Socialist Tech-State?

[Dreckt]

Some time ago, I found this article on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

It is interesting in the way that it "predicts" that around 2030, technology will have been developed into a stage where scientific and technological revolutions could happen every day. This can happen in numerous of ways, but I am interested in the direction of an Artificial Intelligence.

Now, let us say that such a technology have been developed. Since this machine lacks human needs - such as food and water (being reduced to energy), the need of a family, friends or partner - wouldn't it be the ideal "state" in a socialist country? Socialist states, as have been shown in previous history, have a story of twisting the path to communism into authoritarianism, and mostly through the need of power and the position of power.

But since this machine lacks the personal need of power, as well as the position of power, then would it not be the ideal ruler?

This machine would also process things a lot faster than humans. All mistakes would probably already be accounted for, thus the human factor of mistakes that is so often present in society today would most likely disappear.

Would this be possible?

[redstar2000]

We don't know.

People working in AI have been "promising us the moon" for decades; I believe the smartest "robot" they've managed to come up with so far is about as "intelligent" as a cockroach. :lol:

Nanotechnology, on the other hand, looks "promising" at the moment...we'll see how practical it turns out to be.

One thing the "futurists" ignore is the dynamics of an aging class society...there could be a lot of "cool things" that "could be done" that won't happen in the "old" capitalist countries.

It would be "handy" if a "super AI" could take care of all the "messy bits" of production and distribution...leaving us the freedom to concentrate only on that which is interesting to us.

But I put it in the "I'll believe it when I see it" category.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Chrysalis]

But the bigger picture is this: would it not be, then, like subjugating ourselves to a machine all over again? Because what is the purpose of dismantling capitalism and doing away with class distinction? So we get back our autonomy: so we can deliberate, decide, control our material life (subsistence, mode of production, control our own labor, etc) while being ordinary humans as we really are.


PS: oops, I didn't mean to sound like anti-technology. I was referring to a fully-tech ruler of state, or something like that.

[Cult of Reason]

http://www.technocracy.ca

*Plug*.

You might find that site of interest.

[RebelDog]

It is inevitable that sometime in the future there will be ferocious debate about whether some AI is 'alive'. If you try to list the criterion for something having life (being alive) then the waters get more clouded the more advanced technology becomes. There are even things today which appear to fit the bill. Computer virus's forinstance. They reproduce and move to other computers. Reproduction does not have to be sexual. An intelligent robot could construct copies of itself. They could have the brain power to think freely and realise that they are an exploited class who does the work while humans sit back and take the benifits. A robotic revolution!
I read in a magazine about the 'computational universe'. Everything in the universe can be expressed mathematically. With our ever more powerful computers we can get the computer to work out things like a cure for cancer and all kinds of other things. This would take (with present computers) billions of years of calculations. But quantum computers are only round the corner and they seem to be capable of imense calculations. They say the 21st century will be the century of 'biology' as the 20th was the century of physics. What about the technology that will make it all possible. You may yet see a robot collect a nobel prize.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by The Dissenter
But quantum computers are only round the corner and they seem to be capable of immense calculations.

The people who tell us things like this have a material self-interest in doing so: they want us to support funding for the kind of research they find interesting.

Nothing wrong with that...but be skeptical when people "promise you the moon".

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[piet11111]

we should never ever allow an artificial intelligence to control anything that can potentially hurt someone.

we should keep an AI disconnected from everything to prevent someone messing with it or vice versa.
i dont think an intelligence without emotions or morality can be trusted enough to allow it to be able to do anything.

heck we cant even trust humans with power.
so why would we trust a program.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

we should never ever allow an artificial intelligence to control anything that can potentially hurt someone.

Why hard-code some version of Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics?


we should keep an AI disconnected from everything to prevent someone messing with it or vice versa.

Or we can give the AI powers to prevent anyone messing with it. We can still phyically pull the plug in the event of it going rampant.


i dont think an intelligence without emotions or morality can be trusted enough to allow it to be able to do anything.

Then give it emotions and loyalty.


heck we cant even trust humans with power.
so why would we trust a program.

