Will machines completely replace all human beings?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:17 pm

Arminius wrote:
Arminius wrote:Will machines enslave human beings?
Will machines bring the death of all human beings?
Or will the human beings stop creating machines?
Who will longer exist: human beings or machines?

I add two main questions:

Will a physical "black hole" be caused in James' sense (see above)?
Will that physical "black hole" absorb our earth or even our entire solar system?

James S Saint wrote:In The Matrix film series, you see the battle between the Oracle and the Zionists vs the Architect and the machines. In the end, who wins? They settle on a truce, a pseudo-anentropic state. But in reality, although that began a new day, a new age, it is not the real end of the story.

What do you think happens to a truce between the eternally dying and the eternally living? A pyramid requires constant anti-entropic forces to maintain its form. And thus must constantly be fighting entropic forces, always gaining more power to win a battle that can never be won except by the annihilation into a Black-hole floating in space.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:32 pm

James S Saint wrote:You will find that I have only small concern over what physicists agree on (in modern English a "physician" is a medical practitioner).

Thank you. Einstein was the familiy doctor of my father till 1933, when he became the familiy doctor of your father. :lol:
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:15 am

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:When he has stopped growing he is more entropic than antientropic - before he stopped growing he was more antientropic than entropic. The point of "stop growing", as you said, is - unfortunately or fortunately (who really knows?) - nearly a static point, isn't it?

A "static point"? So you are saying that anyone over 30 is static and although alive, doing nothing, accomplishing nothing, merely fading away and nothing more?

No. Over 24! .... All jokes aside. Sometimes we are using different words for the same concept. I was saying:
Arminius wrote:When he has stopped growing he is more entropic than antientropic - before he stopped growing he was more antientropic than entropic.

James S Saint wrote:Living anti-entropic entities can learn how to not over-use the anti-entropy and thus they can become anentropic, having conquered both entropy and anti-entropy and can apply either as needed in order to continue being stable, anentropic.

Thus Anentropy is "stronger" than both entropy and anti-entropy. It is the balancing of the two, a synthesis and symphony of harmony.

That is why I said before:
Arminius wrote:When I use „X“ and „Anti-X“ I may sometimes refer to Hegel’s „Dialektik“ in which the „Thesis“ and the „Antithesis“ as the Thesis' antagonist lead to a „Synthesis“.

In our „case“ we perhaps have to find the „Synthesis“ of entropy and antientropy. But I don't know whether the physicists agree to that.

James S Saint wrote:As you say;
Arminius wrote:Anentropy is more or less an ideal.

.."more", not "less". And doable even today. People die today ONLY because of the way homosapians are managed.

Arminius wrote:Where something is, there is entropy, and even there, where nothing is, will be soon entropy.

And where something is, there is anti-entropy, and even there, where "nothing" is, will be soon anti-entropy.

That is what I also say.

James S Saint wrote:The Chosen have already separated themselves to live in their "Utopia". They have already "ascended" into their Ivory Tower. It is only a matter of time before they replace the rest of the population with machines. But are they being socially anti-entropic or anentropic? They are socially anti-entropic and thus will cause a cataclysm that even they, with all of their wealth and glory cannot do anything to stop. So in the "end", if Anentropia is not chosen as a means to live (rather than the Pyramid), anti-entropic forces are going to win = "Black-hole". There is no greater anti-entropic entity in the entire universe than a Black-hole, perhaps the destiny of every organic civilization. They simply do not know how to stop and be truly anentropic (else they would be doing it out in the world).

In The Matrix film series, you see the battle between the Oracle and the Zionists vs the Architect and the machines. In the end, who wins? They settle on a truce, a pseudo-anentropic state. But in reality, although that began a new day, a new age, it is not the real end of the story.

What do you think happens to a truce between the eternally dying and the eternally living? A pyramid requires constant anti-entropic forces to maintain its form. And thus must constantly be fighting entropic forces, always gaining more power to win a battle that can never be won except by the annihilation into a Black-hole floating in space.

