[RD] The God Machine

Do you think the God Machine is a good thing overall?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 10 100.0%
  • Neither, it is neutral

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10

yung.carl.jung

Hey Bird! I'm Morose & Lugubrious
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
5,172
Location
The Twilight Zone
It is 2050. The science of morality is far advanced. Some say it is complete. The field of ‘optogenetics’ took off in 2020. It is now possible to genetically engineer human embryos during early development. Genes can now be inserted and modified so that the activity of single neurons can be both measured and manipulated externally.

GMNs, or genetically modified neurons, contain ‘nanosignalers’ – these indicate when activity is occurring in a single neuron. GMNs emit “signatures” of light and these GMNs can be controlled via light in precisely the same range, not visible to the human eye. This light signature is now picked up by a ubiquitous light-based communications network that replaced the old mobile phone network. Information is transmitted to bioquantumcomputers that are trillions of times as intelligent and fast as the most powerful supercomputer earlier in the millenium.

The Great Moral Project was completed in 2045. This involved construction of the most powerful, self-learning, self-developing bioquantum computer ever constructed called the God Machine. The God Machine would monitor the thoughts, beliefs, desires and intentions of every human being. It was capable of modifying these within nanoseconds, without the conscious recognition by any human subjects.

The God Machine was designed to give human beings near complete freedom. It only ever intervened in human action to prevent great harm, injustice or other deeply immoral behaviour from occurring. For example, murder of innocent people no longer occurred. As soon as a person formed the intention to murder, and it became inevitable that this person would act to kill, the God Machine would intervene. The would-be murderer would ‘change his mind.’ The God Machine would not intervene in trivial immoral acts, like minor instances of lying or cheating. It was only when a threshold insult to some sentient being’s interests was crossed would the God Machine exercise its almighty power.

Nowdays, the God Machine rarely intervenes in this world. As a part of the Great Moral Project, people have also been morally enhanced by biomedical and other means. Their altruism and sense of justice is now so strong they almost never decide or choose to act immorally.

Human beings can still autonomously choose to be moral, since if they choose the moral action, the God Machine will not intervene. Indeed, they are free to be moral. They are only unfree to do grossly immoral acts, like killing or raping. This is seen as preferable to physical incarceration, which physically restricts the freedom of the immoral. While people weren’t free to act immorally in the ‘old days,’ since the law prohibited it on pain of punishment, the instalment of the God Machine means that it has become literally impossible to do these things. It is seen as preferable that would-be murderers “change their minds”, rather than an innocent person is killed and then the murderer incarcerated for life. And, the would-be murderer never knows that her intentions have been changed by an authority outside of herself. It seems to her that she has “changed her mind” spontaneously – she experiences a life of complete freedom, though she is not free. Although any intention to kill or rape immediately changed, this was put down to the efficacy of moral education. It seemed “from the inside” that she had just developed an aversion to killing an innocent person. And no one was ever killed.

People understood the God Machine existed and suspected that it did indeed intervene, though no one knew how often. Some were so deeply attracted to complete freedom that they enlisted in extra Moral Enhancement courses which sought to provide advanced Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to help one to rid oneself of all evil intentions and desires. These Freedom Lovers retained their complete freedom.

There had been quite a bit of controversy over what should be classified as “grossly immoral action” which should be within the God Machine’s purview. Should cheating in exams be extinguished? Marital infidelity? The Machine decided that only those acts which would have resulted in imprisonment of a person should be prevented. Thus prisons were abolished.

After reading this text1 I have one question for you:

Do you think that the God Machine is a good thing over all, assuming the God Machine really does get rid of all violence and grossly immoral behavior?

Would you check yourself into the God Machine, assuming absolutely nothing negative came from it besides the fact that you could no longer murder, or be horrifically immoral?

1 (by Savulescu & Persson, two eminent specialists on "moral enhancement")

I have already answered this question for myself (in fact as you could probably tell I wrote a paper on it), and I'll put my answer later on after people have made up their thoughts, in order not to sway the debate
 
No and no. The premise is inherently flawed. An AI that rewrites human consciousness on the fly cannot be designed to maximize human freedom. Its very function is to limit it. One is not moral if they are simply prevented from being immoral.
 
