MindWrap: Roko's Basilisk and the Folly of Transhumanist Atheism

"A thought experiment called 'Roko's Basilisk' takes the notion of world-ending artificial intelligence to a new extreme, suggesting that all-powerful robots may one day torture those who didn't help them come into existence sooner." Business Insider

"Roko's basilisk is a thought experiment about the potential risks involved in developing artificial intelligence. The experiment's premise is that an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being. It resembles a futurist version of Pascal's wager, in that it suggests people should weigh possible punishment versus reward and as a result accept particular singularitarian ideas or financially support their development." Rational Wiki

What is the Roko's basilisk? It's an idea that if somehow we were to create a smarter-than-humans AI, which will in turn create an even smarter AI, and so on until it becomes close to omniscient and godlike, that it will create a simulations of all of the previous humans that didn't take part in advancing it, and then punishing them.

Why would it punish them in a simulation? Arguably, said AI would be the best thing ever, as it will solve humanity's problems if it was created to be friendly. However, since humanity has suffered before it was born, so to speak, those humans that didn't advance the AI will be punished because reasons. Those reasons include existential risk or some other.

One put it that 151,600 people die each day before said AI manifested, so the AI has a reason to exact revenge on those that didn't help it come back to save humanity.
To be fair, not all transhumanists hold these belief, as it is just a thought experiment. You'd have to accept the premise that AI would find existential crisis compelling enough to punish simulations of you far in the future, in addition to the already faulty transhumanist assumptions.

If one does accept the premise, these are the problems with that line of thinking.

That is,
1. Atheism says there is no God
1a. If there was a God, He is evil for reasons, including the following: sending people to hell for not following Him, the existence of evil, people suffering, etc.

1b. God sees Himself as the ultimate good

2. We are most likely simulations by an AI

3. If we are simulations, then AI is basically a god in all practices and purposes

3a. Thus if said AI runs this simulated universe, it is the god of this universe


Thus if Roko's Basilisk is true,

A. There is a god

B. That god is evil for sending the current simulations of who don't to an existential hell, allowing evil to exist in the simulated universe, allowing suffering of simulations, etc.

C. That AI considers itself the ultimate good, and with objective measure

D. We are already simulations of said AI god

E. Atheism is false, at least in this simulated universe

So if Roko's Basilisk is possible, atheism is false. Do note I don't believe in Roko's Basilisk or atheism, I used their reasoning.

MindWrap: Why Are Humans Afraid Of An Artificial Intelligence Rebellion?

I'm still grieving today from the Tittle's loss, but due to a couple recent articles in the news about a subject I've always wanted to touch, I will analyze this question, "Why are humans afraid of rebellion from super artificial intelligence?". Movies like the Terminator and Matrix popularize the idea: that man will be ruled by machines.

The Butlerian Jihad, a fictional artificial intelligence uprising in the Dune series

On May the 1st, "Mayday", Stephen Hawking, the acclaimed thinker, warned us about the implications of highly advanced artificial intelligence and it's possible threat to humanity. To him, we aren't taking artificial intelligence seriously enough.

One can imagine such technology outsmarting financial markets, out-inventing human researchers, out-manipulating human leaders, and developing weapons we cannot even understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. ~ Stephen Hawking

Today, an article comes out on Neurogrid, a chip that is modeled after the human brain's parallel processing power. While not specialized as traditional supercomputers in that it can run purely mathematical computations, Neurogrid is important step in that in reflects brain activity as is understood.

But the fundamental difference between the way traditional computing systems model the brain and the way Neurogrid works lies in the way the computations are performed and communicated throughout the system.
Most computers, including supercomputers, rely on digital signaling, meaning the computer carries out instructions by essentially answering "true" or "false" to a series of questions. This is similar to how neurons communicate: they either fire an action potential, or they don't.

Indeed, interesting technology. It does seem we are headed to some kind of singularity, but not one imagined by transhumanists in my opinion. But I digress. We come back to the original question. Why are humans afraid of a revolt by computerized beings?

As a Christian, I believe that the created are no greater than the creator(s), and there is no evolutionary process that creates something greater than itself, though I believe there are only at best, horizontal changes, not anything significant vertically upwards. I also believe the Bible is literal and completely true.

With those assumptions, my argument is simple. Humanity remembers his rebellion against God in Eden, and we fear our creations will do that to us.

In Genesis, God, a Superintelligence far beyond comprehension, creates intelligences according to His image: Adam and Eve. They were not greater than their Creator. And yet in their desire to become like God, they fell.

In our remembrance, we falsely think that mere computers will become self-aware. Unfortunately, self-awareness is only available through spiritual means. Even animals are not self-aware but are ruled by instinct.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:7

I subscribe to Dr. Caroline Leaf, a cognitive neuroscientist, in regards to the mind and brain. Only the spirit can bring self-awareness. No amount of software programming or advancement in hardware will create something greater. Yes, computers are very specialized and efficient in what they can do, whether or not be it mathematical computation or chess, but it will only be mere reflections and only statistical advantage, not a qualitative one.

In our primal memories and fears and sinful nature, we create the robotic Skynet boogeyman. We fear that computers will be corrupt because we are corrupt.

And that is true to an extent. It would make sense that everything we make is fallen. Humans might program or manufacture devices to have evil purposes. But machines will never be inherently sinful or purposely, self-awarely corrupt, because they will be at best, tools, not life.

Though maybe the statue of the Beast in Revelation may be an exception. Who knows? It's possible that demonic presence or counterfeit intelligence may manifest itself.

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. Revelation 13:15