Neuralink - Good or bad?

[Geffers]

This video gives us a 17 minute insight into what is developing in the World of AI and interfaces to the brain. Quite scary actually.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Geffers

 

[Tiffany]

I used to be eager about the latest neuralink progress until I learned the really sad side of it during their development phase with monkeys. It would obviously be nice if people that had disabilities could have improved lives by enhanced devices or a hybrid of AI, but it seems technology is still a long way off?

 

[Retro]

I used to be eager about the latest neuralink progress until I learned the really sad side of it during their development phase with monkeys.

Oh yeah, as soon as research wanders into animal testing territory, I condemn it. I say do it on criminals in prison. You'll get more reliable data and it will help to deter people from committing crimes in the first place.

 

[Mars]

Oh yeah, as soon as research wanders into animal testing territory, I condemn it. I say do it on criminals in prison. You'll get more reliable data and it will help to deter people from committing crimes in the first place.

If only indeed! Unfortunately dogooders will soon raise a hue and cry on behalf of the inmates' violated human rights. Nevermind the fact that those derelicts had violated and trampled on innocent people's human rights; at times the sacred right to Life itself.

 

[Crims]

If only indeed! Unfortunately dogooders will soon raise a hue and cry on behalf of the inmates' violated human rights. Nevermind the fact that those derelicts had violated and trampled on innocent people's human rights; at times the sacred right to Life itself.

Or annoyingly never show up when the opposite happens - a unjust inmate is chosen. Neuralink is fundamentally the wrong approach, and it's money + tech vs humanity.

 

[Mars]

Or annoyingly never show up when the opposite happens - a unjust inmate is chosen. Neuralink is fundamentally the wrong approach, and it's money + tech vs humanity.

Definitely, money talks and who cares about the animals

 

[live627]

I say do it on criminals in prison. You'll get more reliable data and it will help to deter people from committing crimes in the first place.

That assumes that it is disclosed.

 

[Retro]

That assumes that it is disclosed.

It wouldn't be possible to keep something like this secret indefinitely, so no, it's not happening.

 

[live627]

the cia loves their secretive social exxperiments

 

[Uncrowned]

Neuralink should be held off and needs a lot of testing before anyone should be able to get one implanted in them. However, the current patient base is disabled individuals and I have no reason to stand in the way of allowing them to try it. I cannot truly put myself in the shoes of a person who has no access to their limbs or even the ability to communicate, but I can agree that the hope of regaining the abilities lost is worth a lot of risk for those people. Would I risk my life for the ability to speak to others or to see again? Maybe, I don't know, but I would like to have the choice to take the risk.

One issue I have with that video is the part about AI. I could be wrong here, but I do not believe there is any way for a machine learning programmed AI (like ChatGPT) to transform into an AGI. This transformation is in the processing and underlying programming of the AI and we are likely decades (if not thousands of years) from AGI in most models and assuming ChatGPT can "evolve" into an AGI seems to be without merit or research. As far as I know, he just made up this entire section of the video to generate fear.

I also see fighting the creation of AGI to be silly. It is going to happen as the first nation with AGI is going to win this game of IRL civilization that we are playing and while one or two major nations might avoid it, the world powers will not accept defeat. So, we might as well plan for how AGI will treat humans instead of some hope that humans won't create it.

 

[Crims]

I also see fighting the creation of AGI to be silly. It is going to happen as the first nation with AGI is going to win this game of IRL civilization that we are playing and while one or two major nations might avoid it, the world powers will not accept defeat. So, we might as well plan for how AGI will treat humans instead of some hope that humans won't create it.

Capitalism, and other examples of 'if it's eventually going to happen it should' hamper future avenues, besides the example Neuralink. The regular way that would go is 'well Elon shouldn't try' - there are weaker although better ways (in the long run) available. Treating animals as numbers isn't the way.

Billionaires shouldn't be commended nor criticised for spending their money. The results speak on their own.

 

[Uncrowned]

Capitalism, and other examples of 'if it's eventually going to happen it should' hamper future avenues, besides the example Neuralink. The regular way that would go is 'well Elon shouldn't try' - there are weaker although better ways (in the long run) available. Treating animals as numbers isn't the way.

Billionaires shouldn't be commended nor criticised for spending their money. The results speak on their own.

I'm confused. I highly doubt Musk will live long enough to create an AGI and we have no reason to use animals to test a AGI (granted an AGI with the brain of a Honey Badger would make the Terminator movies much more interesting). Nor do I believe it has anything to do with an economy, beyond perhaps the stronger economies being more likely to achieve it first.

Going back to neuralink, testing it on animals is something that I view as unethical. However, animal testing as a whole is moral grey area and we haven't surpassed getting it removed from testing perfume, yet alone possible cures for paralysis. So sadly I don't see animal testing being removed from the mix any day soon, although it would be nice if we could.

 

[Crims]

I'd be interested to see when disabled people get more capable than us regulars in the office, assuming that we ever reach that point as mentioned.

I'm confused. I highly doubt Musk will live long enough to create an AGI and we have no reason to use animals to test a AGI (granted an AGI with the brain of a Honey Badger would make the Terminator movies much more interesting). Nor do I believe it has anything to do with an economy, beyond perhaps the stronger economies being more likely to achieve it first.

Going back to neuralink, testing it on animals is something that I view as unethical. However, animal testing as a whole is moral grey area and we haven't surpassed getting it removed from testing perfume, yet alone possible cures for paralysis. So sadly I don't see animal testing being removed from the mix any day soon, although it would be nice if we could.

