Why Do People Think Robots Will Take Over The World?

[voyager2]

So why do people think robots will take over the world?
For that mater why make a robot that makes screw-drivers self aware?

[Razor Concepts]

Humans Have Too Many Faults.

or, google "robots take over world" and see this same issue discussed a million times over  

[Hawaii00000]

Too many movies...
Too little reality...

[SmAsH]

Mainly the fault of movies as stated above. But, if you take a look at the rate they are becoming smarter... I wouldn't be too surprised...

[voyager2]

I think you lot are bad examples for robot novices who think technology is more advanced than it really is
I think a brain cell died too...

[MangoBot]

my writing teacher thinks that some things are extremely advanced like the militarys robot that can stay upright when kicked, if we had as much tax dollars we could have made that easily

[frostyg02uk]

I think it is because in the movies we assume the robots feel superior to humans in some form. I think for robots to want to take over we are animorphing them and giving them some forms of human emotion such as greed etc. For this to ever become reality technology would have to increase drastically and robots would have to have human emotion or logic. Im less then a beginner at this robot thing but ill assume we are thousands of years off this ;op
To answer the original question.....Blame hollywood. And maybe the leaps and bounds we have actually made in robot tech in such a short time.

[Admin]

Darwinian evolution - survival of the fittest . . .

Either that or because I make robots in my own image

[paulstreats]

Its because we grow to rely on technology. until the inevitable point where our basic needs are provided by technology.

Think about it- computers really control the world now. if all of the computers were switched off then the developed world will stop functioning.(no internet, no stock exchanges, no electricity, no telecommunications, no air travel, no television nothing. Even basic things like microwaves and washing machines have computers in them). Even the smallest things have digital electronics built into them. Just because the computers arent sentient doesnt mean that they arent controlling the world because they ARE.

We will rely on robotics just the same...

[amando96]

no internet

NOOOOO!

[Soeren]

Hi,

So why do people think robots will take over the world?

Do they? I for one have serious doubts for several reasons. One is the extremely sad little spurts of forward movements in the study of intelligence and the appliance of same - we need quantum leaps here and a shitload of them to build anything that seems just close to retarded.

But that aside, the main reason why robots won't take over the world... It takes them to want it.
Want is a bit higher in thought processing than need, but both relates to feelings which robots do not have. Sure, they can be brought to simulate feelings, so if you torch the arm of a robot, sensors can tell its circuits what's wrong and eg. make it go *Ouuuuch, my hand is on fire*, but it will not feel it, it will not care a bit if it wasn't for the programming - simulated, not real.
The day robots can feel (either in the physical sense or the metaphysic realm), I'll start carrying a Taser, but that won't happen in my life time.

Mankind have tried to define intelligence for a very long time and about each decade or so, the working definition is replaced with a new one, but none has been satisfactory so far and I think the problem is, that you have to be on a higher level to understand something "lower". As long as we don't have a precise and true, full definition of intelligence, we cannot program it into a machine and without intelligence, which I see as a holistic term covering feelings too, they're not gonna take over the world.

That's the same reason that I dislike the term Artificial Intelligence. That term defines it as intelligence, just made by humans rather than "nature". All we're ever gonna see, unless something really revolutionary happens is Simulated Intelligence, all based on our (at the actual time) definition of what it really is.

Don't fear the robots, cars are way more dangerous, a trip downtown a Saturday evening is way more dangerous and so on... As many have mentioned, it's born out of fiction, which admittedly, would be pretty boring if the robots just behaved as in reality.

[corrado33]

I agree with you Soeren, but my question is, what if computers were taught to learn without constraints.  Yeah I know we have computers that can learn to play games, or robots that can learn to stand on their own feet, but what if someone taught a computer to simply learn, to learn everything?  (Basically, teach it to be a little kid)  I know at first it'd be "simulated intelligence", but I think it'd eventually "evolve" past that.  You'd have to think something like that would develop "feelings" eventually?  I don't know, I always imagined something like this would have happened by now.  Ever since I've known how to program I've toyed with the idea of teaching a computer to learn, but I always said to myself "Yeah I can teach it to observe, but how do you teach it to make conclusions based on it's observations and no specific criteria?".  This was a while ago, even for me.  I'm a relatively young kid but I learned to program when I was...14?  Since then I've always had this thought in my head.  I honestly think actual "Learning" is the key.  If computers could learn like we do, than they'd take over the world.  I feel kinda...racist? when I say that?  Them vs. us?  lol

[voyager2]

I never really thought that robots would take over the world, just wanted to know why other poeple do.
But I agree with corrado33, robots that learn are the "key".

[Soeren]

Hi,

[...] what if computers were taught to learn without constraints.  Yeah I know we have computers that can learn to play games, or robots that can learn to stand on their own feet, but what if someone taught a computer to simply learn, to learn everything? 

Everything is such a big word and 100% impossible to reach, as most new intel will yield a bunch of new questions.
But in a more moderate sense... It's happening allready, have been for more than a decade and there's a science project with a 'bot that is trained daily by a host of scientist - psychologists, behaviourists, etc. and despite that army of brilliant people, progress is painfully slow.

(Basically, teach it to be a little kid) 

That's what they try to do.

Problem is... Humans learn from curiosity (diving into the realm of feelings once more), how would you teach a machine to be curious.
As long as the part of us called "soul" by religious people and "ego, super ego and id" by psychologists (the part that defines us as individuals) is not fully understood, how could we even try to implement it in a machine?
And we haven't even got a moderate clue about what it is. If we knew it all, we wouldn't need to build robots - we could just build humans!

I know at first it'd be "simulated intelligence", but I think it'd eventually "evolve" past that.  You'd have to think something like that would develop "feelings" eventually?

I know you don't mean any foul with that, but you have to realize  that this is just your very unsubstantiated theory - we have no evidence at all substantiating that feelings would develop from a learning algorithm, but quite a bit saying it won't.

What we're ultimately discussing here is life.
Life, in any form is never happening out of a system. In philosophy, you have the terms Cosmos and Chaos, where Cosmos is the ordered system and Chaos is the exact opposite. Life allways emerges in Chaos, by accident and as a cross effect of some blends of fabric from Cosmos. Humanity is a freak accident of nature.

Since then I've always had this thought in my head.  I honestly think actual "Learning" is the key.  If computers could learn like we do, than they'd take over the world.  I feel kinda...racist? when I say that?  Them vs. us?  lol

Haha, they'd work for us... *Dance puppets* 

Of course, we are all entitled to our opinions and mine is just such a thing, but from nothing of what I've seen, read, heard or pondered, seems to lie even the slightest hope for robots with feelings.


Let's not confuse real Science with Science Fiction

[Admin]

A quick thought to think about . . .

People only spend large amounts of money on stuff they really need or really want.

No one will spend large amounts of money on robots that don't do what we need or want.

So companies will never produce them.

Therefore, robots that take over the world won't exist unless we really need or really want them to take over the world. Would you spend $15k on a car that can decide on its own if it feels like driving?

Of course, there is the accidental sentience like in Terminator . . . but probability wise, its very very unlikely to ever happen.