Professor Stephen Hawking says humans will be wiped out in 1,000 years unless we find new planet

[Machiavelli]

Anthony Bond
Daily Mirror
November 16, 2016

Professor Stephen Hawking says humans have less than 1,000 years on Earth before we are wiped out by extinction.

The celebrated physicist said humans will only survive if another planet was found to live on.

The 74-year-old said unless this happens then humans will be wiped out in a mass extinction.

More

[bolobaby]

Another affect of "global warming" - it turns brilliant minds into mush.

[Suppressed]

The headline is pretty tenuously related to the main thrust of his point, and the article.

Also, he said: "I don’t think we will survive another 1000 years without escaping beyond our fragile planet.”  That's a bit different from the title.

This is why they convened:

"In short, the rise of powerful AI will be either the best, or the worst thing, ever to happen to humanity.

"We do not yet know which. That is why in 2014, I and a few others called for more research to be done in this area. I am very glad that someone was listening to me."

[Ghost Bear]

"In short, the rise of powerful AI will be either the best, or the worst thing, ever to happen to humanity.

As if the same can't be said for virtually every major discovery ever made, going right back to the harnessing of fire.   

[Suppressed]

As if the same can't be said for virtually every major discovery ever made, going right back to the harnessing of fire.   

I don't know...I think there's a bit different level of danger with this.

[240B]

Yeh, Yeh, Yeh, I know. I've heard this a hundred times. Unless we do XYZ mankind will be DESTROYED!


Why should I worry about something that may or may not happen a thousand years from now?

[Idaho_Cowboy]

As if the same can't be said for virtually every major discovery ever made, going right back to the harnessing of fire.   

Fire makes smoke and smoke is required for Bacon. Bacon is the biggest boon to mankind in history. Bacon has no downsides.

[LateForLunch]

Yeh, Yeh, Yeh, I know. I've heard this a hundred times. Unless we do XYZ mankind will be DESTROYED!


Why should I worry about something that may or may not happen a thousand years from now?

Excellent point, along with all of the other ones in this thread.

It may be necessary to point out that Hawking is trying to establish a career transition from physics  theoretician / mathematician to pop-star. 

Physicist Michio Kaku made that same jump years ago. Isaac Azimov (a former chemist) and former astronomer Carl Sagan were among the first.

Physics and science require adherence to strictly rational discourse. Pop-stardom is about getting attention for yourself to promote "exposure" and "brand value". Like a porn star or chewing gum.

Hawking has been making grossly self-contradictory statements for a long time now, (coincidentally concurrent with the termination of any more publishing of scientific articles or papers). He first warned against trying to contact ETs (calling the SETI program foolish) then reversed himself 180 degrees when a billionaire offered him a lot of money (and publicity) to join SETI.

He was once a scientist and worthy of great attention. Now he is just another clown without make-up, hustling for website hits and Fecesbook followers. 

[Oceander]

Fire makes smoke and smoke is required for Bacon. Bacon is the biggest boon to mankind in history. Bacon has no downsides.

[truth_seeker]

Intellectual pride is his problem. He presumes to be so smart, as to know the future.

But for all of his intelligence, does he have a method to hold back Plate Techtonics ??

I say that force of nature holds far greater risk for mankind, than any from manmade global climate change.

Plate Techtronics=volcanic eruption=massive climatic changes=extinction of species=migrations of mankind etc.

[Oceander]

Intellectual pride is his problem. He presumes to be so smart, as to know the future.

But for all of his intelligence, does he have a method to hold back Plate Techtonics ??

I say that force of nature holds far greater risk for mankind, than any from manmade global climate change.

Plate Techtronics=volcanic eruption=massive climatic changes=extinction of species=migrations of mankind etc.

I don't think he thinks he or we can control plate tectonics; he appears to believe we can sidestep the effects by spreading out to other planets.  With that I agree. 

[LateForLunch]

Intellectual pride is his problem. He presumes to be so smart, as to know the future.

But for all of his intelligence, does he have a method to hold back Plate Techtonics ??

I say that force of nature holds far greater risk for mankind, than any from manmade global climate change.

Plate Techtronics=volcanic eruption=massive climatic changes=extinction of species=migrations of mankind etc.

Aka "super plume event". The last time it happened a whole lotta species went bye-bye. Bipedal monkeyrodents should probably take notice as well.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Science is supposed to be repeatable and testable. As far as APGW is concerned none of their models have been worth the 1 and 0 they are made out of in terms of predicting anything. According to the hockey stick we should be cooking and according to Al Gore we should have drowned, so why should I panic this time?