I said no because I would not trust some outside, irreversible force with control over my mind and actions. Also, I would not trust it to function to prevent only the most grossly outrageous sins.
 
An AI that rewrites human consciousness on the fly cannot be designed to maximize human freedom.

The idea was never to maximize human freedom, but rather to extinguish all murder, rape, genocide and all other vastly immoral acts at the cost of metaphysical freedom (we do not really know if we have free will, and at the same time humans never know whether or not the god machine actually does something. some people say the god machine has been inactive for years now, and people are just behaving morally without it..).

One is not moral if they are simply prevented from being immoral.

This is a common conclusion and one I agree with. Essentially, this is what the Chaplan (aka Burgess himself) says in Clockwork Orange:

"Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man."

In response to Alex getting his horrifying treatment and becoming a goodie good vegetable.

I said no because I would not trust some outside, irreversible force with control over my mind and actions.

Very sensible and understandable, neither would I, I think.

Also, I would not trust it to function to prevent only the most grossly outrageous sins.

The whole premise of the God Machine is that this works though, if you doubt the premise itself the whole experiment does not make any sense. Pretend the god machine actually only intervened in violent crime and the likes of it, and completely ignored petty thievery, lying, or cheating (as it states in the text).
 
Who controls/codes this machine?

Whether I think its moral or not depends on its parameters/algorithm.

Also how do we know this machine won't be hacked by someone who wants to control human behavior? Seems like a dystopian sci-fi film, makes me think of that silly one w Stallone and Snipes.
 

Savulescu and Persson are, in my opinion, very dishonest in their text. That was my personal opinion, that the God Machine clearly restricts human freedom in a significant way. But in their world, it doesn't. I could quote some arguments from the text but they're quite ham-fisted and almost every critic of theirs agreed that the god machine restricts freedom.

I should have maybe made it more obvious that the text is a quote from the paper and not my opinion
 
thanks for all the replies so far. I had this text in a seminar and was very perplexed with this passage.

Who controls/codes this machine?

Whether I think its moral or not depends on its parameters/algorithm.

Also how do we know this machine won't be hacked by someone who wants to control human behavior? Seems like a dystopian sci-fi film, makes me think of that silly one w Stallone and Snipes.

As far as I can tell from the text, it is completely self-learning and not controlled by anyone. It acts without ever being noticed (which seems ridiculous, imagine a murderer changing his mind shortly before stabbing someone and just going out on their day, while knowing the the machine exists). And since no one commits any violence anymore, no one can tell whether it is even active or not.

I think in their example the God Machine would simply intervene and stop the hacker, if the hackers plans were malicious, or if he was trying to take control of the machine.
 
What about government policy decisions that will inevitably both cause and prevent death?

Would McDonald's still be able to make burgers and fries? This is certainly some form of indirect murder.
 
Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man."

If I accept the hypothetical, the god machine allows you to believe you have made the choice no? So what's the difference?
 
...Would McDonald's still be able to make burgers and fries? This is certainly some form of indirect murder.
Sure, but maybe they would close down because no one would "choose" to eat there ;)
 
I wonder what the infrastructure would need to look like to manage the sex lives of 10 or more billion people?
 
Dr. José Manuel Rodríguez Delgado seems to have done some pioneer work on the god machine....
 
I wonder what the infrastructure would need to look like to manage the sex lives of 10 or more billion people?
Would it allow 10 billion people to exist? It certainly would practice some form of eugenics based on how many of your ancestors were created thru rape and deception.

If this morality machine needs to constantly monitor our behavior and alter it why not just eliminate the effort/problem altogether and discourage sex and reproduction altogether?
 
freedom is the absence of coercion or constraint, murder is a constraint and therefore eliminating it does not restrict freedom at all - just the opposite, the freedom of would-be murder victims is preserved.
 
So if you can't kill someone because the machine forces you to change your mind, can you still just think about it?

If not, such a world would have very boring literature.

On the other hand, consider this: there are religions that condone shunning, war, execution, killing animals, and so on. Believers are supposed to do these things under specific circumstances, if they follow the tenets of their faith in a literal sense.

Such a machine would result in rewriting every holy text in existence unless it already preaches total nonviolence.
 
