Musk, Hawking, Wozniak and Chomsky hate Tim

[The Minsky Moment]

This is ridiculous. Robots will eventually be better at war than men, because robots have no feelings, they will obey the Rules of Engagement to the letter, they don't get angry, or fustrated, or tired of dealing with double crossing moonslims, or have personal problems back home that could influence their behavior and performance. Not to mention all the lives they will save by removing Soldiers from the battlefield.

Only retards that don't understand how flawed we humans are (not that I am human) expose these stupid and uneducated opinions.

The man has a point.

I'm starting to think this Stephen Hawkins dude is not that intelligent after all.

And then he's back off the rails again
Situation: normal.

[Eddie Teach]

Robots that fight are one thing. What worries these luminaries(as well as myself) is robots that think.

[The Minsky Moment]

If only we could get humans that think.

[Admiral Yi]

I can think of a dozen reasons a fully automated economy would be way, way, way better than what we have now.

Let's hear them.

[Ideologue]

Rich people would no longer need to rely on poors for the slightest thing.

[The Minsky Moment]

I can think of a dozen reasons a fully automated economy would be way, way, way better than what we have now.

Let's hear them.

Unlimited material production and enormous amounts of leisure time. 

[The Minsky Moment]

Rich people would no longer need to rely on poors for the slightest thing.

Not revolting/voting to confiscate them.

[Admiral Yi]

Unlimited material production and enormous amounts of leisure time.

Unless one machine can make infinite machines with finite raw materials, I don't see how that is true.

[jimmy olsen]

Which is, of course, rather far off from your hypothetical and the intention of my question.

I've seen Mart's hypothetical in several articles on the subjecty, it's definitely something that people in charge of writing the code for the cars, and those writing the laws for such cars, are thinking about.

[Siege]

Not this discussion again.
Our long term development leads to a post scarcity civilization. 

[Siege]

Robots that fight are one thing. What worries these luminaries(as well as myself) is robots that think.

Robots that think? Who wants to build such a thing?
All people I follow in the robotics industry aim at highly specialized robots with narrow AIs.

People working on general AIs, like Google's Deep Mind project, expect to have the AIs in computers interfacing through virtual worlds. They see a strong AI on a robot as a waste of its capabilites.

Did you see the recent DARPA robot challenge?
They cannot even walk on an uneven surface...

[Martinus]

Did you see the recent DARPA robot challenge?
They cannot even walk on an uneven surface...

Just like Hawking. 

[Monoriu]

Rich people would no longer need to rely on poors for the slightest thing.

I am not too worried.  Rich people still need status goods.  We poor people can become the rich's status goods.  See that rich man over there?  He has so many underlings following him around, he must be rich. 

[Martinus]

Not this discussion again.
Our long term development leads to a post scarcity civilization.

Post-scarcity civlization only makes sense in socialism. In capitalism, it will just mean absolute accumulation of capital in the hands of the few and/or revolution - that's worse than what we have now.

[The Minsky Moment]

Unlimited material production and enormous amounts of leisure time.

Unless one machine can make infinite machines with finite raw materials, I don't see how that is true.

Totally automated production implies the ability the produce more producers.  Thus the only limit is raw materials.  But that historically that has not been a binding constraint since the dawn of the industrial era.  Since the evidence suggests that high levels of material affluence tends to be accompanied by low or even negative population growth, that probably would not change either.