I can't predict the precise effects but [ultimately] what the type of AI I think people have in mind here will do is improve the versatility of general-purpose hardware. [...]
Why might machines decide to wipe-out humanity? And how might this technology be leveraged in ways to prevent that type of an outcome from happening?
because humans are destroying the planet with pollution and there's too many idiots who refuse to accept man made climate change. machines destroy humans because we're ruining the planet.
Those are political issues, not technological ones. Plastic pollution, for example, stems from the irresponsible disposal of plastics (that and plastics take inordinately long to decompose). Technological innovations, at least in theory, are meant to reverse the effects of "climate change" (some definitions may vary, depending on whomever it is you are communicating with). As far as technology is concerned, it can be said that people too frequently volunteer their information to companies that sell (or, at least, provide access to) their information to advertisers (this is meant as a criticism).
No, they're human issues. Humans are stupid and the machines will destroy us.
To play the role of devil's advocate, there are a few points I would like to make to counter your argument. You say things are getting better and better. To a large extent, I would agree. At the same time, however, rates of suicide, depression and alcoholism are on the rise in some of the most industrialized countries in the world where such technology is readily available. Obsessive compulsive behaviors are also increasingly evident in industrialized countries (when such things weren't really discussed in the past with technology absent). What might the connection between the two be? And why might it be necessary to teach kids how to do things as they were 150 years ago?
suicide: I guy from South Korea told me that they have the highest suicide rates in the world. He said that was because of the expectations placed on them by society. He said that unlike America, they don't have a bunch of natural resources to fall back on. He said all they have are their brains. He said that South Korean children start school at 3 years of age, and there aren't summer breaks and such. If you didn't do well in school and life, you were a disgrace to your family. So fast forward a couple of hundred years in South Korea. Computers program themselves and learn. They do all the work and make most decisions. Natural resources aren't a problem, because nano technology can somehow just make stuff. Alcoholism has been around since the invention of fermenting fruit. Depression isn't new. They invented that during the great depression! OCD: I doubt you can blame that on your fancy toaster oven. Why would I tell my kids about how hard it was back in the day? Because, the little fuckers need to know that we all walked to school, uphill, both ways in the snow!
Either you were trolling a little bit with your last sentence or you are showing signs of pathological parenting. Kids lack experience and all. To each his own though I guess.
Actually, my last sentence was a failed joke. So I'll now give you my serious answer. "And why might it be necessary to teach kids how to do things as they were 150 years ago?"Overall, that would be a waste of time. I'd think it would be better to focus on teaching kids about the present, and not the past.
Handwriting is no longer taught in schools for some would deem it primitive schooling, for example. There is still significant value in written communication (e. g., by hand) that is no longer taught in school. I did have someone say to me recently, "You and that ole guy over there are the only guys in this joint who wrote anybody a letter", so I think that speaks to contemporary reality. Just because something is modern means it's worth teaching nor, just because something is no longer contemporary doesn't mean it lacks value, both in the home and in school. Food for thought!
So home school your kids. Teach your kids how to use an abacus, and I'll teach mine how to use an Excel spreadsheet. Everyone's a winner. Food for thought!
I do think there's value to teaching kids how to use the software commonly used today. There are some limits to how early modern technology should be taught, at least in my humble opinion. I once handed a $20 to a young woman for $16 worth of firewood, for example. I had to explain to her that she owed me $4 per the difference. Of course there's value to modern technology anyhow! :)
Either that or she was just trying to get a 4 buck tip!
Maybe, but I think she was just lacking in basic math skills everybody should know. One of the reasons why I say that: from what I could see in her body language, she didn't really seem all there when I said, "You owe me $4!". "What?", she asked with a confused look on her face. "It's $8/bag of wood. I asked for 2 bags of wood, so that's $16. I gave you a $20 bill, so you owe me $4". People need to be able to write cursive (e. g., for when they sign legally binding documents -- Digital signatures don't always cut it in most cases). I don't dispute you on the value of knowing digital technology now that pretty much all employers require it. It's more or less a matter of retaining some of the more conventional skills that still carry with them considerable value (e.. g, people form their own identity by virtue of their hand-written signature!). You present interesting arguments anyhow!
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!