Saturday, April 25, 2009
Artificial Intelligence
With all the advances in technology today, technology singularity and artificial intelligence are very interesting topics. I have always wondered how far technology will advance in my lifetime. One of the group members asked us if there were a chip to but in our brains to allow us to think twice as fast, would we do it? I honestly don’t know how I would feel about that. On the one hand, it would be nice to think twice as fast, however, would that really be fair? They also mentioned that it wouldn’t be fair if some people could afford these chips and others couldn’t. Is it ethical to allow some people to increase their mental capabilities because they can afford it, and hold others back just because they cannot afford it. It also raises the question of what happens if these systems begin to fail. Suppose all the sudden they do not work and you have spent time and money getting them put in. What if they begin to cause harm to our bodies. While it would be very nice to have a chip put in our brains to allow us to think twice as fast, it is interesting to think about the possible consequences. What do you think? Would you do this if you could?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
For every new technology that comes out that would affect our bodies, there should be rigorous testing involved. That said, I would definitely need to see positive results before using anything like a chip in my brain. The question of fairness is interesting, but what if there were some sort of scholarship or financial aid system in place should people choose to get a chip like this? This would widen the market for the product while potentially bettering society.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is a really interesting question and I'm not sure how I would respond if given the opportunity. Like mcfall-smith said, I would not consider the procedure unless rigorous tests were done that prove its abilities. Even if the tests were positive, I'm not sure if i would do it because of the nature of the procedure. I don't think its fair to artificially enhance your abilities. I know some can make the argument that it is already done with aderol and other stimulants, but for me, this seems different.
ReplyDeleteI would like to hope that I would not put something artificial in my brain that could potentially have catastrophic effects. However, all it takes is one person to put this chip in his/her brain to start a chain reaction. Once people start developing advantages, whether they are intellectually, athletically, etc. I think most of us would feel compelled to do the same in order to keep up.
ReplyDeleteI kind of look at this situation similar to the effects of steroids in baseball. Steroids, although illegal in the United States, was never explicitly illegal in Major League Baseball. Once a few players started using steroids with tremendous results and no penalty, the chain reaction began. There was talk about performance-enhancing drugs, but no action was taken for a long time. I'm sure many of the players did not want to take steroids due to health concerns and moral reasoning, but many felt obligated in order to keep playing and getting paid to play the sport.
It freaks me out to image technology getting so advanced that it would be used in the human body. I disagree with it because people aren't supposed to be perfect and think as fast as a computer. Also the division in the world would be so great that it would be hard for individuals to interact. Similar to what s patel stated if one person does it then someone else will and it becomes standard. The American culture is so competitive that everyone is trying to out do someone and they technologies could produce unnatural human qualities.
ReplyDeleteI think the steroid comparison is wonderful for this topic. While those that can afford it may choose to do so for personal/professional gain, the unfairness of the situation makes it unethical. The chain reaction created through the possibility of a 'brain enhancing' chip would be tremendous. Likewise, interaction between countries and groups is difficult enough due to language and cultural barriers. Such a device would further this international divide, essentially between the "haves" and the "have nots." This divide would also be noted within the walls of individual countries due to socioeconomic conditions.
ReplyDeleteFrom a personal perspective, I would not take on the risk of placing such technology within my brain. While the chip may be tested, often negative drug results do not emerge for many years. Similarly, who knows if sometime of future technology or disease would negatively affect the previously placed implant. There is no way to test for all possible solutions and when the effected region is something as important as the brain, I'd rather not take my chances.
I agree with the chain reaction statement. There would be fear as to what this technology would entail, but if a few people had it, the differences between those people and the rest of the population would obviously be dramatic. Furthering the divide between the "haves" and "have nots" as c.davis stated would make international unity next to impossible. Would it mean that we could solve questions of poverty and environmental degradation? Or would the divide mean that those with the abilty would only look out for themselves and the other "haves" rather than the "have nots."
ReplyDeleteI think that a chip to make us think faster would create more problems in the end. In my opinion, envisioning this makes me think that it would turn our society full of robots. I agree that it is very important to test all new technologies, but it seems there is not a way to full test the affects of a chip that would make us think twice as fast. It is difficult to know the potential of something like this. For those that could not afford it, they would be so far behind. People that can not afford to be educated in the world would be left in the dust because they would also not be able to afford the chip, if that makes sense. It is scary to think about how artificial intelligence will affect the future generations. I would also not want to risk the potential harms just to think twice as fast as everyone else, yet it such an interesting topic.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think I’d jump on the opportunity to get a chip implanted in my brain to make me think twice as fast. I’d have to worry that such a thing would somehow disrupt the creative brainstorming process or inhibit my thinking in some other way. I like thinking through things at my own speed and processing information in the way my brain has developed to process it. I think a more interesting possibility would be a chip to improve memory or memorization. It would certainly make standardized testing unfair, but it seems like it would certainly be useful in an academic environment, if not otherwise. You have to wonder though, if computers are going to advance this quickly and presumably are going to be increasingly easy to use, do we really need to “upgrade” our brains along with the technology or should we just use technology better?