Sorry, I saw a chance to digress from the core topic.
I'm talking about the creation of Neuralink, regardless of AGIs or not. The way I read that post was like 'Morals be damned', and while not the intent (I hope) it's something that stuck out more to me, as I've read that said of all of Elon Musk's creations. It's obviously black morally, for some hopeful future justification. I hardly see anyone criticising the Boring company, Neuralink or his actual contributions in Tesla and the repeated intent stood out more than Neuralink itself.

 

[Retro]

ppl, I've moved this thread to the AI section as it's a better fit for it. I've also stickied it.

 

[Retro]

The video is right that AI poses huge potential dangers, some of which we can't even imagine now. Can you imagine some digitised version of a dictator that lives forever? Can you think of any particular dictator who'd like to do this? World domination might well be possible under such a scenario and nuclear war is a possibility too, among so many other bad things done in their interest.

AI has the enormous potential to revolutionise the quality of life for people and animals all over earth and accelerate technological advancements by unheard of amounts, but unfortunately, it's got even more potential for the downsides and we know how the misuse of technology tends to go. In this case, it can evolve in ways that the creators never intended, don't understand and is totally against our interests. This isn't conspiracy thinking either, as well known tech companies and luminaries have signed petitions to put the brakes on its development and put in critical safeguards, which was reported in the mainstream news. Alas, I think their warnings will come to nothing.

 

[Tiffany]

The video is right that AI poses huge potential dangers, some of which we can't even imagine now. Can you imagine some digitised version of a dictator that lives forever? Can you think of any particular dictator who'd like to do this? World domination might well be possible under such a scenario and nuclear war is a possibility too, among so many other bad things done in their interest.

If some evil humans have it their way with power unchecked, yes I can imagine digitized dictators. Reminds me of the Star Trek episode, The Return of the Archons. This is the episode with Landru.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Retro]

@Tiffany just shows you that this idea isn't new and has simply been refined and given the new name of artificial intelligence. I've seen this trope in various sci-fi shows and films over the years now.

 

[Uncrowned]

I'm talking about the creation of Neuralink, regardless of AGIs or not. The way I read that post was like 'Morals be damned', and while not the intent (I hope) it's something that stuck out more to me, as I've read that said of all of Elon Musk's creations. It's obviously black morally, for some hopeful future justification. I hardly see anyone criticising the Boring company, Neuralink or his actual contributions in Tesla and the repeated intent stood out more than Neuralink itself.

Ah, that was not my intention with the post. I do believe that the world should operate with a moral value and that AI should be looked at in a very debated nature when it comes to how much and how far we should develop it. However, my original post was merely my opinion that I do not see a realistic future where every nation and every corporation comes together and chooses to not pursue an AGI.

The sad truth of the matter is that the power of having an AGI is essentially going to make blocking the creation an impossible task for humanity as time goes by. Looking at it from a real-life view, I don't see the US or China looking at an AGI as "should we", they will be looking at it as "what if we don't" and this fear of not having one will be the reason the first one is created. It essentially sits in the nuclear weapons debate where the fight isn't should we have them, the fear is what happens if we don't have them and this removes all regard to the long-term problems the items in question create. I'm not saying it is the correct view, but it is the view we normally make.

Of course, an AGI might be an impossible task to create as well. Today it stands only as a theoretical model, so perhaps all this is for nothing, and getting a program to understand is simply an impossibility.

 

[Geffers]

If some evil humans have it their way with power unchecked, yes I can imagine digitized dictators. Reminds me of the Star Trek episode, The Return of the Archons. This is the episode with Landru.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Star Trek, loved the original episodes and many of their 'futuristic' imaginings are now the norm.

Geffers

 

[Tiffany]

Star Trek, loved the original episodes and many of their 'futuristic' imaginings are now the norm.

Geffers

Yeah, Star Trek is pretty great. The writers were cutting edge amazing in the technology side of it but ST was also exceptionally driven by using today's social issues, exploring them in their episodes and challenged how those social issues can be resolved in the future.

 

[Retro]

Tiffs, I remember how Next Gen took that concept to another level. Life in the Federation was a veritable utopia with no money needed and everyone having a great life without wars or strife. I'd so love to live in such a society and with all that future technology, too. I doubt we'll ever get there in the real world though, sigh.

NG was by far my favourite series. Voyager was great too, felt like a technologically upgraded NG and the humour with the Doc really made it.

 

[Tiffany]

Tiffs, I remember how Next Gen took that concept to another level. Life in the Federation was a veritable utopia with no money needed and everyone having a great life without wars or strife. I'd so love to live in such a society and with all that future technology, too. I doubt we'll ever get there in the real world though, sigh.

NG was by far my favourite series. Voyager was great too, felt like a technologically upgraded NG and the humour with the Doc really made it.

STNG really did take it to another level and made life in the Federation an appealing possibility for people that wanted to perform and do well, but not be mired by the struggle along the way...always had shelter, food, clothing and a positive environment to excel on the way.

Our favorites are the original Star Trek and STNG. I think when Voyager and DS9 came out our lives got pretty busy and we couldn't follow the series as well. We did enjoy the doc and as an actor (Robert Picardo), he's great

 

[Geffers]

STNG really did take it to another level and made life in the Federation an appealing possibility for people that wanted to perform and do well, but not be mired by the struggle along the way...always had shelter, food, clothing and a positive environment to excel on the way.

Our favorites are the original Star Trek and STNG. I think when Voyager and DS9 came out our lives got pretty busy and we couldn't follow the series as well. We did enjoy the doc and as an actor (Robert Picardo), he's great

Actually, nostalgically I liked the original series but the acting in some of the early episodes was a wee bit amateurish, didn't follow any of the subsequent series except Enterprise which was a modern take on what came before Kirk and Spock. Actually thought that was excellent.

Geffers