«

Chris Malcolm wrote:
>
> > John Turco <> wrote:

<edited for brevity>

> > As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no chance in
> > hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd notion.
> >
> > Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an incredibly easy way to
> > defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug" on him, in
> > the most literal sense.
>
> Hopefully that would be even easier than getting rid of an annoying
> human leader by just shooting him


Hush yo' keyboard, Chris! Even >joking< about political assassinations
can be risky, these days.

After all, we cannot be sure who may be monitoring this newsgroup...

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

John Turco <> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>> > John Turco <> wrote:

>> > As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no
>> > chance in hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd
>> > notion.

>> > Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an i ncredibly easy
>> > way to defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug"
>> > on him, in the most literal sense.

>> Take a nuklear sub. Try to pull it's plug.

> Toy boats in your bathtub, are irrelevant.

If you want to call me a god --- or at least a very powerful
supernatural being --- I'll have to ask for sacrificial offerings.

If you think me an ordinary human, *and* having the Atlantic
and Pacific and so on as my bathtubs, you're deranged and quite
possible completely mad.

>> Take just an ordinary data centre. With battery banks and big
>> generator backup.

>> Add automatic defenses. Could take quite some times and lifes
>> unless you can "just" bomb the centre to rubble. Which _might_
>> be a bit hard if said data centre is in a mountain. Some are.

> The word "evolved" was used, for a very good reason. The classic
> sci-fi plot of a sentient, power-hungry machine, usually involves
> the device growing a "mind of its own" (sans human intervention).

> Can you envision this ever happening, in reality?

I can envision evil humans. I can envision computers being
close enough to the human brain. I can add 1 and 1.

-Wolfgang

John Turco <> wrote:
> PeterN wrote:

>> Remember HAL in 2001?

> Actually, I've never seen that overrated and pretentious movie.

Have you at least read the book?

-Wolfgang

On Oct 26, 6:00*pm, John Turco <j...@concentric.net> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>
> > > John Turco <j...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> > > As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no
> > > chance in hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd
> > > notion.
>
> > > Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an i ncredibly easy
> > > way to defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug"
> > > on him, in the most literal sense.
>
> > Take a nuklear sub. *Try to pull it's plug.
>
> Toy boats in your bathtub, are irrelevant.
>
> > Take just an ordinary data centre. *With battery banks and big
> > generator backup.
>
> > Add automatic defenses. *Could take quite some times and lifes
> > unless you can "just" bomb the centre to rubble. *Which _might_
> > be a bit hard if said data centre is in a mountain. *Some are.
>
> > -Wolfgang
>
> The word "evolved" was used, for a very good reason. The classic
> sci-fi plot of a sentient, power-hungry machine, usually involves
> the device growing a "mind of its own" (sans human intervention).
>
> Can you envision this ever happening, in reality?

I don't think it is so far-fetched. We already have computer viruses
that mutate beyond human control. Who know knows what will be
possible in 100 or 200 years? Not all programmers are nice guys.

On 10/30/2011 1:35 AM, otter wrote:
> On Oct 26, 6:00 pm, John Turco<j...@concentric.net> wrote:
>> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>
>>>> John Turco<j...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no
>>>> chance in hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd
>>>> notion.
>>
>>>> Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an i ncredibly easy
>>>> way to defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug"
>>>> on him, in the most literal sense.
>>
>>> Take a nuklear sub. Try to pull it's plug.
>>
>> Toy boats in your bathtub, are irrelevant.
>>
>>> Take just an ordinary data centre. With battery banks and big
>>> generator backup.
>>
>>> Add automatic defenses. Could take quite some times and lifes
>>> unless you can "just" bomb the centre to rubble. Which _might_
>>> be a bit hard if said data centre is in a mountain. Some are.
>>
>>> -Wolfgang
>>
>> The word "evolved" was used, for a very good reason. The classic
>> sci-fi plot of a sentient, power-hungry machine, usually involves
>> the device growing a "mind of its own" (sans human intervention).
>>
>> Can you envision this ever happening, in reality?
>
> I don't think it is so far-fetched. We already have computer viruses
> that mutate beyond human control. Who know knows what will be
> possible in 100 or 200 years? Not all programmers are nice guys.