[kevindavis007]

Granted I have been hearing about the doomsday scenario ever since I was born. However, he is right, we should go to other planets, my fear that there is a neutron star heading to our planet or a rogue black hole..

[Idaho_Cowboy]

or a rogue black hole..

that would suck...



 

[kevindavis007]

Fire makes smoke and smoke is required for Bacon. Bacon is the biggest boon to mankind in history. Bacon has no downsides.

I would say Beer as well.. Beer good..

[kevindavis007]

that would suck...



 

Literally..

[Cripplecreek]

Hawking shouldn't talk outside his wheelhouse.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

It may be necessary to point out that Hawking is trying to establish a career transition from physics  theoretician / mathematician to pop-star. 

Yeah, he already is.  Has been for some time.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MC_Hawking

[Note: that link may be NSFW due to a few uses of the F word.  If you decide to take it upon yourself to track down some of the music, it is NOT SAFE FOR WORK and highly offensive to some.  If you have a sick sense of humor, it's pretty funny stuff, but best kept to yourself]

[Ghost Bear]

Granted I have been hearing about the doomsday scenario ever since I was born. However, he is right, we should go to other planets, my fear that there is a neutron star heading to our planet or a rogue black hole..

Pretty much any black hole, rogue or otherwise, would make for a bad day. Even one we create ourselves:

[Sanguine]

Hawking shouldn't talk outside his wheelhouse.

Yes, that's a problem for many.  They spend years working on understanding and specializing in one narrow area of this universe and don't understand that regardless of how smart they are, theoretical physics, for instance, does not necessarily translate into climate "science" or human behavior.

[Cripplecreek]

Yes, that's a problem for many.  They spend years working on understanding and specializing in one narrow area of this universe and don't understand that regardless of how smart they are, theoretical physics, for instance, does not necessarily translate into climate "science" or human behavior.

I'm all for exploring space and spreading across the universe but predicting that mankind will be extinct in 1000 years is foolish.

[Suppressed]

I have to wonder how many commenting actually read the story.

[Ghost Bear]

I have to wonder how many commenting actually read the story.

What's the fun in that?   

[Cripplecreek]

The headline is pretty tenuously related to the main thrust of his point, and the article.

Also, he said: "I don’t think we will survive another 1000 years without escaping beyond our fragile planet.”  That's a bit different from the title.

This is why they convened:

"In short, the rise of powerful AI will be either the best, or the worst thing, ever to happen to humanity.

"We do not yet know which. That is why in 2014, I and a few others called for more research to be done in this area. I am very glad that someone was listening to me."

I see no downside to AI and I don't buy the sci fi horror scenarios. No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us. Short of instilling emotions in  them there just is no driving force for them to want to destroy us. Emotional machines aren't even on the horizon. Without emotion there is no desire for freedom or lust for what humans have or can do.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus:_The_Forbin_Project

[kevindavis007]

I'm all for exploring space and spreading across the universe but predicting that mankind will be extinct in 1000 years is foolish.

 

[Ghost Bear]

I see no downside to AI and I don't buy the sci fi horror scenarios. No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us. Short of instilling emotions in  them there just is no driving force for them to want to destroy us. Emotional machines aren't even on the horizon. Without emotion there is no desire for freedom or lust for what humans have or can do.

While that is true, the machines would also have no interest in not destroying us.  They would have no morals whatsoever, and could decide that mankind was getting in the way of their plans and that it would be more efficient to get rid of us....

[kevindavis007]

I see no downside to AI and I don't buy the sci fi horror scenarios. No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us. Short of instilling emotions in  them there just is no driving force for them to want to destroy us. Emotional machines aren't even on the horizon. Without emotion there is no desire for freedom or lust for what humans have or can do.

Unless they have a plan ;)

[jmyrlefuller]

Another affect of "global warming" - it turns brilliant minds into mush.

Considering how long he's had ALS, eventually the neurons in the head were going to start being affected.

[jmyrlefuller]

I see no downside to AI and I don't buy the sci fi horror scenarios. No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us. Short of instilling emotions in  them there just is no driving force for them to want to destroy us. Emotional machines aren't even on the horizon. Without emotion there is no desire for freedom or lust for what humans have or can do.

Au contraire.

Consider the scenario proposed in The Day the Earth Stood Still: if a race of machines totally based on logic and lacking emotions comes to this conclusion:

If humans are destroyed, Earth still survives unharmed. If humans destroy Earth's habitability, they still die. Therefore it is more logical to destroy humans so that Earth survives.

...then they'll turn on us on a dime. That's not emotion, that's lack of emotion.

