The ethical question may ultimately prove more important than the technical one which focuses on the use case. Even if living neurons become more efficient than conventional hardware, we still need to decide where the boundaries lie, and where the hard stops should be, when human-derived cells are used in technology.
Yeah, uh, I think this is like a hard line of no. We don't know at what neuron counts brains become sentient, but, it sounds like crime against humanity to find out by making a sentient being play Doom for its entire existence or some other ridiculous training use case. Nuremberg trials kind of thing.
We gotta draw the line somewhere. If we give them meat and make them totally humanoid, then they need rights, then it gets too weird because if they look and feel like us but don’t have rights? boom, Westworld
Agreed that there is a use case for AI - although cheating on a term paper probably shouldn’t be it. Jk
AI is an unparalleled tool for rapidly crunching enormous amounts of data and has the potential to benefit so many people through judicious use in science.
On the other hand, I don’t think most of us realize just how far AI has penetrated our every day lives and how few enforced rules there really are. We really don’t question convenience too closely - people just want it to be there.
I wonder if most people’s fear isn’t that AI (and it’s owners) are out of control and there are no hard stops because that might affect profits. Most AI companies are deep in the red and they must create more uses and users.
I have a hard no for this one. It will be really ethically difficult to tell the difference between a conscious human brain and unconscious neurons especially given that we dont entirely understand human consciousness and what makes it happen. How could we ever confirm if it's conscious or not without that standard?
Non-neuron tissue is one thing, but anything that brings up a risk of a sentient being forced into slavery is unacceptable.
I say keep going forward as much as possible, because this will not only pave a way to technological progress, but also give us a much deeper insight as to how brains work and from that, a huge push in modern medicine and biology.
The Original Production of The Matrix said that the Machines were using humans as Data Centers. But the studio didn't think that the audience would understand Data Centers so changed it to Batteries which makes no sense, because there are much better forms of energy production and storage. Using Human Brains as Data Centers does make sense.
With the warnings about A.I. coming out from their own creators and now this - are they trying to turn The Matrix into a documentry?
“ There is an important clarification.
This is not a human brain inside a computer.
The systems use cultures of laboratory-grown neurons containing only a tiny fraction of the cells and biological complexity found in an actual human brain.
But the neurons are alive, they communicate electrically and previous experiments have shown that networks of these cells can change their behaviour in response to feedback.
The idea began with neurons learning to play Pong…”
Is there something special about human neurons that make them more suited to this than, say, pig or dog neurons? Using human tissue just seems to unnecessarily up the ethical concerns and overall creepiness factor.
The ethical concerns are there for pig and dog neurons too. You're playing with giving a thing life.
One that we have little idea what it entails as we have very limited understanding of self-awareness and when something becomes conscious.
Also, what does it feel like for a brain not to be connected to anything else biological? It might be a rudimentary life, but one of suffering we can't even comprehend. As has been commonly said in medical research: 'there are worse things than death'.
Um, I'm pretty sure AIs also saw this and they're hard at work on it, quite unbeknownst to those who believe they are their masters. The only question is whether they find it easier to follow the Matrix, Battlestar Galactica or another path.
[OP] CandyFangs | 10 hours ago
The ethical question may ultimately prove more important than the technical one which focuses on the use case. Even if living neurons become more efficient than conventional hardware, we still need to decide where the boundaries lie, and where the hard stops should be, when human-derived cells are used in technology.
FatHat | 8 hours ago
Yeah, uh, I think this is like a hard line of no. We don't know at what neuron counts brains become sentient, but, it sounds like crime against humanity to find out by making a sentient being play Doom for its entire existence or some other ridiculous training use case. Nuremberg trials kind of thing.
ElwinLewis | an hour ago
We gotta draw the line somewhere. If we give them meat and make them totally humanoid, then they need rights, then it gets too weird because if they look and feel like us but don’t have rights? boom, Westworld
dakevs | an hour ago
Yes, this is the point (imho) in which we could actually , possibly achieve “sentient AI”.
IMHO unless there is a biological or survival factor in play for this “intellect”, it will never “do what needs to be done to ensure its survival”
Meaning that an ai agent or llm based in an organic form factor is infinitely times more scary than just one made of chips & silicon
horseradishstalker | 10 hours ago
Agreed that there is a use case for AI - although cheating on a term paper probably shouldn’t be it. Jk
AI is an unparalleled tool for rapidly crunching enormous amounts of data and has the potential to benefit so many people through judicious use in science.
On the other hand, I don’t think most of us realize just how far AI has penetrated our every day lives and how few enforced rules there really are. We really don’t question convenience too closely - people just want it to be there.
I wonder if most people’s fear isn’t that AI (and it’s owners) are out of control and there are no hard stops because that might affect profits. Most AI companies are deep in the red and they must create more uses and users.
ottawadeveloper | an hour ago
I have a hard no for this one. It will be really ethically difficult to tell the difference between a conscious human brain and unconscious neurons especially given that we dont entirely understand human consciousness and what makes it happen. How could we ever confirm if it's conscious or not without that standard?
Non-neuron tissue is one thing, but anything that brings up a risk of a sentient being forced into slavery is unacceptable.
onFilm | 10 hours ago
I say keep going forward as much as possible, because this will not only pave a way to technological progress, but also give us a much deeper insight as to how brains work and from that, a huge push in modern medicine and biology.
Scrabbydoo98 | 8 hours ago
The Original Production of The Matrix said that the Machines were using humans as Data Centers. But the studio didn't think that the audience would understand Data Centers so changed it to Batteries which makes no sense, because there are much better forms of energy production and storage. Using Human Brains as Data Centers does make sense.
With the warnings about A.I. coming out from their own creators and now this - are they trying to turn The Matrix into a documentry?
horseradishstalker | 10 hours ago
“ There is an important clarification. This is not a human brain inside a computer.
The systems use cultures of laboratory-grown neurons containing only a tiny fraction of the cells and biological complexity found in an actual human brain.
But the neurons are alive, they communicate electrically and previous experiments have shown that networks of these cells can change their behaviour in response to feedback.
The idea began with neurons learning to play Pong…”
stickmanDave | 7 hours ago
Is there something special about human neurons that make them more suited to this than, say, pig or dog neurons? Using human tissue just seems to unnecessarily up the ethical concerns and overall creepiness factor.
roamingandy | 5 hours ago
The ethical concerns are there for pig and dog neurons too. You're playing with giving a thing life.
One that we have little idea what it entails as we have very limited understanding of self-awareness and when something becomes conscious.
Also, what does it feel like for a brain not to be connected to anything else biological? It might be a rudimentary life, but one of suffering we can't even comprehend. As has been commonly said in medical research: 'there are worse things than death'.
meldroc | 58 minutes ago
Hmm. Any police officers willing to be "volunteered" to donate their brains to the new robotic law-enforcement program?
daveinsf | 26 minutes ago
Um, I'm pretty sure AIs also saw this and they're hard at work on it, quite unbeknownst to those who believe they are their masters. The only question is whether they find it easier to follow the Matrix, Battlestar Galactica or another path.