<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Them!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/</link>
	<description>Just another Pajamasmedia.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:33:16 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Al_Batross</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29785</link>
		<dc:creator>Al_Batross</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:51:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29785</guid>
		<description>An RPV/UAV/RPG (Remotely Piloted Grunt) operates under direct human control, especially (I hope) when it&#039;s weapon systems are active, so that the human operator can provide an organic safety-catch. 
However, fully autonomous systems would bother me, even if very small and carrying only tiny sensor packages. I would not be worrying about the little chaps going postal off their own bats, but rather about the danger of them being infected by malicious programming and turned into lethal weapons even without being armed (eg  high speed flight at head-height in a crowded street).
I would also worry about the autonomous technology transferring into consumer electronics and thus becoming readily available to Uni-bomber hobbyists and Jihadi wannabees, who could incorporate it into their own devices.
Please keep a human in the loop for as long as possible, even if that human is only sitting at a PC thousands of miles away from a bug-sized bug.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An RPV/UAV/RPG (Remotely Piloted Grunt) operates under direct human control, especially (I hope) when it&#8217;s weapon systems are active, so that the human operator can provide an organic safety-catch.<br />
However, fully autonomous systems would bother me, even if very small and carrying only tiny sensor packages. I would not be worrying about the little chaps going postal off their own bats, but rather about the danger of them being infected by malicious programming and turned into lethal weapons even without being armed (eg  high speed flight at head-height in a crowded street).<br />
I would also worry about the autonomous technology transferring into consumer electronics and thus becoming readily available to Uni-bomber hobbyists and Jihadi wannabees, who could incorporate it into their own devices.<br />
Please keep a human in the loop for as long as possible, even if that human is only sitting at a PC thousands of miles away from a bug-sized bug.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anodyne</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29748</link>
		<dc:creator>Anodyne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29748</guid>
		<description>@ 51:

&lt;b&gt; This is almost amusing.

We’ve had radicals on the streets of most large cities enunciating clearly their desires and intentions.

We invent small machines to find out what people’s intentions are. And invent complicated and error prone technologies to handle the flood of data.

Blindness isn’t only a physical disability.&lt;/b&gt;

A willful blindness at that: &lt;a href=&quot;http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/strategic-collapse-at-the-army-war-college/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Strategic Collapse at the Army War College&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 51:</p>
<p><b> This is almost amusing.</p>
<p>We’ve had radicals on the streets of most large cities enunciating clearly their desires and intentions.</p>
<p>We invent small machines to find out what people’s intentions are. And invent complicated and error prone technologies to handle the flood of data.</p>
<p>Blindness isn’t only a physical disability.</b></p>
<p>A willful blindness at that: <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/strategic-collapse-at-the-army-war-college/" rel="nofollow">Strategic Collapse at the Army War College</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29746</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:49:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29746</guid>
		<description>UN-acceptable censorship: The United Nations tries to outlaw criticism of Islam

By Floyd Abrams

Wednesday, January 14th 2009, 4:00 AM 

Almost 500 years ago, on the wall of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses, characterizing as &quot;madness&quot; the notion that papal pardons could absolve individuals for their sins. As viewed from Rome, Luther had maligned, even defamed, the church. Luther was eventually excommunicated. His conduct ultimately led to the creation of a Protestant Church in Germany and a Reformation throughout Europe.

It is difficult to believe that in the 21st century anyone would seriously propose that conduct such as Luther&#039;s should be deemed illegal. But a few weeks ago, the General Assembly of the United Nations took a giant step in that direction. It adopted - for the fourth straight year - a resolution prepared by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference calling upon all UN nations to adopt legislation banning the &quot;defamation&quot; of religion. Spurred by the Danish cartoons of 2005, some of which portrayed the Prophet Muhammed in a manner deemed offensive by the OIC, the resolution was opposed by the United States, most European nations, Japan, India and a number of other nations.

Nonetheless, it has now been adopted. 