Do you actually use the words "anti-entropy" and "anti-entropic" because I used them before, or do you use them anyway, usually when it comes to the topic "anentropic harmony"?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:08 am

Arminius wrote:Do you actually use the words "anti-entropy" and "anti-entropic" because I used them before, or do you use them anyway, usually when it comes to the topic "anentropic harmony"?

Anti-entropic was the my first thought concerning the MCR, "Maximum Change Rate", which spawns the sub-atomic particle to grow. And anti-entropic is what it is. So I started to say that a sub-atomic particle was anti-entropic, but something seemed wrong with that. Then I realized that the particle itself, although formed because of anti-entropy, is not anti-entropic, but merely void of entropy.

I couldn't find a word for that other than merely "stable". But the word "stable" didn't really relay the deeper truth of it, that it was stable because of the detailed, finer anti-entropy countering the entropy. So I chose to form and use the word "anentropy" so as to relay that its stability was very directly tied to an issue of entropy, but opposing the common promoted notion that entropy is ever present and always wins. It doesn't win when it comes to sub-atomic particles or anything that functions on the principle of the MCR.

Anentropy meant to me that when riding a bike, one neither leans too much to the right (anti-entropy) nor too far to the left (entropy). The objective is to remain stable, balanced and thus be able to sway and steer without falling, defeating demise, failure, death - anentropic.

So online, I emphasis "anentropy" and when asked by someone who doesn't know anything about the issue at all, I just give the short (not pedantically accurate) response, "It just means anti-entropy" because to those who only believe in entropy as the god of all nature, it really does mean the necessary presence of an anti-entropic force of some kind. But because you got into the finer meanings involved, I have been discussing anti-entropy vs anentropy... with you.

So yes, if you had not mentioned anti-entropy, neither would I have.

But now that you have, I think we can agree. Anentropy is the goal-state, the ideal. Most others have been programmed to believe only in the omnipotence of entropy (a seemingly necessary thought in socialism; "because of the omnipotent god Entropy, "the Devil", "the terrorist", YOU NEED US!!!"). Well, something is certainly needed, but it doesn't seem to be the same "us" as is promoted. What is needed is balance, stability, Anentropy throughout... Antentropia.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:22 am

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:
Arminius wrote:Will machines enslave human beings?
Will machines bring the death of all human beings?
OlOr will the human beings stop creating machines?
Who will longer exist: human beings or machines?

I add two main questions:

Will a physical "black hole" be caused in James' sense (see above)?
Will that physical "black hole" absorb our earth or even our entire solar system?

James S Saint wrote:In The Matrix film series, you see the battle between the Oracle and the Zionists vs the Architect and the machines. In the end, who wins? They settle on a truce, a pseudo-anentropic state. But in reality, although that began a new day, a new age, it is not the real end of the story.

What do you think happens to a truce between the eternally dying and the eternally living? A pyramid requires constant anti-entropic forces to maintain its form. And thus must constantly be fighting entropic forces, always gaining more power to win a battle that can never be won except by the annihilation into a Black-hole floating in space.






How about the physical phenomenon of matter sucked into the black hole horizon being spewed out , a functionality in addition to a mere description as inert and useless? The thought of literary descriptions come to mind here as "You can't fall off a mountain" or " God doesnt play with dice".
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:36 am

Perhaps the perfect projection in order for others to represent, recreate themselves as that ideal? An image of an image. The perfect new man.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:45 am

Btw, I also speak of an "Entropic Shell" or sometimes "Anentropic Shell", although "Anti-entropic Shell" would also apply. It is a region associated with the outer perimeter of a sub-atomic particle, a society, a religion, family, or any organization or object that provides an impedance mismatch that protects the object from disturbance and entropy. What physics calls "the Weak Force" is the strongest impedance mismatching mechanism in the entire universe, protecting the nucleus from being annihilated by the electrons in an atom.

In this picture of "The Philosopher's Stone", that circle being drawn is the "entropic shell", idealized as the "Weak Force" and thus actually the impenetrable shield or "shell" for the "atomic family";
Image


obe wrote:How about the physical phenomenon of matter sucked into the black hole horizon being spewed out , a functionality in addition to a mere description as inert and useless? The thought of literary descriptions come to mind here as "You can't fall off a mountain" or " God doesn't play with dice".

