check the essay

With the rise of man came the rise of innovation, as we are shoved into the future what implications will our creations create. Artificial intelligence isn’t the future, it’s already here. As a society we must not worry about what this advancement will take away from us. Improving on the nature of healthy relations between advancement and human complacency can lead to a better understanding and greater results.

Computers were not regarded as equals for much of human history. Processors have only gotten better as time has gone on resulting in better developed and quicker computers able to calculate faster. It is no question that computers are better than humans in raw computation but they have surpassed that. Traditional GO players (Chinese board game) are being beaten by a program designed to play the game. After much time people have programmed a computer to understand all the possible moves made in a game. With 2.08 × 10^170 moves available in a game and 361 available moves at a time. Vardi Moshe published The Moral Imperative of Artificial Intelligence where he states “Programs based on Monte-Carlo tree search now play at human-master levels and are beginning to challenge top professional players” This is incredibly hard to do even as a professional player, and it is testament to the advancement of technology to see a computer trump a human.

The growth of technology in games is not the only place we see advancement.  We are starting to see this tech used as an employment tool. This tool can be used as one that aids people in completion of difficult tasks and even one that replaces the  people assigned to the tasks. It is no question that technology has replaced many jobs in the united states and all over the world. Today we must prepare for the future so tomorrow it will not be too drastic. At the rate we are going, it will replace much more and quicker than we would believe. Onnig Dombalagian, Vice Dean for Academic Affairs and George Denègre Professor of Law, states in his book Automation Chasing the Tape, “The automated execution of transactions is only the tip of the iceberg” It is clear that change is inevitable. We must accept that by preparing for the future and changing society sooner than later. This will prevent a backlash of disgruntled people thanks to quickly changing systems.

Quite frankly some people will just push against the advancement of artificial intelligence and the replacement of jobs around the world. People pushed against the idea of assembly lines yet they get a job done quicker and with more costs mitigated. It is paramount to understand that technology will advance no matter how an individual feels about it. We as humans always push for better, so this change is inevitable.     John Sullins and Richard Tieszen have written Artificial Life: Life Form, Simulation, or Simulacrum to not only inform people of the changes but also dive into the hard hitting questions that need to be answered before the progression of Artificial intelligence hits a turning point. In their book they state, “an organism is in reality nothing more than a collection of atoms, a simple machine made of organic molecules” (62) Despite worry the positives of technological advancements are numerous and lead to better lives for all. This advancement is how the world can truly change for the better.

People struggle to find a balancing point. Many questions arise such as “where do we stop” or “how far can we go” with many conflicting opinions that we are playing god and thoughts of what jobs can and cannot be automated. Citizens can clearly see the progress made in the last 200 years and how much better it has made the world. From Amazon to Google, the changes are not only staggering but world changing.

Fritz Allhoff makes the claim that “consideration remains whether potential nanotechnology for leakage detection could have been used for more recent inspections, which could have prevented the failure of the pipeline” in his book Nanoethics the Ethical and Social Implications of Nanotechnology. There was a gas pipeline explosion in California that could have been prevented with this technology. Each person has a obligation to make the world better, in any way they can. Yes there is a price to progress but so far the reward has far exceeded the price in the past.

A major concern is the potential for the technology we create to make humans obsolete in the work force, specifically letting the rich get richer by replacing expensive humans with machines that do not take much upkeep. Machines are easy to take care of and will offset their costs over time while replacing workers and giving employers greater profit margins. It is understandable that this would worry people, but there are ideas already being tested to help combat this crude change. There is the idea of having a living wage, a way to help people stay afloat in the new world. This allows people to stay alive and keep some sort of decent living.

Many philosophers think that a supercomputer could be created and would be the monster of our own destruction. The idea of creating something that could surpass our own dominance is quite old in nature. Although it is not artificial intelligence Frankenstein came out in 1818, questioning the power of man to create something beyond his own capabilities while being sentient. These creations have existed for many years and have yet to take over the world. People have made advancements and progress with machines like the printing press or the invention of the internet. This isn’t going to cause the downfall of humankind now. Vincent Muller poses a similar question, “Can we make machines that think and act like humans or other natural intelligent agents?” in his book Philosophy and Theory of Artificial Intelligence. Ultimately this is just like the imagination of a child who has become scared in the night. We are so far away from anything close to a new terminator. the has gone wild and is blown out of proportion. The chances of this happening are slim to none.

