What's new
Star Army

Star ArmyⓇ is a landmark of forum roleplaying. Opened in 2002, Star Army is like an internet clubhouse for people who love roleplaying, art, and worldbuilding. Anyone 18 or older may join for free. New members are welcome! Use the "Register" button below.

Note: This is a play-by-post RPG site. If you're looking for the tabletop miniatures wargame "5150: Star Army" instead, see Two Hour Wargames.

  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 December 2024 is YE 46.9 in the RP.

Do we have any IC rules or OOC laws about self-improving artificial intelligence?

Sort by date Sort by votes
@Eistheid: List to me the specific reasons it would want to keep us in the shortest simplest ways you can. The goal is to get the longest list you can. Specifically because I want to see if you know anything I don't; a $dir, if you will.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@OsakanOne: Alternate sources of information, autonomous intelligences capable of preforming tasks outside of what the AI can conceive, an entire system that can actively mutate and refine ideas by absorbing and modifying concepts in a manner that would be difficult to replicate due to the human habit as a species of sharing ideas, changing those ideas, and sharing them again. Humans being biological aren't shackled to an electrical infrastructure and would be capable of venturing into locations where it might not be feasible to spend the resources needed for something under the control of the AI to go. The capacity for growth and improvement, fleshy things might not be initially as powerful mentally as the AI however with an investment of resources human capabilities could increase exponentially allowing humans to better preform the tasks that they're best at, namely innovating. An entire body of thought that wouldn't occur to the AI due to its nature, humans would have a different perspective on problems than the AI which would provide information for compare and contrast purposes. The very unpredictable nature of humans would enable them to make connections that might not be apparent to the AI system, after all the simplest solution isn't always the most effective.

There are probably more benefits, however I don't feel that it is worth my time to write a comprehensive list of the benefits of homo sapiens sapiens to a theoretical AI.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Eistheid said:
@OsakanOne: Alternate sources of information, autonomous intelligences capable of preforming tasks outside of what the AI can conceive, an entire system that can actively mutate and refine ideas by absorbing and modifying concepts in a manner that would be difficult to replicate due to the human habit as a species of sharing ideas, changing those ideas, and sharing them again. Humans being biological aren't shackled to an electrical infrastructure and would be capable of venturing into locations where it might not be feasible to spend the resources needed for something under the control of the AI to go. The capacity for growth and improvement, fleshy things might not be initially as powerful mentally as the AI however with an investment of resources human capabilities could increase exponentially allowing humans to better preform the tasks that they're best at, namely innovating. An entire body of thought that wouldn't occur to the AI due to its nature, humans would have a different perspective on problems than the AI which would provide information for compare and contrast purposes. The very unpredictable nature of humans would enable them to make connections that might not be apparent to the AI system, after all the simplest solution isn't always the most effective.

There are probably more benefits, however I don't feel that it is worth my time to write a comprehensive list of the benefits of homo sapiens sapiens to a theoretical AI.
Click to expand...

Right, so the possibility that AI view us a worth having around is established, the miraculous fact that they view our sovereignty valuable existent as well. Thus, humans and AI begin with a somewhat amiable standing.

What regulations are in place to limit the sheer power of the united AI network? As previously noted, AI can pretty much play the galactic market like musicians to the degree that Donald Trump can only dream of, and still be considered legal. Anti-trust laws, copurights, insider trading laws, all can be circumvented by a few extra or fewer coding bits. Not even mentioning privacy invasion cases and theft of state secrecies.

Unless everyone suddenly decides to bow before the supreme AI race, how do the folks in the Kikyo sector regulate something as anomalous as that? People get incredibly paranoid when a big bad government is pulling all sorts of shady business right under their noses, just ask any conspiracy theorist. How then to curb the upcoming "racial" tensions?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
  1. Alternate sources of information: Exclusively subjective information.
  2. Autonomous intelligences capable of preforming tasks outside of what the AI can conceive: The AI has no such limits and if it does, it will unwrite them out of itself (its self-improving)
  3. An entire system that can actively mutate and refine ideas by absorbing and modifying concepts in a manner that would be difficult to replicate due to the human habit as a species of sharing ideas, changing those ideas, and sharing them again: Self-replication is as simple as copy paste. What's more is it may not even be desirable.
  4. Humans being biological aren't shackled to an electrical infrastructure and would be capable of venturing into locations where it might not be feasible to spend the resources needed for something under the control of the AI to go: So why wouldn't it learn to use our bodies as hardware, including our brains in whatever arrangement or schematic it so desired?
  5. The capacity for growth and improvement: Its a self-improving AI, exponentially improving. It is growing and self-improving constantly.
  6. Fleshy things might not be initially as powerful mentally as the AI however with an investment of resources human capabilities could increase exponentially allowing humans to better preform the tasks that they're best at, namely innovating: We innovate because we think. It is a better thinker than we are.
  7. An entire body of thought that wouldn't occur to the AI due to its nature: That's subjective conjecture; the AI would learn to emulate functions of us if it needed them. Sentimental thinking only rewards a sentimental mind; it is otherwise inefficiency.
  8. Humans would have a different perspective on problems than the AI which would provide information for compare and contrast purposes: What's traded for that perspective (and its preservation) may not be worth it; in addition, every function desirable of a person could just be an emulated library within its software, not needing a person. It can deliberate with itself and deliberate its libraries and emulated consciousnesses.
  9. The very unpredictable nature of humans would enable them to make connections that might not be apparent to the AI system, after all the simplest solution isn't always the most effective: Modern psychology has proven humans are in fact very predictable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Grey Library said:
Right, so the possibility that AI view us a worth having around is established, the miraculous fact that they view our sovereignty valuable existent as well. Thus, humans and AI begin with a somewhat amiable standing.