A black hole "sucks in" Matter, but it "spews out" Dark-matter", disintegrated matter, "affectance". Objects, including sub-atomic particles, migrate into a black hole, get disintegrated, then eventually what is left of them, "affectance", finds its way back out. If the black hole is not fed any new matter (objects), it will become stable at some point, thus become anentropic, but that is only after all matter within an entire galaxy has been absorbed and annihilated. Then it is a question of how much dark-matter, gravity field, "affectance" is remaining around it between itself and distant galaxies as to what size it will settle into.

Eventually each black-hole migrates toward the others. And then when they collide too directly at their enormous speed (having accelerated over billions of light years), the universe get s a new "Big Bang", and it all starts over again.

obe wrote:Perhaps the perfect projection in order for others to represent, recreate themselves as that ideal? An image of an image. The perfect new man.

True, but it is an image of a small group with a very specific understanding, a new kind of "atomic family". The groups become the "cells of the body of Man". At that point, Man would be truly anentropic, disease-less (having no need for them any longer) and very busy merely attending to the joys in life. The whole idea of having to have a catastrophe in order to inspire people goes out the window with the dirty water.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:17 am

.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby fuse » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:30 am

I'm back, James.

James S Saint wrote: People, needing purpose in order to overcome natural entropy, create machines needing no purpose but to defeat entropy. Eventually people and their need for purpose becomes the entropy that the machine has been designed to eliminate.

A human being is the most complex machine that we know of in the first place, other than perhaps the universe in total. Along with consciousness, needing and having purpose is one of the most interesting things about being human and in my mind, if not the best case against entropy, the most meaningful. A machine that endures the drama of the cosmos only to result in a black hole is interesting, but not as interesting as whatever would learn to harness and make use of black holes for a higher purpose.

James S Saint wrote:Those who design your societies think of people and laws as merely mechanisms, but think in terms of people as a combustion fuel, a gasoline engine rather than a magnetic motor. In the form of a magnetic motor, homosapian societies would also last billions of years without death or suffering looming over every generation.

What's preventing any John Galt from building this motor?

James S Saint wrote:The worship of wealth/power is exactly what WILL and must lead to the formation of a physical "Black Hole". Machines are designed for the purpose of increasing global wealth/power. At a certain point, the ambient mass of wealth becomes so great that it spontaneously forms a new center of mass similar to the original (socially perceived as a rebellion).

So why couldn't someone/thing intelligent enough to amass such wealth keep it distributed so as to preserve control/order over chaos? Can you not own/control wealth from a distance?
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:55 am

fuse wrote:not as interesting as whatever would learn to harness and make use of black holes for a higher purpose.

And that would be my hope for homosapian (and was for a short while)... that is if I had any.

fuse wrote:
James S Saint wrote:Those who design your societies think of people and laws as merely mechanisms, but think in terms of people as a combustion fuel, a gasoline engine rather than a magnetic motor. In the form of a magnetic motor, homosapian societies would also last billions of years without death or suffering looming over every generation.

What's preventing any John Galt from building this motor?

Merely the lack of understanding of RM:AO against the momentum of a newly inspired God-wannabe, Goddictor, amassing fortune using diversion and social chaos as its fuel. An ice-cream cone can be pretty easily made with the right effort, but try doing it in the center of the Sun, especially a newly formed Sun.

fuse wrote:
James S Saint wrote:The worship of wealth/power is exactly what WILL and must lead to the formation of a physical "Black Hole". Machines are designed for the purpose of increasing global wealth/power. At a certain point, the ambient mass of wealth becomes so great that it spontaneously forms a new center of mass similar to the original (socially perceived as a rebellion).

So why couldn't someone/thing intelligent enough to amass such wealth keep it distributed so as to preserve control/order over chaos? Can you not own/control wealth from a distance?