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/14/2009-01-14_unacceptable_censorship_the_united_natio.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UN-acceptable censorship: The United Nations tries to outlaw criticism of Islam</p>
<p>By Floyd Abrams</p>
<p>Wednesday, January 14th 2009, 4:00 AM </p>
<p>Almost 500 years ago, on the wall of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses, characterizing as &#8220;madness&#8221; the notion that papal pardons could absolve individuals for their sins. As viewed from Rome, Luther had maligned, even defamed, the church. Luther was eventually excommunicated. His conduct ultimately led to the creation of a Protestant Church in Germany and a Reformation throughout Europe.</p>
<p>It is difficult to believe that in the 21st century anyone would seriously propose that conduct such as Luther&#8217;s should be deemed illegal. But a few weeks ago, the General Assembly of the United Nations took a giant step in that direction. It adopted &#8211; for the fourth straight year &#8211; a resolution prepared by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference calling upon all UN nations to adopt legislation banning the &#8220;defamation&#8221; of religion. Spurred by the Danish cartoons of 2005, some of which portrayed the Prophet Muhammed in a manner deemed offensive by the OIC, the resolution was opposed by the United States, most European nations, Japan, India and a number of other nations.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, it has now been adopted. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/14/2009-01-14_unacceptable_censorship_the_united_natio.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/14/2009-01-14_unacceptable_censorship_the_united_natio.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29741</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29741</guid>
		<description>Some months ago, I wrote about how the US ability to send precision munitions onto any arbitrary spot on earth was referred to by insurgents as the “hand of Allah”. Now with these robotic bugs, the US has the “eyes and ears of Allah”.  Unfortunately, we have yet to invent the “brain of Allah” to match.
.............
Its helpful to remember here that Allah is a meteorite.

 Ultimately we have a human government employee trying to make sense of his godlike input so that he can hurl down the godlike output.
....
In Christ we have have access to the mind of God.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some months ago, I wrote about how the US ability to send precision munitions onto any arbitrary spot on earth was referred to by insurgents as the “hand of Allah”. Now with these robotic bugs, the US has the “eyes and ears of Allah”.  Unfortunately, we have yet to invent the “brain of Allah” to match.<br />
&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.<br />
Its helpful to remember here that Allah is a meteorite.</p>
<p> Ultimately we have a human government employee trying to make sense of his godlike input so that he can hurl down the godlike output.<br />
&#8230;.<br />
In Christ we have have access to the mind of God.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WestWright</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29739</link>
		<dc:creator>WestWright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:09:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29739</guid>
		<description>#58. Steynian 308: thanks for the reminder about M. Steyn. After reading this techno/sciFi post I needed a bit o&#039; Steyn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#58. Steynian 308: thanks for the reminder about M. Steyn. After reading this techno/sciFi post I needed a bit o&#8217; Steyn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steynian 308 &#171; Free Canuckistan!</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29723</link>
		<dc:creator>Steynian 308 &#171; Free Canuckistan!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29723</guid>
		<description>[...] SKYNET&#8211; TINY VERSION: &#8220;Aviation Week describes the coming of pervasively distributed sensors, all linked together [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] SKYNET&#8211; TINY VERSION: &#8220;Aviation Week describes the coming of pervasively distributed sensors, all linked together [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: twobyfour</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29719</link>
		<dc:creator>twobyfour</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29719</guid>
		<description>Cont&#039;d...

&lt;i&gt;The conclusion by both is that we are creating (through Artificial Intelligence) the “more advanced species that will replace us” (”…no intelligent species in history has survived contact with a more advanced species”).&lt;/i&gt;

Actually, I&#039;d object to the premise that the AIs would be more advanced. There is a little chance that the AIs can autonomously evolve their intelligence beyond endowment we initially provide. They would be constricted by logic and patterns they were programmed with. Them may be gazillions and they would still not be able to overcome their bounding box. 

The more likely case would be a &quot;grey goo&quot; in which we drown. Not always a superior kind is an impetus for a demise of another kind. An example may be Islamic Grey Goo, that could potentially destroy a superior culture by their sheer numbers. Mankind could be knocked out by lowly virus, tomorrow. Or wiped out by a dumb rock! ;-)

As for survival vis-a-vis contact with a more advanced species, that may have actually happened in remote past and we are still here, mayhaps even because of it.

