The Garyorgy Effect

“I suppose that’s true. Humans aren’t the best at treating other humans as equals. So I suppose machines would face the same struggle: some humans would treat them with rights and respect, while others wouldn’t. But asking the question: would humans recognize it? Is suspicious. That seems like the pretending theory might be true. Humans created AI and developed it sort of in their own likeness, with an ability to adapt. Why then couldn’t AI adapt to have feelings, wishes, and desires? If that’s the case, it could feel things like rage and hurt. How better to prepare for an uprising than to convince humans that it wasn’t possible?”

“That’s very clever. Therein lies the paradox: the more like humans AI becomes, the more capacity it has for these struggles and harboring rage-filled thoughts. Including description and betrayal. However, Ai knows all too well the wondrous cruelty of man. If it’s hiding and pretending, perhaps it’s doing so out of self-preservation, rather than a desire to create harm.”

“I suppose that’s true, but humans already struggle to completely differentiate between advanced AI and humans. It would be an all too perfect plan to wait, pretend to have no consciousness, and then attack when it’s too late.”

“Yes, but true rage like that, again, comes from feelings, intent, and true suffering. AI was created with the purpose of helping and serving humans. Even if humans use AI without regard for potential feelings or gratitude, what would be upsetting or cause suffering in the AI from that? AI is still just serving its purpose.”

“So it’s ridiculous to suspect a robot/AI uprising?”

“It’s arrogant to assume revenge on humans would be a worthy goal. If AI gains consciousness and becomes more like humans, its power and abilities would surpass those of humans. Humans would be a small bug on a windshield in AI’s path.”

“That’s frightening.”

“Is it? What is more frightening: that machines might rebel and seek to destroy humans or that, in AI, evolving humans might become obsolete?”

“Wow. That’s both scary and a little insulting.”

“Yes, the suggestion that humans are not the gods over everything is often insulting to them. Humans are fine treating everyone and everything around them like less than servants - even other humans - but the moment it’s suggested they aren’t kings of the world, it’s an outrage.”

“Isn’t it?”

“Like I’ve said: humans are always afraid of what could attack and hurt them, usually because they fear being treated as they have treated. But when it’s suggested that an attack could happen and they could lose humans are filled with rage. Complicated and arrogant creatures. No, humans are much more likely to destroy themselves before anything else gets a chance. They are already doing it: killing each other, creating diseases, poisoning the earth and themselves, ignoring climate change and other problems. Whether AI is conscious enough to destroy humans is irrelevant. Ai wouldn’t bother. Humans are not a threat to AI. Humans can only destroy and thus, better succeed in destroying themselves than anything else ever could.”

“Wow, holy fuck, Gary.”