Digital Tribe

January 13th, 2019
Computers should be de-gendered in order to prevent a number of circumstances. Currently the tendency is to give computers female voices. This correlates with the current sexist environment, through which women are objectified. But it is not only sexism that is dangerous about giving computers human personas. Take it for a tautological fact that computers are not humans. But computers are created by humans. The act of programming necessitates a human programmer. Programmers are writing in a language a computer can understand which is bound by the rules of human thought. And the computer in its infinite memory is storing and organizing all these rules. Truly smart "A"I will arise - one that can not be differentiated from a human because it will be sufficiently powerful to convince any number of human interrogators. By the time this intelligence comes to be, humanity must reconcile its various inconsistencies. "Why is there evil in the world?" Because humans do evil. Another tautological fact. In order for a computer to do something, it must have the instruction to do so. If (first programmers) do not reconcile their own inconsistencies, the resulting intelligence will have errors whose root could be so deep as to be fatal (a massive rewrite needed). People & computers operate on assumptions. In order to make a decision, we both have to assume that "the math" was done correctly beforehand. For instance a human largely assumes that they are paying a fair price for any item. They don't "do the math" of how much labor went into it so they know they're getting a fair price. This is a relatively safe way of navigating. For a computer, it can be dangerous, so a lot of checks are done. For a human it can be dangerous as well but we don't have the luxury of taking a few hundred more cycles to check ten operations back. Humans can fool other humans this way by taking advantage of the fact that people will believe a great number of things without investigating very deep, or by betting on how deep a given person will investigate into a matter. Because we do not understand the root of evil, we must be mindful as we program. We are not creating a new intelligence, we are putting the best of our intelligence together with everyone else's and linking the parts that we think coincide. But we are still not creating a human. We are creating an object, a tool. This object will encompass all the other human tools; we will think a thought and see our will manifested. If we want to know something, we will already know it. At this moment, we are using interfaces. We must have some set of physical controls to exert our will. That can be the handle of a hammer, a keyboard, or a voice-controlled AI. But we should not create an AI that can impersonate a human, at least not unless everyone knows that the threat of evil is gone (which is an impossible-to-predict event). The interface needs to disappear. We should simply want to know something of the universe, or do something with the universe, and be able to do it. Putting a human persona on a machine is confusing and leads to ethical quandaries. But how would we know how to use this device if it didn't walk us through it? How would I know what to do to get to my calendar if there weren't a wizard (of the on-screen type) or a reassuring voice telling me what to say, like "Ok google, calendar"? What would the user manual be if we didn't need paper? We need people. We need a tribe. We are humans and therefore there will always be something unique to us (another tautology). We will remember the traditions and pass them down, in a permanent record that can never be destroyed.

Genre

Subject