There is argument that it is not our place to give another thing a life or sentience. Many mythological stories address this exact subject. The idea is that creating sentience of another species or being is something that only god is meant to do. While this is a great idea and provides interesting philosophy, it has no place in science. Science is about trial and error, discovery, and understanding the workings of the world. Giving birth is the idea of giving sentience but it is for the next generation of humans. We thrust children into this world with the worst conditions possible and expect them to survive yet creating an artificial intelligence is too much responsibility or too close to “playing god”?  Carter, Matt. Minds and Computers an Introduction to the Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence. Edinburgh University Press, 2007. I believe that this is an older way of thinking that does not apply in the current day and age. The fact that we cannot create things because it is not our place is old thinking. We must embrace the new and seek to understand.

A good question for most is would machines be given rights like a human being or would they be an exception. Say that these machines that could take jobs might have a thought or two of their own, would you consider them your equal? What would it take for someone to see a non-human as an equal. This is a difficult question to answer. It is understandable that some people would be opposed to this idea of being on the same level as a machine but in the end we are all made of parts and pieces. Sumathy Ramesh brings up a great point in his book A Checklist to Protect Human Rights in Artificial-Intelligence Research. Ramesh poses the conundrum of “When the existential concerns of what makes us human come into question, it is ethics and not product specifications that determine sustained success.” The key to having peace and understanding is making compromises. This is the understanding that is needed to keep us from segregating like we did with people of color. Fail to do this and we could be in the exact same spot we were in in the 1900’s

All this talk of replacement and equal rights shouldn't be a worry because an artificial intelligence this smart is a long way off. So we have time to adapt and prepare. With the necessary precautions we will have nothing to be scared of nor panic about. I think that this is a time that we should prepare but not be so worried about what is in the future. The idea is to be ready if these robots do turn out to be a capable as we fear, and able to adapt thanks to an open mind and a new way of living in modern society. This idea is already talked about yet needs to be implemented.  Ramesh says, “Governments must create their own deliberative bodies to mediate open debate involving representatives from all sectors of society, and to determine how to translate these guidelines into policy, including specific laws and regulations.” (103) Ultimately the road will be hard but it would be just like the industrial revolution. This will, in the same way, push us into a new day and age.

Robots may become sentient thanks to updates in code or become so lifelike it is hard to distinguish if it is genuine consciousness. We should begin to understand what makes a consciousness a consciousness. The idea that humans are the only species that is sentient is wrong in the first place. No one would really be able to say what would be considered a life, or even who would be able to make a judgment call on what is right or wrong. At what point can we breathe life into something yet not call it alive. The good news is that artificial intelligence would not just start at a level of competency of a human being. As the technology gets better and as we begin to understand what jobs require a human to be effective we can slowly upgrade machines so not all are sentient. What we cannot do we can develop robots for the replacement of  dangerous things or jobs we didn't even know existed. We can see these applications being made today yet not currently ready for used in the field. A robot dog could carry much more weight than a soldier and if the robot gets shot no one loses a life.

There could, in the distant future, be a way to copy one's life essence into a digital format, like a flash drive or a computer program. This would allow the person to ‘continue’ their life, so to speak. This idea relates to the story of a ship being slowly worn down and replaced with other parts. At what point is the ship not the original ship? Now this is a scary thought that has sparked many a science fiction films. Movies like  Transcendence or Life/Less have posed the same question in the modern day. What constitutes the same person, how do you know if nothing went wrong. Is the real person dead and this is just a copy of them. The issues here are immeasurable but overall there is a belief that a copy of a human being is just that, a copy. They may feel human emotion but that does not mean that they are one of us nor does it give them the rights that we have. What would stop someone from creating an army of themselves. This is why copying of humans is immoral and should be illegal.