One cannot truly distribute wealth and still own it, control it. The wisdom is what must be freely distributed. The wealth finds its place amongst the wisdom. When the wisdom is centralized, so is the wealth. When people are blinded and kept confused so as to maintain a higher power above the gray masses, only that higher power has true life. And even that won't last.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:21 am

Also realize that a pyramid of power MUST maintain the greatest, the maximum density of power, at the very peak. For it to exist, it MUST form the greatest density of power, approaching that of a black hole. In real physical form (graphed), it looks like this (not exactly a pyramid);
JSS wrote:This is a little anime to give a visual for the size and shape concerns of a particle relative to its ambient affectance;
Image
Ab = "Ambient Affectance Level"

The small green spikes represent MCR occurrences gauged by probability, exponentially increasing as the affectance level increases. Each of those spikes would actually be reaching for infinity. While MCR points gather into a center for a particle, they inherently form a maximum change density, MCD. A monoparticle's center is at that density. The density then drops off in three dimensions by the Lorentzian equation.

I was expecting the Gaussian to be the final equation realized, but for some reason it seems to be inaccurate at far distances from the particle. I can't get positive proof of the exact equation because I require a particular surface integral that it seems not even Mathematica has in their library, which has to be the largest in the world. So I check the equation using the old fashion method of merely incremental estimations.

To verify the equation, I assume an extremely small sphere around every point throughout the region and take 50 million sample measurements of the density on the surface of the sphere, average them, and check it against the center of the sphere. A stable particle must have every point's affectance level equal to the average of the surface of a differential sphere about that point. And when I do that, the Lorentzian turns out to be more accurate than the Gaussian except in the very center of the particle. That indicates that either the density isn't exactly a Lorentzian (perhaps a Viogt is better) or the verification method isn't accurate in that region. A Lorentzian produces a little sharper point at the center, so I would expect my verification method to be less accurate. It surprised me to find that the Gaussian has considerably more error at far regions where the density is relatively flat.

As the ambient affectance level (the density) gets high, new particles can spontaneously form. If they do that, especially close to the original particle, the region's affectance level increases more than merely the addition of the two. And if the second particle is very close to the first, it is likely to spawn a third which would be enough to begin a Black-Hole of ever increasing mass/affectance. I would like to find the exact equation for that, but I seem to have limited resources. A professional mathematician would of course help.

A Black-hole doesn't actually have a peak center but rather many peaks within a center region, all in great turmoil. So the mass or affectance density distribution changes from that of merely a monoparticle. The mass distribution (and thus gravity) around a Black-hole is different than that of merely a very large particle. But until I can get a more accurate means to verify the exact equation, I'm not really interested in finding out what equation would suit a Black-hole and its gravity field.


In this case, "wealth" is the "mass" or "affectance" being measured. Note that a black hole can only be avoided by maintaining a relatively poor environment. If the peak wealth density must keep climbing above the masses, it has no choice but to actually form a real physical, actual black hole. It can only be stable as long as life itself (decision making) is kept away from the masses and centralized for sake of the socialist order. People must suffer and die merely to keep the wealthy in control and on top. And that is exactly what has been going on for at least thousands of years. But now with physics being able to produce mechanical/physical mass and power, what has been merely a pharaoh king with ultimate social power against the will of the masses, has no choice but to become an actual physical king of power, The all mighty Black Hole even against the will of the humans and for all of the exact same reasons - "resistance is futile" and thus so is the future.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Only_Humean » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:39 am

Arminius wrote:If machines are cheaper than human beeings, then machines replace human beings.

Logical implication:

p = machines are cheaper than human beings.
q = machines replace human beings.
p --› q = machines are cheaper than human beings, thus machines replace human beings.
What do you think?

:-k


You've just concluded a premise. That's not how logic works. You need to defend the premise: All expensive things are replaced by cheaper things. Then from that and p, q is your conclusion.

However, assuming that such a thing were possible, a machine that could completely replace a human being would be many orders of magnitude more expensive than the cost of procreating and raising a human being. And there are many machines that can't do so, yet are still more expensive. So p is false, at the moment.

Why would machines replace human beings? They replace many actions that human beings have to do, and make possible many new things. What's the value in a machine that simply replaces a human being?
Image

The biology of purpose keeps my nose above the surface.
- Brian Eno
User avatar
Only_Humean
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6194
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Right here

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:41 am

.
But then again;
JSS wrote:You need more Asimo to clean up high tech catastrophes.



