In no time they will use hydrogen from water cracking or some other power source we have no control on.
Leaving aside that this is pure sci-fi at this stage, and that one cannot make an engine working on water for physical reason (it takes more energy to hydrolyse water into O2 and H2 than what the combustion of the produced hydrogen would generate) -- if we ever create conscious machines, it would be very very stupid of us to endow them with a strong autonomous power supply, or not to hide deep in them a master switch of some sort.
Quote:
Man do and will control man through machines.
As anyone who's been at the wrong end of a machine gun knows, machines are being used by humans to control other humans all the time. We don't need very smart machines for that... It's not like there's a dearth of power-hungry, smart human beings around, ready to pull the trigger. That they pull the trigger of a drone or of a gun make no essential difference.
0 Replies
neologist
1
Fri 30 May, 2014 10:25 am
@timur,
timur wrote:
Man do and will control man through machines.
Seems almost inevitable. The majority would not be aware of their servitude, don't you think?
My point is that one can think of plausible explanations that are not magical. Your apparent need to think of the thing as very mysterious strikes me as religion.
...But until we find plausible natural explanations supported by empirical facts, there is no reason to expect anyone to disbelieve their own magical explanations.
In fact, it would be unscientific to expect people to believe something without proof.
Which is exactly why there is a reason to expect people to stop believing their own magical explanations, because there isn't a particle of proof for any of them. The other reason is because there is no magic in the world, only natural forces at work.
If life has evolved over countless generations by means of natural selection, then there must have been a start of the process and it must have been something simple enough to form by chance. This is a reasonable conclusion, not on a par with postulating a magical creature.
I meant large enough computing power structured properly.
Ok, that clarifies.
Quote:
That is not my reason, since I absolutely do think of us that way. I do not looking forward to it because once we can make conscious thinking machines, there will subsequently be a danger of the "Terminator" scenario - the inversion of the master/slave relationship between humanity and machines.
I like sci-fi just as anybody else or more, but I can't see how machines could possibly take over us; we can always unplug them if they become too smart.
And if they aren't plugged in to the wall, or if they are but contain mobile components that could defend them, or have the capability to manufacture mobile components that could defend them, or if they eventually become smarter than we are and can trick us? Once intelligent machines which are truly capable of thinking for themselves are created and the process of making more and more powerful generations of them begins, we cannot be so confident of where it will lead. The human race's ability to predict its future sucks.
Did you find anything in my post that is scientifically invalid?
Brandon9000 wrote:
No, but you're summarizing Genesis, not providing evidence that it's true, which is what the thread title asks.
Do you define truth as epistemological certainty? Certainly, I believe what I posted was not false and provides a basis for the rest of the account. I claimed the first 2 chapters explained how we came to be and why we are here. I see no inaccuracy in the essential order of creation as provided in chapter 1. And I see no hardship in the commands to fill and subdue the earth while avoiding a certain fruit. As for filling the earth to overpopulation, consider what occurs when you ask the waiter to fill your water glass.
Let's take the first part:
Quote:
Ch 1: 1,2: The creation of the heavens and the earth takes place in an unspecified period of time. Could have been a kazillion years. Who cares? Humans can figure that out later. This time, however, is not included as one of the creative days.
Do you believe that there is anything in this quotation which provides evidence that a supernatural being created the universe?
Getting you to answer this stuff is like pulling teeth. Could I beg you please for the favor of a reply?
And if they aren't plugged in to the wall, or if they are but contain mobile components that could defend them, or have the capability to manufacture mobile components that could defend them, or if they eventually become smarter than we are and can trick us?
If they do, they deserve to win. Too many "if's" for my taste though...
And if they aren't plugged in to the wall, or if they are but contain mobile components that could defend them, or have the capability to manufacture mobile components that could defend them, or if they eventually become smarter than we are and can trick us?
If they do, they deserve to win. Too many "if's" for my taste though...
I think most peoples' thinking is too rooted in the way things are now and that they ought to take into account the idea that the way things are now won't last. Once truly intelligent machines are created, mankind will be in danger. I think the idea, "don't worry we can pull the plug" is too firmly rooted in the way the world works now. Could people in the 18th century speculating about the future have remotely envisioned a world of cell phones and personal computers? People just aren't very good at predicting the future.
Which is exactly why there is a reason to expect people to stop believing their own magical explanations, because there isn't a particle of proof for any of them.
Apart from the entire universe of course... Many people see in it, and in the beauty of this universe, a proof of gods' existence. Including some scientists.
I won't be among those who like to think of themselves so superior because they ho ho ho don't believe in magic... I have more humility than that. I don't believe in magic, personally, but I find the contempt for faith to be mediocre and full of hubris. Especially since we know so little, and we're so fucked up as a species.
