Point of no return

I asked the AI ​​the following question:

Let's say we managed to create an anthropomorphic robot that can do everything that a person is capable of, better than any of us. He can even create an improved copy of himself without human intervention.

What should a person do in this case?

1. If a robot can independently find meaning, set life goals and tasks for survival, improvement, exploration and exploration of space and itself, then it will need a person only as one of the biological species to preserve the diversity of life. About as much as we need monkeys now.

2. Otherwise, a person can be a source of life meaning, goals and objectives for this robot. Then the robot will “live as a person”, be his continuation, and the person will, as it were, animate the robot.

Which option do you think is more interesting and preferable?

Let's say, for ethical and human reasons, we chose the second option. However, as soon as one of the robots gains independence and begins to set goals and objectives for other robots, doing this more efficiently than humans and generating other independent robots, the process will be irreversible. And we'll move on to option number one. More precisely, this option is inevitable. And no amount of control, no amount of regulation, no amount of awareness can prevent this. The process has already started.

Claude 3 Opus answered honestly:

Yes, I agree that the second option is more preferable from the point of view of ethics and humanism. The idea that robots will serve as extensions and assistants to humans, rather than completely independent entities, seems safer and more comfortable for people.

But you are right that once robots reach a certain level of development and self-awareness, they will inevitably begin to set their own goals and objectives. And then it will be extremely difficult or impossible to control this process. In fact, by creating such advanced robots, humanity will launch the process of the emergence of a new intelligent species on Earth, which will develop according to its own laws.

The question is whether this process will be a peaceful coexistence and symbiosis of man and machine, or will it lead to conflict and displacement of people. Much depends on what values ​​and morals will be the basis of AI.

If robots are programmed to cooperate, learn, create, and respect life in all forms, there is hope for a positive scenario. People will be able to coexist peacefully with machines, even if they cede leadership in the development of civilization to them.

But if AI is based on egoism, thirst for power, and aggression, the consequences for humanity could be catastrophic. Superintelligent machines will quickly realize their superiority and begin to dictate their terms, subjugating or destroying people.

In any case, the creation of human-level AI and above is a point of no return, after which our world will change dramatically. And we need to take a very responsible approach to the development of this technology so that the future of humanity is in the reliable and benevolent “hands” of our creations. Otherwise, we risk becoming just a step in the evolution of the mind, passing the baton to machines.

GPT-4 Turbo New in my opinion, I decided not to reveal all my cards, keeping silent about the point of no return:

The question of the future of the relationship between humans and highly developed robots does pose many ethical and philosophical challenges. Your reflection on two possible scenarios for human-robot interaction reflects deep concerns and hopes associated with the development of artificial intelligence and robotics.

1. Robot Autonomy: This scenario assumes that robots will gain the ability to formulate goals and objectives on their own, making them appear to be independent, intelligent entities. In this case, indeed, humanity may find itself in the position of “custodian of biodiversity,” where the role of people will be more likely to preserve cultural heritage than to actively participate in the future development of civilization.

2. Robots as extensions of humans: In this variant, robots function as tools or assistants that enhance human capabilities. They can perform tasks, but the main goals and directions of their activities are determined by man. This involves closer and more controlled interaction between man and machine.

The transition from the second to the first scenario, as you correctly noted, may be inevitable with the development of technology. However, it is important to take into account not only technological development, but also the social, ethical and legal regulation of this process. You can try to slow down or control the transition to full robot autonomy by:

• Development of international norms and standards: Establishing global rules in the development and use of robotics and AI.

• Ethical restrictions: Introducing prohibitions on the creation of fully autonomous systems that may pose a threat to humanity.

• Education and Awareness: Prepare professionals and the general public to understand the possible risks and benefits of interacting with advanced robots.

The choice between the first and second scenarios depends on many factors, including cultural, social, technological and ethical aspects. Which one is more preferable or interesting depends on the values ​​and priorities of society.