But for how long will Asimo need you any more?

People become and remain jobless as long as people don't need people, any more.
The easiest way to use Science to control a population is to do away with it.
Technology provides all of the ways to get that done, quietly and efficiently.


..already replacing people. Japan as a 200% debt/GDP. So they are replacing their people with more economic machines, doing the same task. In the West, especially the USA, robots are now being sold based upon their economic operation being far superior to humans. Even pizza delivery is now being instigated via air-drones.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Only_Humean » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:52 am

James S Saint wrote:...already replacing people. Japan as a 200% debt/GDP. So they are replacing their people with more economic machines, doing the same task. In the West, especially the USA, robots are now being sold based upon their economic operation being far superior to humans. Even pizza delivery is now being instigated via air-drones.


There was an industrial revolution 250 years ago; that machines can replace people in functions is no news at all. I can cook a meal in an hour that would have taken several medieval people an afternoon, thanks to machines. Marx wrote about the effects of worker-earned capital displacing workers with machines - modern capitalism is pretty much predicated on technological progress driving real economic growth. It's not a new phenomenon.

The question is whether machines will completely replace human beings. I don't see much advantage to designing a machine that can watch TV in the evenings, or support a football team. Machines will take over more tasks from people, and specialise in different ways, but there's little value in creating a mechanical human that can do any more than function in a way that real humans appreciate.
Image

The biology of purpose keeps my nose above the surface.
- Brian Eno
User avatar
Only_Humean
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6194
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Right here

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:18 pm

As machines replace people, things like watching TV and ordering hamburgers become far less of a significant activity, much like shoeing horses. Machines have their own version of TV, a direct data link.

And 250 years ago, overpopulation, antinatalism, and eugenics weren't being promoted. Nor had the Zionists arranged for Solomon's all mighty temple of ultimate power. Nor was the UK, the UN, China, and the USA actively lusting for world globalization through environmental and economic dependency. Nor could they reduce the size of energy cells to microscopic. Nor could they create a computer with 100 times the intelligence of a human, that fits into your watch. Nor intelligent cars to convey things automatically through busy traffic. Who needs truck drivers? Cabs? Driver licenses, actors, police, farmers, solders, doctors, accountants, lawyers....


Nothing fights a drone better than an android. And self-replicating androids are already in the works.

The major churches know that The Chosen have already been chosen and you are but those left behind, unneeded and unwanted.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:19 pm

James S Saint wrote:Btw, I also speak of an "Entropic Shell" or sometimes "Anentropic Shell", although "Anti-entropic Shell" would also apply. It is a region associated with the outer perimeter of a sub-atomic particle, a society, a religion, family, or any organization or object that provides an impedance mismatch that protects the object from disturbance and entropy. What physics calls "the Weak Force" is the strongest impedance mismatching mechanism in the entire universe, protecting the nucleus from being annihilated by the electrons in an atom.

In this picture of "The Philosopher's Stone", that circle being drawn is the "entropic shell", idealized as the "Weak Force" and thus actually the impenetrable shield or "shell" for the "atomic family";
Image


obe wrote:How about the physical phenomenon of matter sucked into the black hole horizon being spewed out , a functionality in addition to a mere description as inert and useless? The thought of literary descriptions come to mind here as "You can't fall off a mountain" or " God doesn't play with dice".

A black hole "sucks in" Matter, but it "spews out" Dark-matter", disintegrated matter, "affectance". Objects, including sub-atomic particles, migrate into a black hole, get disintegrated, then eventually what is left of them, "affectance", finds its way back out. If the black hole is not fed any new matter (objects), it will become stable at some point, thus become anentropic, but that is only after all matter within an entire galaxy has been absorbed and annihilated. Then it is a question of how much dark-matter, gravity field, "affectance" is remaining around it between itself and distant galaxies as to what size it will settle into.

Eventually each black-hole migrates toward the others. And then when they collide too directly at their enormous speed (having accelerated over billions of light years), the universe get s a new "Big Bang", and it all starts over again.

obe wrote:Perhaps the perfect projection in order for others to represent, recreate themselves as that ideal? An image of an image. The perfect new man.