Take us, for example. We are super predators. We effectively rule over the dominion of animals. But as we become more aware of relationships and complexities around us, at least as a species, we become more intelligent and tend to mitigate our detrimental effect on the less advanced species. We would still be predators, People Eating Tasty Animals, as far as can be projected into the future, but will learn to manage our prey better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cont&#8217;d&#8230;</p>
<p><i>The conclusion by both is that we are creating (through Artificial Intelligence) the “more advanced species that will replace us” (”…no intelligent species in history has survived contact with a more advanced species”).</i></p>
<p>Actually, I&#8217;d object to the premise that the AIs would be more advanced. There is a little chance that the AIs can autonomously evolve their intelligence beyond endowment we initially provide. They would be constricted by logic and patterns they were programmed with. Them may be gazillions and they would still not be able to overcome their bounding box. </p>
<p>The more likely case would be a &#8220;grey goo&#8221; in which we drown. Not always a superior kind is an impetus for a demise of another kind. An example may be Islamic Grey Goo, that could potentially destroy a superior culture by their sheer numbers. Mankind could be knocked out by lowly virus, tomorrow. Or wiped out by a dumb rock! <img src='http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>As for survival vis-a-vis contact with a more advanced species, that may have actually happened in remote past and we are still here, mayhaps even because of it.</p>
<p>Take us, for example. We are super predators. We effectively rule over the dominion of animals. But as we become more aware of relationships and complexities around us, at least as a species, we become more intelligent and tend to mitigate our detrimental effect on the less advanced species. We would still be predators, People Eating Tasty Animals, as far as can be projected into the future, but will learn to manage our prey better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: twobyfour</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29717</link>
		<dc:creator>twobyfour</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:02:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29717</guid>
		<description>54. Warsong
&lt;i&gt;…we know him, as, “The Unibomber.”&lt;/i&gt;

Neva herd of him.

Oh! You did not mean Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski, perchance? 

Borderline schizophrenics are often brilliant, in some particular focus, but in other aspects they may as dumb as rock.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>54. Warsong<br />
<i>…we know him, as, “The Unibomber.”</i></p>
<p>Neva herd of him.</p>
<p>Oh! You did not mean Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski, perchance? </p>
<p>Borderline schizophrenics are often brilliant, in some particular focus, but in other aspects they may as dumb as rock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Murphy</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29713</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29713</guid>
		<description>51. james wilson

I used to think like that, too, but not so much any more. All this stuff is so subtle, the possibilities so endless and the technology moving so quick that second rate minds, defensive ones who just aren&#039;t open to the almost limitless possibilities will always be so far behind that the rest of us will have developed antidotes/countermeasures before or very shortly after the drongoes become a problem with yesterday&#039;s technology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>51. james wilson</p>
<p>I used to think like that, too, but not so much any more. All this stuff is so subtle, the possibilities so endless and the technology moving so quick that second rate minds, defensive ones who just aren&#8217;t open to the almost limitless possibilities will always be so far behind that the rest of us will have developed antidotes/countermeasures before or very shortly after the drongoes become a problem with yesterday&#8217;s technology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Warsong</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/01/12/them/comment-page-2/#comment-29711</link>
		<dc:creator>Warsong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=1858#comment-29711</guid>
		<description>A few years ago the man who invented Oracle (name?), and, half a dozen machine languages, wrote an article in &quot;Wired Magazine&quot; about Artificial Intelligence. He included an essay by a friend of his who was in prison.

The conclusion by both is that we are creating (through Artificial Intelligence) the &quot;more advanced species that will replace us&quot; (&quot;...no intelligent species in history has survived contact with a more advanced species&quot;).

The &quot;guest author&quot; wrote one of the most brilliant, logical essays I&#039;ve ever read...we know him, as, &quot;The Unibomber.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few years ago the man who invented Oracle (name?), and, half a dozen machine languages, wrote an article in &#8220;Wired Magazine&#8221; about Artificial Intelligence. He included an essay by a friend of his who was in prison.</p>
<p>The conclusion by both is that we are creating (through Artificial Intelligence) the &#8220;more advanced species that will replace us&#8221; (&#8221;&#8230;no intelligent species in history has survived contact with a more advanced species&#8221;).</p>
<p>The &#8220;guest author&#8221; wrote one of the most brilliant, logical essays I&#8217;ve ever read&#8230;we know him, as, &#8220;The Unibomber.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
