Scientists: Artificial life likely in 3 to 10 years

All I know is that any scientist who works in the field of artificial intelligence and/or artificial life and makes a comment such as "what could go wrong?" needs to be taken to a bookstore, pointed towards the science fiction section and given a good smack upside the head.

Dude, as soon as those come out, I need to get something approaching blueprints! Cellular and molecular biology have always been huge interests of mine, so has artificial life. Put the two together, and well....

I kinda can't think of a good adjective for this. Well, you get the idea.

Gray goo!

Grey goo refers to a hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all living matter on Earth while building more of themselves (a scenario known as ecophagy). [Wikipedia]

"Never in our imagination could this happen" is a pretty common pretext to several scary sci-fi novels... tee hee.

Personally I don't give a crap I say they should give it a go. If they make some kind of artificial life hooray for them, I'm curious what kinds of insight into the development of life on this planet it could give us. If it manages to develop faster than we planned and kill us all, then I suppose I'll finally win my long battle with life.

I'm not too worried.
What they plan on doing in the short-term is creating an (inferior) replica of life as it looked like on earth 2 billion years ago. I'm fully aware of the sometimes remarkable emergent behavior effect, but 99% of the sci-fi doomsday scenarios are just not possible given organisms this primitive.

So Darky if I understand you right what they're going to make is really really primitive and in all probability wouldn't be able to do anything 'drastic' ... for lack of a better word?

If that's the case then I hope they succeed. 😊

Prrkitty wrote:So Darky if I understand you right what they're going to make is really really primitive and in all probability wouldn't be able to do anything 'drastic' ... for lack of a better word?

If that's the case then I hope they succeed. 😊

It can scratch it's butt and that's about it from the sound of it.

If they could develop sentient life then I am pretty sure a lot of AI researchers would like to have a stern talk with them about why they haven't released their research sooner.

*edit* The kind of stern talk that involves a lot of violence

biggiy05 wrote:It can scratch it's butt and that's about it from the sound of it.

Sounds like it can't even do that. Any organism would need a survival mechanism. And from I've gathered from the article, such a mechanism would have to be engineered by scientists.

Beldaran wrote:Gray goo!

Grey goo refers to a hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all living matter on Earth while building more of themselves (a scenario known as ecophagy). [Wikipedia]

Prrkitty wrote:"...never in our imagination could this happen."

Masamune wrote:Sounds like it can't even do that. Any organism would need a survival mechanism. And from I've gathered from the article, such a mechanism would have to be engineered by scientists.

It was a poor attempt at a joke.

The human race will more than likely screw its self over one way or another at some point in time. This may be that way or it could another way.

*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

mrz84 wrote:*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

The bold is the general area I am referring to;

What would give THEM the right to? Honestly, most (if not all) religous groups are wayyy too arrogant :/

"religion is the only thing preventing the human race from achieving it's full potential" --- Some guy, I need to look up which guy. I recommend you guys read a book called "Brave new world" 😉

Also, there goes Genesis (out the window), with more certainty this time.

mrz84 wrote:*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

I'd like to point out which side fired the first shot. Without a link to some stupid group actually complaining I believe this is nothing short of trying to stir up trouble.

By the way, Mr. Wizard, you misspelled "just", "religious", and "people" while you were in such a hurry to make sure you were the guy that started the fight.

I don't think that Brave New World was about religion controlling us.

Oh man the bait is so hard to NOT take:

Also, there goes Genesis (out the window), with more certainty this time.

You forget that the primary problem that all theories, scientific and religious, have to deal with is it is very difficult to understand the concept of "beginning" for the universe, particularly because the concept of complete void is almost as difficult to imagine as infinity.

Scientists still have to create artificial life starting from void in order to claim they have unlocked the mystery of creation. This experiment is important though, because obviously we have no idea how to start with void and work backwards to nothing. However, we haven't really been able to start with something and end up with life, either. If we can accomplish that, then perhaps the insight into how life can form will provide further insight into how matter can be formed, leading to the possibility of creating life from void that would seem to invalidate the concept that God created the universe.

However, true Christians have this annoying property that they believe God is omnipotent. If man is capable of accomplishing a goal, then surely this omnipotent being could have done it as well, so man creating life from nothing will do little to disprove the existence of God. Additionally, Genesis will still hold since it discusses how life was created from nothing by God; science will simply omit the "by God" part.

Truth be told, no man can say whether that is correct or not until after death, and the dead don't divulge their secrets frequently.

Please do not turn this into a debate; I really want to remain neutral here, and I am trying to point out that the argument is stupid and nobody can win before it starts.

If you ignore that request, it's going to seriously turn into another 3-page "nuh uh" "yuh huh" fest as we continue to iterate the same point over and over again: athiests think God doesn't exist and want science to prove it and Christians think God exist and believe that it is impossible for science to disprove it.

It's really a shame that we can't just agree to disagree on the "this happened because God said so" part; personally the void is the hardest part of any creation theory for me to overcome because it suggests that for some moment the Law of Conservation of Matter did not hold. (Though I swear my Physics professor came up with some kind of crazy matter-antimatter scenario where matter can be destroyed and leave nothing behind; that suggests the reverse might be true? Beldaran can you confirm/deny this?)

*edit* Also I think phattonez is correct; I'd rather argue that Brave New World is about happiness.

...I think you've all been watching too many science fiction movies.

And when have scientists ever actually done something when they expected to get it done? AI isn't going to happen for a very long time, at least in any practical sense.

^^The Human Genome Project?

Beldaran wrote:Gray goo!

Grey goo refers to a hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all living matter on Earth while building more of themselves (a scenario known as ecophagy). [Wikipedia]

oh, the novels I could write about this. I am sure they have already been written 😞

also, remember that video of the robot climbing stairs and falling down and everyone freaks out? that was pretty funny, but it made me want to die inside.

AtmaWeapon wrote:Hey buddy several of the most outspoken proponents of the Science vs. Religion We-Will-Shut-Down-Your-Thread crew have already posted and coexisted just nice before this.

I'd like to point out which side fired the first shot. Without a link to some stupid group actually complaining I believe this is nothing short of trying to stir up trouble.

By the way, Mr. Wizard, you misspelled "just", "religious", and "people" while you were in such a hurry to make sure you were the guy that started the fight.

Actually I was just posting my opinion after reading the article and making a small joke which doesn't seem to have you laughing. Also, I type fast from a force of habit during my high school years to get papers done. I've yet to break the habit.