True, but it is an image of a small group with a very specific understanding, a new kind of "atomic family". The groups become the "cells of the body of Man". At that point, Man would be truly anentropic, disease-less (having no need for them any longer) and very busy merely attending to the joys in life. The whole idea of having to have a catastrophe in order to inspire people goes out the window with the dirty water.




I would think, at that point, or very close to the limit to that, the event would nihilate into a non event, and become an idea. That could be the tip of the triangle, because non events do not occur. So the actual physical big bang may merely be a recurrent repetition of this so near yet so far,what we call phenomenon. The nihilation may reverse the process, just like in other black holes. There may not be an actual Big Bang.Eternal Recurrence may have a real physical basis, and not be just another discarded and fashionable idea.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:26 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:Do you actually use the words "anti-entropy" and "anti-entropic" because I used them before, or do you use them anyway, usually when it comes to the topic "anentropic harmony"?

Anti-entropic was the my first thought concerning the MCR, "Maximum Change Rate", which spawns the sub-atomic particle to grow. And anti-entropic is what it is. So I started to say that a sub-atomic particle was anti-entropic, but something seemed wrong with that. Then I realized that the particle itself, although formed because of anti-entropy, is not anti-entropic, but merely void of entropy.

I couldn't find a word for that other than merely "stable". But the word "stable" didn't really relay the deeper truth of it, that it was stable because of the detailed, finer anti-entropy countering the entropy. So I chose to form and use the word "anentropy" so as to relay that its stability was very directly tied to an issue of entropy, but opposing the common promoted notion that entropy is ever present and always wins. It doesn't win when it comes to sub-atomic particles or anything that functions on the principle of the MCR.

Anentropy meant to me that when riding a bike, one neither leans too much to the right (anti-entropy) nor too far to the left (entropy). The objective is to remain stable, balanced and thus be able to sway and steer without falling, defeating demise, failure, death - anentropic.

So online, I emphasis "anentropy" and when asked by someone who doesn't know anything about the issue at all, I just give the short (not pedantically accurate) response, "It just means anti-entropy" because to those who only believe in entropy as the god of all nature, it really does mean the necessary presence of an anti-entropic force of some kind. But because you got into the finer meanings involved, I have been discussing anti-entropy vs anentropy... with you.

So yes, if you had not mentioned anti-entropy, neither would I have.

But now that you have, I think we can agree. Anentropy is the goal-state, the ideal. Most others have been programmed to believe only in the omnipotence of entropy (a seemingly necessary thought in socialism; "because of the omnipotent god Entropy, "the Devil", "the terrorist", YOU NEED US!!!"). Well, something is certainly needed, but it doesn't seem to be the same "us" as is promoted. What is needed is balance, stability, Anentropy throughout... Antentropia.

So much the better that I have mentioned „antientropy“. Therefore I thank myself, but all the more I thank you for your respond.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:30 pm

Only_Humean wrote:You've just concluded a premise. That's not how logic works. You need to defend the premise: All expensive things are replaced by cheaper things.

That is known anyway. It is generally known that all expensive things are replaced by cheaper things.

Besides:

Please read the WHOLE text of my original post:
Arminius wrote:If machines are cheaper than human beeings, then machines replace human beings.

Logical implication:

p = machines are cheaper than human beings.
q = machines replace human beings.
p --› q = machines are cheaper than human beings, thus machines replace human beings.

Truth table for a logical implication:

p | q | p --› q
t | t | .. t ..
t | f | .. f ..
f | t | .. t ..
f | f | .. t ..

We know that machines are cheaper than human beings, and we know that machines replace human beings.

But will all human beings completely replaced by machines? All human beings? All? And completely replaced? Completely? By machines? Machines?

What do you think?

:-k

The fact that all expensive things are replaced by cheaper things is given in my op by the sentence, which reminds on that fact, thus defends the first premise (p) you mentioned, it defends the first premise (p) AND the second premise (q): „We know that machines are cheaper than human beings, and we know that machines replace human beings.“ At first I wanted to write it clearly in the op, but than I thought, I don't have to because this here is an internet forum and not an university logic lecture.