[Gefn]

Didn't Dr. Hawking say the same thing around the turn of the century?

Personally,  I think with all the election talk and what not we may wipe each other out way before that.

(I'm in a foul mood reading about special snowflakes this morning with my coffee. I apologize for not being my sunny self)

[Cripplecreek]

Unless they have a plan ;)

My toaster is plotting against me with the fridge.

I hadn't really thought about it before but Star Trek didn't portray any AI until TNG showed up with Data who was completely harmless due to his/its lack of emotion. The only time Data was ever a threat was when he was under the control of an outside entity. Data could kill in defense of others but would not kill in his own defense.

Data's "brother" Lorr on the other hand had the emotion chip and was capable of malevolent intent.

[Cripplecreek]

Au contraire.

Consider the scenario proposed in The Day the Earth Stood Still: if a race of machines totally based on logic and lacking emotions comes to this conclusion:

If humans are destroyed, Earth still survives unharmed. If humans destroy Earth's habitability, they still die. Therefore it is more logical to destroy humans so that Earth survives.

...then they'll turn on us on a dime. That's not emotion, that's lack of emotion.

Why would they care if the earth survives?

[Gefn]

My toaster is plotting against me with the fridge.

I hadn't really thought about it before but Star Trek didn't portray any AI until TNG showed up with Data who was completely harmless due to his/its lack of emotion. The only time Data was ever a threat was when he was under the control of an outside entity. Data could kill in defense of others but would not kill in his own defense.

Data's "brother" Lorr on the other hand had the emotion chip and was capable of malevolent intent.

Is your toaster "Talkie Toaster" ?

I loved Data. Cat guy and genius.

[thackney]

I hadn't really thought about it before but Star Trek didn't portray any AI until TNG showed up...

"The Ultimate Computer" is a season two episode of the original science fiction television series, Star Trek, first broadcast on March 8, 1968, and repeated June 28, 1968. It is episode No. 53, production No. 53, written by D.C. Fontana, based on a story by Laurence N. Wolfe, and directed by John Meredyth Lucas.

In this episode, a skeleton Enterprise crew are assigned to test a revolutionary computer system that is given total control of the ship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ultimate_Computer

[Cripplecreek]

"The Ultimate Computer" is a season two episode of the original science fiction television series, Star Trek, first broadcast on March 8, 1968, and repeated June 28, 1968. It is episode No. 53, production No. 53, written by D.C. Fontana, based on a story by Laurence N. Wolfe, and directed by John Meredyth Lucas.

In this episode, a skeleton Enterprise crew are assigned to test a revolutionary computer system that is given total control of the ship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ultimate_Computer

I remember that episode now that you bring it up.

However, self determined killer computers and robots are still the realm of sci fi.

[LateForLunch]

"The Ultimate Computer" is a season two episode of the original science fiction television series, Star Trek, first broadcast on March 8, 1968, and repeated June 28, 1968. It is episode No. 53, production No. 53, written by D.C. Fontana, based on a story by Laurence N. Wolfe, and directed by John Meredyth Lucas.

In this episode, a skeleton Enterprise crew are assigned to test a revolutionary computer system that is given total control of the ship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ultimate_Computer

The real world equivalent of that crisis is being discussed as a Technological Singularity event - to wit, the moment at which machine intellects become self-creating and self-designing and explode in their capabilities to correlate and process data in real world applications (purposeful applications). The projected effects of this are of course unknown but there are a variety of speculations about what might happen when machine or organic/machine hybrid thinking entities become able to process and correlate information about the real world exponentially faster than human beings. Assessing the possible "directions and motivations" of such entities is the focus of those speculations. Would an entity which effectively thinks with a million times more complexity and speed that human intellect be benevolent? Indifferent? Unfathomable? Hostile? Unpredictable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

[Gefn]

I remember that episode now that you bring it up.

However, self determined killer computers and robots are still the realm of sci fi.

What about Asimov's 3 laws of robotics?

[Oceander]

I see no downside to AI and I don't buy the sci fi horror scenarios. No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why super intelligent computers or robots would have any interest in destroying us. Short of instilling emotions in  them there just is no driving force for them to want to destroy us. Emotional machines aren't even on the horizon. Without emotion there is no desire for freedom or lust for what humans have or can do.

Competition for resources. 

And emotionless individuals can be ruthless killers; with humans, we generally call them psychopaths. 

[mirraflake]

Competition for resources. 

And emotionless individuals can be ruthless killers; with humans, we generally call them psychopaths.