I once wrote a paper on the morphing of sentience. Out of compassion for
anyone who has not plonked me I will not repeat it here. While the paper
was written on April 1st, it has some scientific basis. While we may not
be able to create sentient life now, as you point out it may not be far
down the road.
In 1973 who besides Woody Allen thought cloning would work.



--
Peter

George Kerby <> wrote:
> On 10/29/11 2:48 PM, in article 4t1un8-,

>> I can envision evil humans.

> Yes. You do that quite frequently.

> Trouble is, you are far removed from Reality...

Ah, so there was no 9/11.
Thank you for telling us.

Now creep back into your earth hole.

-Wolfgang

George Kerby <> wrote:
> "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote:
>> George Kerby <> wrote:
>>> On 10/29/11 2:48 PM, in article 4t1un8-,

>>>> I can envision evil humans.

>>> Yes. You do that quite frequently.

>>> Trouble is, you are far removed from Reality...

>> Ah, so there was no 9/11.

> Maybe in your delusional mind, Strawman...

OK, so now you say the people who orchestrated and perpetrated
9/11 were not evil in your 2 braincells?

George, evil *and* stupid fits you hand-in-glove.

-Wolfgang

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>
> > John Turco <> wrote:
> >> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >> > John Turco <> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no
> >> > chance in hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd
> >> > notion.
> >> >
> >> > Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an i ncredibly easy
> >> > way to defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug"
> >> > on him, in the most literal sense.
> >>
> >> Take a nuklear sub. Try to pull it's plug.
> >
> > Toy boats in your bathtub, are irrelevant.
>
> If you want to call me a god --- or at least a very powerful
> supernatural being --- I'll have to ask for sacrificial offerings.

You're "Wolfgang the Great" -- Teutonic terror of Usenet!

> If you think me an ordinary human, *and* having the Atlantic
> and Pacific and so on as my bathtubs, you're deranged and quite
> possible completely mad.

If you say so, Neptune. (Or, is it Poseidon? It's all Greek to me.)

> >> Take just an ordinary data centre. With battery banks and big
> >> generator backup.
> >>
> >> Add automatic defenses. Could take quite some times and lifes
> >> unless you can "just" bomb the centre to rubble. Which _might_
> >> be a bit hard if said data centre is in a mountain. Some are.
> >
> > The word "evolved" was used, for a very good reason. The classic
> > sci-fi plot of a sentient, power-hungry machine, usually involves
> > the device growing a "mind of its own" (sans human intervention).
> >
> > Can you envision this ever happening, in reality?
>
> I can envision evil humans. I can envision computers being
> close enough to the human brain. I can add 1 and 1.
>
> -Wolfgang

Such a computer shall long remain the stuff of fairy tales,
it's safe to predict.

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>
> > John Turco <> wrote:
> >> PeterN wrote:
> >>
> >> Remember HAL in 2001?
> >
> > Actually, I've never seen that overrated and pretentious
> > movie.
>
> Have you at least read the book?
>
> -Wolfgang


No; I believe science fiction should be seen, not read.

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:00:50 -0500, John Turco <>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> PeterN wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 9/15/2011 10:00 PM, John Turco wrote:
> >
> > <edited for brevity>
> >
> >> > As for this idea of "computers out of control" -- there's no chance in
> >> > hell! I absolutely reject any merit to such an absurd notion.
> >> >
> >> > Because, if a "robotic Golem" ever evolved, an incredibly easy way to
> >> > defeat the threat would always exist: Just "pull the plug" on him, in
> >> > the most literal sense.
> >>
> >>
> >> IBM has programmed Watson to act as a medical advisor.
> >
> > I thought Thomas Watson died, decades ago?
> >
> >> Remember HAL in 2001?
> >
> > Actually, I've never seen that overrated and pretentious movie.
>
> Then how can you possibly know that its overrated or pretentious?
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens


Excellent point! Allow me to rephrase my original statement:

"Actually, I've never seen that movie, which I suspect is
overrated and pretentious."

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>