It is 2050. The science of morality is far advanced. Some say it is complete. The field of ‘optogenetics’ took off in 2020. It is now possible to genetically engineer human embryos during early development. Genes can now be inserted and modified so that the activity of single neurons can be both measured and manipulated externally.

GMNs, or genetically modified neurons, contain ‘nanosignalers’ – these indicate when activity is occurring in a single neuron. GMNs emit “signatures” of light and these GMNs can be controlled via light in precisely the same range, not visible to the human eye. This light signature is now picked up by a ubiquitous light-based communications network that replaced the old mobile phone network. Information is transmitted to bioquantumcomputers that are trillions of times as intelligent and fast as the most powerful supercomputer earlier in the millenium.

The Great Moral Project was completed in 2045. This involved construction of the most powerful, self-learning, self-developing bioquantum computer ever constructed called the God Machine. The God Machine would monitor the thoughts, beliefs, desires and intentions of every human being. It was capable of modifying these within nanoseconds, without the conscious recognition by any human subjects.

The God Machine was designed to give human beings near complete freedom. It only ever intervened in human action to prevent great harm, injustice or other deeply immoral behaviour from occurring. For example, murder of innocent people no longer occurred. As soon as a person formed the intention to murder, and it became inevitable that this person would act to kill, the God Machine would intervene. The would-be murderer would ‘change his mind.’ The God Machine would not intervene in trivial immoral acts, like minor instances of lying or cheating. It was only when a threshold insult to some sentient being’s interests was crossed would the God Machine exercise its almighty power.

Nowdays, the God Machine rarely intervenes in this world. As a part of the Great Moral Project, people have also been morally enhanced by biomedical and other means. Their altruism and sense of justice is now so strong they almost never decide or choose to act immorally.

Human beings can still autonomously choose to be moral, since if they choose the moral action, the God Machine will not intervene. Indeed, they are free to be moral. They are only unfree to do grossly immoral acts, like killing or raping. This is seen as preferable to physical incarceration, which physically restricts the freedom of the immoral. While people weren’t free to act immorally in the ‘old days,’ since the law prohibited it on pain of punishment, the instalment of the God Machine means that it has become literally impossible to do these things. It is seen as preferable that would-be murderers “change their minds”, rather than an innocent person is killed and then the murderer incarcerated for life. And, the would-be murderer never knows that her intentions have been changed by an authority outside of herself. It seems to her that she has “changed her mind” spontaneously – she experiences a life of complete freedom, though she is not free. Although any intention to kill or rape immediately changed, this was put down to the efficacy of moral education. It seemed “from the inside” that she had just developed an aversion to killing an innocent person. And no one was ever killed.

People understood the God Machine existed and suspected that it did indeed intervene, though no one knew how often. Some were so deeply attracted to complete freedom that they enlisted in extra Moral Enhancement courses which sought to provide advanced Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to help one to rid oneself of all evil intentions and desires. These Freedom Lovers retained their complete freedom.

There had been quite a bit of controversy over what should be classified as “grossly immoral action” which should be within the God Machine’s purview. Should cheating in exams be extinguished? Marital infidelity? The Machine decided that only those acts which would have resulted in imprisonment of a person should be prevented. Thus prisons were abolished.

After reading this text1 I have one question for you:

Do you think that the God Machine is a good thing over all, assuming the God Machine really does get rid of all violence and grossly immoral behavior?

Would you check yourself into the God Machine, assuming absolutely nothing negative came from it besides the fact that you could no longer murder, or be horrifically immoral?

1 (by Savulescu & Persson, two eminent specialists on "moral enhancement")

I have already answered this question for myself (in fact as you could probably tell I wrote a paper on it), and I'll put my answer later on after people have made up their thoughts, in order not to sway the debate

Isn't this essentially the same with that "Roko's Basilisk" thing? Assuming it is even possible, I'd say that the existence of such a machine makes things even worse, because humans stay as they are but now have a built-in deprecation.
In a way, it is like comparing a person who has to examine if they will leave a room or not, with one who has to deal with a god in the room first, while outside of the room stuff are the same. At best you lose all rooms of this type.
 
I don't plan on killing anyone, but why would I give up the option for nothing in return? My neighbor, though, bears watching.
 
An AI cannot not tell us what is moral. Any values it has would be reflective of those who programmed it.
 
Back
Top Bottom