ReplyDeleteI highly doubt I would have a chip placed in my brain even if it made me think twice as fast. Going back to the performance enhancing drugs, many athletes decide to use them, but many do not because it is not natural. I think of the chip in the brain as the same, it is not natural therefore I would be less inclined to use it. I don't give into the idea that just because its going to cost serious money that we shouldn't sell it because poor people can't afford it. People don't sell diamonds thinking oh poor people can't afford it so we won't diamonds period. The ethical issue is more important when discussing this topic. I really think that artificial intelligence is the beginning of something that we might regret.
ReplyDeleteI think that education in this country is already divided so that the kids whose parents have more money, or allocate more money for their education quite simply get a better education and more opportunities. I feel that a technological device that enhances intelligence would work in the same way. Those whose parents could afford it, or those who think its important enough to allocate that much money to having it installed in their kids will do it. These kids will simply be the new generation of ivy league graduates and the ones that ultimately run our country, they will just be smarter. I'm not saying that this type of system is fair, I'm just saying that our country has been this way for a long time and the introduction of this new technology would be accepted in much the same way.
ReplyDeleteAutumn brings up an interesting point. Who would have acess to these intelligence chips? It would create a significant divide in our society's intellect. I think that there are many other ways to increase intelligence that we need to focus on before we resort to a technological chip! I would not trust the technology in its early stages and I would want to see proven results of effectiveness. With that being said, I would disagree with the use of these devices.
ReplyDeleteI think the question about the chip in our brains brings up a very interesting discussion. For instance, the talk of whether couples want to decide the sex of their baby, and so on is similar to this topic. I personally would like to have 2 boys and a girl but I can't imagine predicting that. I would just feel weird making that kind of decision. As for the chip, I agree that it would be nice to think faster but I feel like it would only be detrimental to our society. We are already competitive by nature and that would only add a negative form of competition. However, I'm sure some people will definitely want it, especially scholars like doctors for example. Therefore, those that are against will probably end up conforming to what the rest of society is doing because they don't want to fall behind everyone else. That's the thing about technology...I found it very interesting that in a study of what all of the oldest group of people have in common (people that have lived over 100)- is that they have all kept up with the economy's technology advances. I find this very interesting and it makes me want to stay as up to date as possible, even if that means conforming to using a chip in my brian to think twice as fast!
ReplyDeleteI think that having a computer chip in a human's brain could be beneficial in certain instances. First off, I do not think that all humans should be able to have chips in their brains because, as was said, not all people have access to the chips. However, I think certain people, like the President, should be able to have a chip. Someone in that position has to process so much information that it would be beneficial to society for him to be able to think twice as fast.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of having computer chips to make us think faster is absolutely absurd. If these were created, open to the public, and installed in humans, I think we might as well say goodbye to humans as a species and refer to our mankind as robots. Not only would this be controversial in terms of health risks, it would only further divide socio-economic gaps that currently exist. As “E White” mentioned, affordability will inevitably become an issue. Chips as technologically advanced as these will undoubtedly emerge on the market as expensive, thus only available to a small population- the wealthy class. Therefore, what will happen to the “American Dream”? America has always emphasized education as the best way to ensure prosperity- if you work hard and value education, you will be able to achieve success. Education is the very basis of our country and an opportunity that we pride the most. With chips that essentially serve a longer-deserved and hardworking achievement to you on a platter, education will become degraded and de-valued.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure what to think about this issue. Ellison brought up a good point about affordability and whether it's fair if the rich people can afford to have the implant and poor people can't afford to have the implant. Well, no, of course it wouldn't be fair but there are many things in life that aren't fair. Women get paid less than men in today's society. Is that fair? A child needs an operation but his/her parents can't afford to pay for it and now the child will likely die...is that fair? A baseball player on steroids making home-runs...is that fair? I am not trying to be cynical, I just don't think you can center this issue around affordability. Anyone who opted to have this surgery is taking a risk. Something could go wrong on the operating table and they could die. The surgery isn't vital for you to live...it's essentially a cosmetic procedure if you think about it. So, even if this whole chip in head thing was possible, you would be paying out of your own pocket to have it done. No insurance company would ever cover this. Should something happen to you on the operating table or years after the surgery, you made the choice to have it done. Nobody is perfect and nothing can ever make you perfect (no matter how many "procedures" you have done). In my opinion, I think I would skip the chip because staying alive means a whole lot more to me than being able to think faster with an implanted chip.
ReplyDeleteNew technologies challenge the framework we have for ethical decision making. I think the topic of singularity is a case in point. It is almost discomforting to think about how technologies could redistribute advantages and how that would affect the way we process our society.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think such considerations and possibilities are interesting and valuable, however, I feel like the CONS overpower the PROS. And it could very well be that I am a slight pessimist, but I think such technology is far to problematic. The loss of ethics and morality will undoubtedly accompany such advancements (such as the chip that facilitates faster processing/thinking). To0 many individuals or at least in my reality, too many people are concerned and consumed with doing the impossible, with being invincible. My point is humans are not invincible and the quest to become so is what underpins much research today, whether or not researchers, inventors, self-acclaimed geniuses wish to admit to it.
ReplyDeleteAnother point is that such advancements not only will start to diminish morality and ethics, but start to remove what it means to be human. WHO REALLY WANTS TO BE PERFECT? All the great things in life fall short of perfection. Love, Spirituality, Marriage, Parenthood, SUCCESS!
Stop trying to be what YOU do not believe in...haha...GOD!!!!