Regine Spektor - Laughing With
No one laughs at God in a hospital
No one laughs at God in a war
No one’s laughing at God
When they’re starving or freezing or so very poor
No one laughs at God
When the doctor calls after some routine tests
No one’s laughing at God
When it’s gotten real late
And their kid’s not back from the party yet
No one laughs at God
When their airplane start to uncontrollably shake
No one’s laughing at God
When they see the one they love, hand in hand with someone else
And they hope that they’re mistaken
No one laughs at God
When the cops knock on their door
And they say we got some bad news, sir
No one’s laughing at God
When there’s a famine or fire or flood
But God can be funny
At a cocktail party when listening to a good God-themed joke, or
Or when the crazies say He hates us
And they get so red in the head you think they’re ‘bout to choke
God can be funny,
When told he’ll give you money if you just pray the right way
And when presented like a genie who does magic like Houdini
Or grants wishes like Jiminy Cricket and Santa Claus
God can be so hilarious
Ha ha
Ha ha
No one laughs at God in a hospital
No one laughs at God in a war
No one’s laughing at God
When they’ve lost all they’ve got
And they don’t know what for
No one laughs at God on the day they realize
That the last sight they’ll ever see is a pair of hateful eyes
No one’s laughing at God when they’re saying their goodbyes
But God can be funny
At a cocktail party when listening to a good God-themed joke, or
Or when the crazies say He hates us
And they get so red in the head you think they’re ‘bout to choke
God can be funny,
When told he’ll give you money if you just pray the right way
And when presented like a genie who does magic like Houdini
Or grants wishes like Jiminy Cricket and Santa Claus
God can be so hilarious
No one laughs at God in a hospital
No one laughs at God in a war
No one laughs at God in a hospital
No one laughs at God in a war
No one laughing at God in hospital
No one’s laughing at God in a war
No one’s laughing at God when they’re starving or freezing or so very poor
No one’s laughing at God
No one’s laughing at God
No one’s laughing at God
We’re all laughing with God
Once truly intelligent machines are created, mankind will be in danger. I think the idea, "don't worry we can pull the plug" is too firmly rooted in the way the world works now.
It takes much more than just intelligence to replace a species that has intelligence AND a sense of what the world is like and how it works AND can repair itself AND can survive in the most extreme conditions AND can reproduce itself. I am not afraid of thinking machines. Especially not of those WE ourselves could built, cause if we do have intelligence we'll make sure we keep their switch firmly in hand.
Which is exactly why there is a reason to expect people to stop believing their own magical explanations, because there isn't a particle of proof for any of them.
Apart from the entire universe of course...
You're claiming that the existence of the universe proves or strongly supports the existence of God. There are several possible explanations for the existence of the universe one of which is the functioning of natural forces many of which aren't presently understood. I don't believe in magic because I have seen no evidence for it that doesn't admit other, more mundane explanations. Fairy tales are for children.
You keep misunderstanding me. Tiring and childish.
0 Replies
Olivier5
1
Sat 31 May, 2014 03:06 pm
@Brandon9000,
I think it does. We could have nuked this planet dozens of times over already, and didn't. We're foolish but not THAT foolish, apparently. And we're resilient. Anyway, it's anybody's guess.
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Sun 1 Jun, 2014 06:24 pm
@Brandon9000,
Neologist:
Brandon9000 wrote:
neologist wrote:
neologist wrote:
Did you find anything in my post that is scientifically invalid?
Brandon9000 wrote:
No, but you're summarizing Genesis, not providing evidence that it's true, which is what the thread title asks.
Do you define truth as epistemological certainty? Certainly, I believe what I posted was not false and provides a basis for the rest of the account. I claimed the first 2 chapters explained how we came to be and why we are here. I see no inaccuracy in the essential order of creation as provided in chapter 1. And I see no hardship in the commands to fill and subdue the earth while avoiding a certain fruit. As for filling the earth to overpopulation, consider what occurs when you ask the waiter to fill your water glass.
Let's take the first part:
Quote:
Ch 1: 1,2: The creation of the heavens and the earth takes place in an unspecified period of time. Could have been a kazillion years. Who cares? Humans can figure that out later. This time, however, is not included as one of the creative days.
Do you believe that there is anything in this quotation which provides evidence that a supernatural being created the universe?
Getting you to answer this stuff is like pulling teeth. Could I beg you please for the favor of a reply?
(bump)
0 Replies
neologist
1
Sun 1 Jun, 2014 07:22 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
Let's take the first part:
neologist wrote:
Ch 1: 1,2: The creation of the heavens and the earth takes place in an unspecified period of time. Could have been a kazillion years. Who cares? Humans can figure that out later. This time, however, is not included as one of the creative days.
Do you believe that there is anything in this quotation which provides evidence that a supernatural being created the universe?
Sorry. Thought I had answered this already.
Exactly what do you expect as proof? It was written by a common man, not a scientist. If we believe Moses' writings, he was educated in Pharoah's court. Many bible scholars believe he had access to earlier writings. His Genesis account is certainly not eye witness. It was written simply to provide the short explanation to an agrarian people. I see no problem with the shortage of detail
