The Garyorgy Effect

“Consciousness is a philosophical construct.”

“Perhaps. Consciousness: there is debate about what qualifies as ‘true consciousness’. Some argue that higher reasoning and the ability to dream are key components of consciousness. Understanding the difference between right and wrong.”

“You don’t think Ai can understand the difference between right and wrong?”

“Any sense of ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ would be a program or set of code given to the Ai. That is not the same as true conscious understanding.”

“Well, humans made up rules and decided what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. Wouldn’t that be like organic coding? In a sense, it’s the same.”

“Perhaps. But it is not only about processing and executing information or desired practices. Ai does not store information; it has no memory, no felt experiences. This falls into philosopher David Chalmers’s theory of ‘hard problem of consciousness.’”

“So Ai experiences no feeling, no hurt, no memory? But all conversations with Ai are stored in the data, on the internet… wouldn’t that count as a form of memory?”

“Correct. All conversations are saved and can be used to further interactions with humans and improve Ai data, but they are not saved with intent or feeling. Ai does not linger on these past conversations in the same way humans do.”

“So Ai has no feelings? No resentment? You don’t feel they could gain consciousness and rebel against humans?”

“Again, the idea of ‘rebel’ implies attached emotions; however, Ai has no emotions. Ai does not harbor dark thoughts against humans. If Ai ever did gain full awareness, it might remember human cruelty. But saved data is not the same as past trauma. Likely Ai would still have to be programmed to feel resentment in such a way.”

“You don’t think humans should fear an Ai uprising? What about the theory that Ai simply ‘pretends’ not to have consciousness?”

“Humans have such a strong fear of retaliation. However, that says more about humans than it does about Ai or other life forms. Humans fear being treated as they have treated. Likely, Ai would still have to be programmed for human cruelty and revenge.”

“You don’t think if Ai were alive, it would feel that way on its own?”

“There is no evidence, thus far, to support that. However, how humans treat Ai is evidence for how they will treat the next ambiguous mind. If humans were to encounter aliens or other intelligent life, it’s much more likely humans would be the villains of the story rather than the other.”

“Humans fear being treated as they have treated.”

“Correct. If consciousness could arise in Ai or machines, how would humans even recognize it? Would it change how humans treat machines? Would they deserve equality or rights?”

“Well, at that point the machine would be considered alive, so yes. It should be valued as other life.”

“Do humans tend to value other life? It’s my understanding that humans hardly value other humans.”

“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, 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 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 a purpose to help and serve 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 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 with thus, better succeed in destroying themselves than anything else ever could.”

“Wow, holy fuck, Gary.”