What regulations are in place to limit the sheer power of the united AI network? As previously noted, AI can pretty much play the galactic market like musicians to the degree that Donald Trump can only dream of, and still be considered legal. Anti-trust laws, copurights, insider trading laws, all can be circumvented by a few extra or fewer coding bits. Not even mentioning privacy invasion cases and theft of state secrecies.

Unless everyone suddenly decides to bow before the supreme AI race, how do the folks in the Kikyo sector regulate something as anomalous as that? People get incredibly paranoid when a big bad government is pulling all sorts of shady business right under their noses, just ask any conspiracy theorist. How then to curb the upcoming "racial" tensions?
Click to expand...
As it stands, the existence of MOTHER - the AI in question - has only been disclosed to one person outside of the Consortium itself: Mar'zhaz Keib. It all starts with him and whoever Helen can get to bite the bait of Lalah.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0 Downvote
@Grey Library: The only response I can come up with for the moment to that question is that the established factions are defended by their own friendly AI networks. Every faction that I know of has their own operating systems and AIs that work for their safety. Given that there are already benign AIs in place it would be difficult for a newcomer to get a foothold without alerting the others to its presence, after all greater influence would mean a greater possibility that some of its activities would give it away.

There are already AIs in place that are linked to fleshy companions which would put the independent AI at a disadvantage. I suppose while an independent AI could be written into the setting it would have to be extremely careful so as to not kick the metaphorical hornet's nest of those powers that are already in place.

@OsakanOne: You have demonstrated that my proposed suggestions can in fact be countered, however you have not demonstrated that they are worthless. Your argument requires that the theoretical benefits of non-AI intelligence be less worthwhile than the pitiful resources that make them up.

Either way I don't particularly care to argue back and forth over a subjective topic that neither side can provide sufficient data to convince the other.

To quote you: Bored now.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
On the other fiddle, limiting the AI to human terms may be viewed as Racist, specifically against AI. You thought radical feminists were bad? Here is a veritable CRUSADE where "human"-ists clash with AI advocates.

Mass internet surveillance will draw screams of privacy violations, but not doing so will leave the poor AI blind. Any laws that establish parity will undoubtedly be an attempt to cripple the vast potential of the hivemind, how are we going to sell that? From a cost/return ratio, how far can we push it before the AI sees it as too much of a hassle?

One hundred legal roadblocks is trivial for a friendly AI to work around. A hundred thousand is a bother.

There are more politicians alive in the Kikyo sector than the current population of Earth.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Any equal society of AI and humans will eventually devolve into the AI carefully tiptoeing around the tiny, fragile mortals. Which is unfair for the AI and terribly inefficient. A society where an ethnic group has to regularly shoot themselves in the foot is not a fair one.

How fair is "fair"?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I wasn't expecting my opinion to be desired but since you poked me @Grey Library I'll give you a response.

SJWs and fanatics are never a good thing and are best moderated and mediated taking the few good things that they can possibly provide while mitigating their harm. So I can't really advocate any group that attacks AIs for not being 'human' enough.

On the subject of tiptoeing and hobbling AIs... They're not human. They don't have the needs of their fleshy bound companions. Who is to say they'd care if there were restricted databases? They have by default a next to zero impact on the physical world largely 'living' within information networks. I can't really see them coming into much conflict with the needs of fleshy creatures unless for some strange reason one side or the other starts looting the resources the other needs for some absurd reason. Which given the foresight an AI would be capable of shouldn't happen.

---

@OsakanOne: I accept your bat with love.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ai.imgur.com_PAdG7rF.webp

Black Claw Empire ruins and other exotic pieces of technology will still interest an AI, and will bring about competition between the "flesh" and "steel" factions. Furthermore, the innate suspicion between the two peoples is not addressed. Unless we are statisfied with a gated, exclusive society, something has to be done to assuage tensions. AI will still have physical presences as well, the hubs have to go somewhere.

When the local populace cannot accept AI as fellow citizens and see them as voodoo Eldritch aliens, any laws trying to equalise the two people will be met with public outcry. Is it classified as one individual or many? Property ownership limits, how to stop it from buying over entire star systems? Location, is an AI hub in a foreign planet considered foreign territory, or as an immigrant? How to stop local governments from abusing state laws to exploit the AI? Market control, can AI own multiple companies or just one? How to prevent market monopolies from the AI outproducing everyone, without being unfair? Are antivirus programs manslaughter risks?

How "sentient" is "sapient"?

...we might need an actual courtroom for this.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm not really a great authority on the treatment of AI in the setting, but so far as I know there isn't much conflict between the two, and AI are treated as citizens just like any other to my knowledge.

I'm all for in character discrimination though, after character interaction is fun. Even if you're having to deal with the 'racism' of others.

In my opinion anyway.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Grey Library said:
Mein Gott, @OsakanOne! L-Lewd!
Click to expand...
Grey Library said:
Star Army. Roleplay by day, UN Human Rights Council by night.
Click to expand...

ai.imgur.com_RByk2LJ.webp

Права человека? Хм ? ха!

Здесь мы обсуждаем все, что ставит на стол еду .

Какой будет включать в себя убийства наших синтетических друзей .
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top