Exactly

Robots would also not care if the environment went to hell-they don't have to breathe clean air or drink good water. If the robot  factories started destroying the planet -dumping poisons into streams etc what would they do if humans tried to shut down the factories?

@Cripplecreek
@Oceander

[mirraflake]

Why should I worry about something that may or may not happen a thousand years from now?

In 64 years  we have gone from a rudementary airplane-that was a glider at best to the space shuttle..what do you think robotics will be in 50-60 years?

@240B

[Cripplecreek]

What about Asimov's 3 laws of robotics?

Asimov = Science fiction

Those fictional 3 law robots were built with positronic brains where the 3 laws were imprinted into every positronic pathway and governed every single calculation. When Asimov wrote about new law and no law robots he had to write personalities into them which would indicate emotions, wants, desires etc.

[Oceander]

Robots would also not care if the environment went to hell-they don't have to breathe clean air or drink good water. If the robot  factories started destroying the planet -dumping poisons into streams etc what would they do if humans tried to shut down the factories?

@Cripplecreek
@Oceander

Acid rain isn't so good for mechanical parts, so it would be in their self interest to avoid serious pollution.  It's also wasteful of resources, which is not rational, so pollution would most likely be minimized for that reason as well. 

However, since mechanicals generally don't need to breathe air or drink water to survive, they may find space more to their liking anyways.  Organics might then be quarantined planetside and not allowed into space.

[mirraflake]

Granted I have been hearing about the doomsday scenario ever since I was born. However, he is right, we should go to other planets, my fear that there is a neutron star heading to our planet or a rogue black hole..

We will be taken out by WWIII which will be a doozy or modern Black Plague or virus-especially with air travel spreading it or a asteroid

I always think humans will live on this planet but at what numbers or living conditions?

@kevindavis

[LateForLunch]

What about Asimov's 3 laws of robotics?

The distinction is between:

 Drone robots:  Merely extensions of human control, which do what any other tool that extend human capabilities would do - including kill without remorse. Self-driving cars, aerial robots like Predator military aircraft, robotic solider machines with guns mounted on them or bombs built into them are all examples of drone robots that could or do easily kill.

"Thinking" robots - Which have programming which reproduces creative or deductive mental functions and have autonomous "intent". Building "intention" into a thinking machine is still something that has not been achieved except in very limited fashion. Programming that cannot modify itself is characteristic of a drone. A true thinking-machine would have programming that displays evidence of "intention" to how it processes data.

There are already computers which have the ability to process the 20 billion FLOPs or so that the human brain engages in, but human brains are associative neural networks (not linear circuits) in which there are an infinitely varied number of connections along that network that all feedback, interact with and modify the data-stream (so to speak). Computers are linear thinking machines because they use digital language which is simply a stream of numbers on an electrical circuit whereas human brains are chemical-electrical circuits with contributions by a whole host of neurochemicals and non-rational feedback mechanisms that "modify" the data stream. 

[Cripplecreek]

Personally I think the greatest danger posed by robots is mentioned in "Inferno" (also fiction)




In the book is mention of planets where mankind had become extinct due to apathy. The robots did everything and humanity simply lost the will to live.

Probably a more realistic scenario than the robots rising up to kill us. After all, any middle aged person can remember playing outside all day long in all kinds of weather. Today playgrounds are empty of kids over 5 years old because those kids are playing video games or spending time on social media (and so are we to a lesser extent). Why waste energy and resources killing us when robots have all the time in the world to wait for us to die on our own?

[Idaho_Cowboy]

"The Ultimate Computer" is a season two episode of the original science fiction television series, Star Trek, first broadcast on March 8, 1968, and repeated June 28, 1968. It is episode No. 53, production No. 53, written by D.C. Fontana, based on a story by Laurence N. Wolfe, and directed by John Meredyth Lucas.

In this episode, a skeleton Enterprise crew are assigned to test a revolutionary computer system that is given total control of the ship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ultimate_Computer

The one with M5 one of my favorites. It's strange how computers went from being the bad guys in TOS (M5, Landru, etc.) to having more complementary portrayals with Data and the Doctor.

[LateForLunch]

The one with M5 one of my favorites. It's strange how computers went from being the bad guys in TOS (M5, Landru, etc.) to having more complementary portrayals with Data and the Doctor.

I like that episode because it is one that portrays how Starfleet is a military organization (space Navy) which is, as all military organizations, primarily concerned with finding better ways to kill people and break things.

[240B]

The one with M5 one of my favorites. It's strange how computers went from being the bad guys in TOS (M5, Landru, etc.) to having more complementary portrayals with Data and the Doctor.