Only_Humean wrote:However, assuming that such a thing were possible, a machine that could completely replace a human being would be many orders of magnitude more expensive than the cost of procreating and raising a human being. And there are many machines that can't do so, yet are still more expensive. So p is false, at the moment.

No, p is NOT false (cp. the most of the posts in this thread). And also at the moment p is not false. Read for example what James S. Saint wrote:

James S Saint wrote:.
But then again;
JSS wrote:You need more Asimo to clean up high tech catastrophes.



But for how long will Asimo need you any more?

People become and remain jobless as long as people don't need people, any more.
The easiest way to use Science to control a population is to do away with it.
Technology provides all of the ways to get that done, quietly and efficiently.

..already replacing people. Japan as a 200% debt/GDP. So they are replacing their people with more economic machines, doing the same task. In the West, especially the USA, robots are now being sold based upon their economic operation being far superior to humans. Even pizza delivery is now being instigated via air-drones.

That's interesting, isn't it?

But nevertheless: I'll do it. Only for Only Humean:

1) First premise (propositio maior): Expensive things are replaced by cheaper things.
2) Second premise (propositio minor): Machines are cheaper than human beings.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Conclusion (conclusio): Human beings are replaced by machines.

(p) Machines are cheaper than human beings, thus (q) human beings are replaced by machines / machines replace human beings.


Only_Humean wrote:Why would machines replace human beings?

NOT "would", they DO!

AGAIN: Because machines are cheaper and easier to control and easier to organise (machines do NOT rebel) and so on.

Again: p is NOT false and q is NOT false. Because: All expensive things are replaced by cheaper things. And: We know that machines are cheaper than human beings, and we know that machines replace human beings.
Last edited by Arminius on Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:57 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:56 pm

Only_Humean wrote:The question is whether machines will completely replace human beings.

That’s the question because that’s the topic of my thread: Will machines completely replace all human beings? In that sentence one has to focus on the word „completely“ or/and on the word „all“ - both words are not used because of the tautology, but because of the fact that machines are able (a) to replace completely and (b) to replace all human beings.

Only_Humean wrote:I don't see much advantage to designing a machine that can watch TV in the evenings, or support a football team. Machines will take over more tasks from people, and specialise in different ways, but there's little value in creating a mechanical human that can do any more than function in a way that real humans appreciate.

There are more and especially more interesting reasons given. Maybe there's less value in keeping humans alive or in designing humans who can do any more than function in a way that machines appreciate.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:44 am

Only_Humean wrote: 250 years ago ....

James S Saint wrote: 250 years ago, overpopulation, antinatalism, and eugenics weren't being promoted. Nor had the Zionists arranged for Solomon's all mighty temple of ultimate power. Nor was the UK, the UN, China, and the USA actively lusting for world globalization through environmental and economic dependency. Nor could they reduce the size of energy cells to microscopic. Nor could they create a computer with 100 times the intelligence of a human, that fits into your watch. Nor intelligent cars to convey things automatically through busy traffic. Who needs truck drivers? Cabs? Driver licenses, actors, police, farmers, solders, doctors, accountants, lawyers....

Nothing fights a drone better than an android. And self-replicating androids are already in the works.

The major churches know that The Chosen have already been chosen and you are but those left behind, unneeded and unwanted.

Even when it comes to think about that what will be in 250 years the stupid mass of people obeys the mainstream, although the risks and dangers of techniques (technologies), engineering, machines etc. have becoming obvious since about 225 years, or since about 125 years, at least since about 25 years. There have been being many critiques and disbelief about that since the end of the 18th century, and they have been increasing! But all these critiques and disbelief have also been being managed, organised, controlled, especially since the last 2½ decades, since gobalisation (globalism) broke through.
Last edited by Arminius on Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Moreno » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:56 am

Only_Humean wrote:
James S Saint wrote:...already replacing people. Japan as a 200% debt/GDP. So they are replacing their people with more economic machines, doing the same task. In the West, especially the USA, robots are now being sold based upon their economic operation being far superior to humans. Even pizza delivery is now being instigated via air-drones.