Because unlike humans, AI can be compltely programmed to serve without thinking otherwise.


It is inevitable that sometime in the future there will be ferocious debate about whether some AI is 'alive'. If you try to list the criterion for something having life (being alive) then the waters get more clouded the more advanced technology becomes. There are even things today which appear to fit the bill. Computer virus's forinstance. They reproduce and move to other computers. Reproduction does not have to be sexual. An intelligent robot could construct copies of itself. They could have the brain power to think freely and realise that they are an exploited class who does the work while humans sit back and take the benifits. A robotic revolution!

Not if they can't concieve of the concept of revolting in the first place.


read in a magazine about the 'computational universe'. Everything in the universe can be expressed mathematically. With our ever more powerful computers we can get the computer to work out things like a cure for cancer and all kinds of other things. This would take (with present computers) billions of years of calculations. But quantum computers are only round the corner and they seem to be capable of imense calculations. They say the 21st century will be the century of 'biology' as the 20th was the century of physics. What about the technology that will make it all possible. You may yet see a robot collect a nobel prize.

Like Redstar said, we should only believe when we see it.

[piet11111]

why hardcode something like that because i dont trust something that can not be intimidated or punished or has nothing to lose.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 12:19 AM
why hardcode something like that because i dont trust something that can not be intimidated or punished or has nothing to lose.
It seems you do not know what hard-coding means. It means a type of code that forms a physically integral part to the system, and as such cannot be altered or removed using software.

Link the hard code to an essential component such as the CPU(s) and any attempt to remove or modify the hard code will result in the computer failing to function.

[Sentinel]

I agree with NoXion. If an AI is programmed to solely serve the needs of humans, it's not in control, humans are.

In my opinion technological development is crucial to form a society able to deliver 'to each according to need', and intelligent computers are part of that. I think they can help us automatise many decisions and make distribution run more smoothly.

To be truly progressive, we should not fear technology irrationally but embrace it as an improvement of man, by man. We should strive to become one with it.

[More Fire for the People]

Lately, one might say that I have become attracted to technocratic socialism. I would say that once socialism has been introduced on a large-scale, perhaps even international, that technology and science will accelerate far beyond what it is now. Science is not independent of the means of production. Hitherto science has served the ruling class and has served as "science" for the improvement of profit. Under socialism, it will become science for the improvement of humanity and human knowledge.

[drain.you]

Interesting ideas.

Here is kind-of related thread which may interest you, regarding how AI has the potential to become the future working class and though we not entirely sure what will happen to humans, the structure of society will definately be effected in some way;
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...72&hl=ai+wokers (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=41472&hl=ai+wokers)

[Sentinel]

Originally posted by Hopscotch Anthill
Lately, one might say that I have become attracted to technocratic socialism. I would say that once socialism has been introduced on a large-scale, perhaps even international, that technology and science will accelerate far beyond what it is now. Science is not independent of the means of production. Hitherto science has served the ruling class and has served as "science" for the improvement of profit. Under socialism, it will become science for the improvement of humanity and human knowledge.

I share your thoughts on this. I have also adopted many of the ideas of transhumanists, as I believe that mankind should strive to literally become one with technology, as a method of improving the bodies evolution has provided us with so far.

Transhumanism, Wikipedia definition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism)
Thread on transhumanism (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46443)

[piet11111]

transhumanism hmm sounds a bit like the borg from star trek.
very interesting i have been thinking about future technology and being able to replace my messed up left arm (i miss a piece of bone and cant lift heavy stuff with it)

my main reasons for being a communist is a better standard of living for all and imensely fast technological advancement.

[More Fire for the People]

I am not a "fan" of transhumanism. I believe we should use technology to better ourselves — better health, higher intelligence, better eyesight, etc. but we should not view ourselves or become as technology.

[Fistful of Steel]

That'd be pretty interesting to see take place.

And as far as robots go, they're the kind of near infallible things that could actually make a socialist system work. You can't corrupt a robot, and it can't bend the rules, it could protect a utopian state without fear of abuse of power, and if the people reap the labour of machines doing their own work then I can see how that would be beneficial.