his essence, has no relation to time, space, or matter, therefore, he is not “under” the laws we are under. What we call heaven (often as a metonymy for God), Hawking calls “the universe where the same rules do not apply.” What this “universe” is like would most certainly be a great mystery to Hawking, but it exists nonetheless. Why? Because it must exist. There simply must be a sufficient explanation for all things. Therefore, Hawking believes in a mysterious creator of all things. Whether this creator is personal or not is not the issue right now. The point is that Hawking invokes a mysterious creator he calls “Other Universe.” This puts him in the religious camp of either pantheism or deism.

Does he worship this “other universe”? It depends on what you mean by “worship.” He credits it with the creation of all things, believes in its power and transcendence, and, now, is evangelizing on its behalf. But he does not have a relationship with it and does not believe it cares about him. Like Paul walking through Athens and noticing the alter built to the “unknown god” (Acts 17:23), Stephen Hawking has a similar alter with the same kind of generic name: “Another Universe.”

The point is that ultimately you have to avoid the “Where did it all come from?” question if you want to be a consistent atheist. Hawking’s pronouncement that God is not necessary dies the death of his own qualification. His faith step here is in the right direction, but needs to go further. I simply call on him to see that this God has revealed himself to us in the person of Jesus Christ and call us to a life of recognition and service to him.

Having said this, I do say what a brilliant mind Hawkins truly does have. Even though he is an unbeliever, he shows God’s image so brightly in many ways.