literature of the apocalypse_3

readings:
Geraci: Introduction to Apocalyptic AI
Brooks: Prologue to Flesh and Machines
Capek: R.U.R.

notes & response:
-A factory capable of making artificial people made of synthetic organic matter, otherwise known as “robots”
-A group of synthetic beings that are capable of thinking for themselves, similar to clones
-But what happens if and when these beings become hostile and choose to rebel against the human race?
-What are the dangers of universality?
-Intelligent machines—our “mind children,” according to Moravec—will create a paradise for humanity in the short term but, in the long term, human beings will need to upload their minds into machine bodies in order to remain a viable life-form.
-Robot manufacturers already anticipate a cultural mixture of human beings and robots, rather than a cultural replacement of the former by the latter.
-Promises of intelligent robots and uploaded consciousness could have replicated successfully through science fiction without ever mixing so closely with laboratory science, as they do in Apocalyptic AI pop science books.
-Diachronic history is the history of sequential events: this even happened and then that event happened.
-Why would God give human beings free will if we were not meant to exercise it?
-Creativity is now in the realm of robots?!…I strongly disagree.
-The law of the Seventh Generation—Native American law that suggests you can’t create any law or invention until you know how it will affect children seven generations from now
-Is progress deterring/adhering with human life?

Is our current understanding of technology and its influence really only deterring from further progression? Similar to the conservative Native American notion of the Law of the Seventh Generation, I too question the progression of the imagination and the human condition if we are really only becoming more dependent on that which is transient. In that sense, have we really made any progress at all?…Or are we just machines marching faster toward our technologically codependent demise? However, I think there’s a way to find a balance between man and machine, as history has proven to be successful in the past. Perhaps we should return to an appreciation for the “technology” of earlier centuries in which humans were still required to operate under the analog condition rather than relying solely on the digital input and trusting that the output is always correct. If this continues to be the case, I think there will always be an opportunity for an “extinction” among the human imagination and it’s ability to create. And in one way or another, technology will reach its end and become static again. In my opinion, creativity and the human ability to create and destroy will always encourage future growth. As long as we continue to explore this idea through various mediums, we will continue to be the masters of evolution and the challengers of change.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s