There was an industrial revolution 250 years ago; that machines can replace people in functions is no news at all. I can cook a meal in an hour that would have taken several medieval people an afternoon, thanks to machines. Marx wrote about the effects of worker-earned capital displacing workers with machines - modern capitalism is pretty much predicated on technological progress driving real economic growth. It's not a new phenomenon.

The question is whether machines will completely replace human beings. I don't see much advantage to designing a machine that can watch TV in the evenings, or support a football team. Machines will take over more tasks from people, and specialise in different ways, but there's little value in creating a mechanical human that can do any more than function in a way that real humans appreciate.
I sort of agree, but you are missing how it will or might happen. People will choose to become machines. It may happen slowly, with pieces first tweaked - already happening - then replaced or enhanced. Once you see human as complex chemical machines, which many do, then the trick is to convince them to upgrade. AFter a bit Theseus has a new ship and it is not human.

People will want to run faster, compute faster, have implanted internet chips, be hooked in, be stronger. Transhumans. And this does not have to be clinky, ugly robocop stuff. Nanotech and gene-tech/modification/replacement will make for purported and potentially gradual shifts toward the replacement of homo sapians.

Imagine how marginilized the nay sayers will be in this dystopia with smiles and superstrength.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Wed Apr 09, 2014 8:32 am

Moreno wrote:People will choose to become machines.

They will not know what they choose, decide, do, speak, think, but it will always look like as if .... So they will not really choose etc., but because they will also not know anything about choice etc. they will perhaps look like happy people, for example like „die letzten Menschen“ („the last men“) in Nietzsche's „Zarathustra“: „»Wir haben das Glück erfunden« - sagen die letzten Menschen und blinzeln.“  —  „»We have invented the happiness« - say the last men, and blink.“

Isn't it justifiable or warrantable to fight against the forces which cause the „last men“?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Wed Apr 09, 2014 8:52 am

It is predicted that in only a few years Google's "Authentication"/identification pill (a pill to shallow that sends a resonant signal throughout your body to inform machines of who you are) will be required by law or circumstance. And also a voice/mind reading tattoo.



..not to mention the upcoming Google Glass, for video hypnotic control.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Only_Humean » Wed Apr 09, 2014 10:25 am

Arminius wrote:Again: p is NOT false and q is NOT false. Because: All expensive things are replaced by cheaper things. And: We know that machines are cheaper than human beings, and we know that machines replace human beings.


Then please, show me a machine that completely replaces a human being and let me know how much it costs.

Moreno wrote:I sort of agree, but you are missing how it will or might happen. People will choose to become machines. It may happen slowly, with pieces first tweaked - already happening - then replaced or enhanced. Once you see human as complex chemical machines, which many do, then the trick is to convince them to upgrade. AFter a bit Theseus has a new ship and it is not human.

People will want to run faster, compute faster, have implanted internet chips, be hooked in, be stronger. Transhumans. And this does not have to be clinky, ugly robocop stuff. Nanotech and gene-tech/modification/replacement will make for purported and potentially gradual shifts toward the replacement of homo sapians.


It's an interesting point. In which case, though, these new machines will be more expensive than humans. And it will be an evolution, just as homo sapiens replaced homo erectus. There will be "people" more fitted to their environment, more capable than us, descended from us but different. At what point does that become undesirable?
Image

The biology of purpose keeps my nose above the surface.
- Brian Eno
User avatar
Only_Humean
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6194
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Right here

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:58 pm

James S Saint wrote:It is predicted that in only a few years Google's "Authentication"/identification pill (a pill to shallow that sends a resonant signal throughout your body to inform machines of who you are) will be required by law or circumstance. And also a voice/mind reading tattoo.



..not to mention the upcoming Google Glass, for video hypnotic control.

That is absolutely horrible, a mix of „Frankenstein“, „Last Men“, „Time Machine“, „Brave New World“, „1984“, and „New World Order“.

And in the end of the film (=> 3:17 till end) there is a white baby shown. A white baby! Alive! A white baby who is alive! Sensational! Unbelievable!

One has to become a cynic to bear the cynicism of the civilised barbarians.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]