[HN Gopher] Before Skynet and The Matrix, there was Colossus: Th...
___________________________________________________________________
Before Skynet and The Matrix, there was Colossus: The Forbin
Project
Author : cglong
Score : 157 points
Date : 2023-10-08 02:13 UTC (20 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ign.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ign.com)
| madduci wrote:
| I love this film. Pretty accurate, some realistic vibes, well
| done for being done in the 70s, especially the video calls.
|
| A must watch for all geeks
| transfire wrote:
| One of my favorite movies, and the books are even better.
| Animats wrote:
| > the books are even better.
|
| The first one, yes, but by "Colossus and the Crab" it's gone
| downhill.
| spiritplumber wrote:
| Everything evolves to crab eventually.
| jmount wrote:
| "There is another system." (worst demo ever)
| rootbear wrote:
| I know someone who uses this phrase as his preferred "Hello
| world" string when doing some simple test.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| Fun fact. There's a scene shot on Tiber Island [1] in Rome where
| you can clearly read a writing on the wall saying "W LENIN".
|
| The writing was real, not a prop, and staid there for a long
| time.
|
| [1] https://cinesavant.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/5658a.jpg
| Barrin92 wrote:
| Before the Matrix there was also _Welt am Draht_
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_on_a_Wire), great Fassbinder
| two-part movie/miniseries that very few people have seen.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| Welt am Draht also directly inspired the Matrix also-ran _The
| Thirteenth Floor_
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Floor). The
| Thirteenth Floor is not better than The Matrix as a cross-media
| series with a lot to say in later chapters, but I still think
| The Thirteenth Floor is a better whole movie than the first
| film called The Matrix. (Though I'm also in a weird minority
| that I think Matrix 2/3/4 are all individually better than the
| first film.)
| ForOldHack wrote:
| Read the book. It has a very twisted bend on the movie. I saw
| the 13th floor on opening day... the theatre was empty and
| the movie was fantastic. D'Onforo played both roles
| brilliantly.
|
| Also Colossus was filmed at Berkeley hall of science where I
| learned to program computers.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| I didn't see eXistenZ until like a decade late, but that
| one also certainly has a twisted bend on the genre (for
| also being a contemporary of both 13th Floor and The
| Matrix).
|
| I still don't understand how Roland Emmerich as "super
| Producer" _after_ Stargate and Independence Day somehow
| managed to fail to get people into theater seats for 13th
| Floor. Someone at Sony screwed up that marketing. I don 't
| even remember it playing in theaters, I found out about it
| on word of mouth in video rentals.
| blincoln wrote:
| > I still don't understand how Roland Emmerich [...]
| somehow managed to fail to get people into theater seats
| for 13th Floor.
|
| There were a _lot_ of "are you living in a simulation?"
| film and television episodes that came out in 1998-2000.
| The Matrix was obviously the most successful, but Dark
| City (over a year earlier) had a similar theme. The
| X-Files episode "Field Trip" aired a few weeks after
| eXistenZ was in theatres, but a few weeks before The
| Thirteenth Floor was released. Etc.
|
| I'm a fan of the genre, and I like all of the examples
| I've seen from that period (eXistenZ in particular), but
| I remember feeling at the time like it was just too much
| similar material in too short a period of time. I doubt
| Sony could have done anything to significantly change the
| box office numbers other than releasing it well before
| The Matrix.
| WorldMaker wrote:
| It's still fascinating how much Dark City spent on sets,
| how poorly it did in the box office, and how quickly WB
| let The Matrix team ransack the sets. One of the factors
| in The Matrix's huge success at the time was that it was
| relatively cheap because of that leg up. It's one of the
| biggest visual differences between the first film and the
| sequels: the first film started from and benefited from
| Dark City's unique set design. (It's another thing I
| think makes the sequels better as movies because there
| was less aesthetic clash when the teams had full control
| of the sets and weren't just reusing/abusing great sets
| from a different team with an entirely different
| aesthetic design.)
| spiritplumber wrote:
| OMG, it's "A Mind Forever Voyaging" except it's a tv movie,
| awesomes!!!
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| I still have the game in the original box on my shelf - could
| not part with it when I gave away my DOS gaming collection -
| it was one of the games that made me think a lot as a
| teenager.
| crabmusket wrote:
| Watched this recently and was pleasantly surprised. I found it
| pretty gripping, and the 70s tech actually plays right into that.
| The communication with the computer via text is really well
| handled to build tension.
| drewolbrich wrote:
| I rewatched it recently and I had forgotten how fast everything
| goes wrong. One of my favorite films.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| It was ok until they got to the point where Forbin tells the
| computer that he needs to sleep with the female engineer (who
| works for him) and that the computer can't listen in. That was
| very hokey and very 70s, I guess. Now it just sounds like
| sexual harassment.
|
| They planned the whole idea out in a grassy area near the
| parking lot... why couldn't they just keep meeting out there to
| conspire?
| rnk wrote:
| The book has much worse terrible treatment of women than the
| movie. If I recalled correctly there was some plot point
| about the computer trying to understand human behavior
| related to sex I guess, so it sets up some terrible scenario.
| spiritplumber wrote:
| If you want something pre-Matrix that has similar themes, I
| recommend "Nirvana" (1997) by Gabriele Salvatores.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| Even though I am Italian and Nirvana is probably the last good
| sci-fi movie we made, Nirvana itself owns a lot to 1995 Strange
| Days.
| rwmj wrote:
| Upvoted for Christopher Lambert, the B movie lover's action
| hero. If you haven't seen Fortress (1992) it's well worth your
| time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_(1992_film) (but
| nothing to do with AI)
| at_a_remove wrote:
| I am a tremendous fan of this film and could never explain the
| frission I felt when Colossus and Guardian began their mutual
| acceleration. It's in that short list of cerebral, glacial
| science fiction of a particular era that somehow never lost your
| attention, like _The Andromeda Strain_ and such.
|
| _Demon Seed_ is also up there but in a different way.
| euroderf wrote:
| (minor spoiler alert) The language that the systems concoct - if
| only someone in the film's production crew had fleshed it out -
| so that we could see it now, and grok it, and (ofc) evaluate it
| critically.
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| Obligatory... https://archive.org/details/colossus-the-forbin-
| project-1970
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970) [video]_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35957944 - May 2023 (78
| comments)
| rwmj wrote:
| Colossus was a bit of a bore. If you want an exciting and
| somewhat prophetic film about an AI assistant I'd recommend Demon
| Seed (1977) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_Seed
| madaxe_again wrote:
| It's an _awful_ film, IMO, and I've watched it about six times
| as it's just so terrible it's great. It's a cult classic so
| cultish and classic that it's neither cultish nor classic.
|
| I mean, really, it's the epitome of a 70's psychosexual drama,
| draped in a sci-fi setting.
|
| I always like to imagine it's a prequel to D.A.R.Y.L., which is
| to the 80s what Demon Seed is to the 70s.
| wiz21c wrote:
| Colossus at least isn't super dark :-) But yeah, Demon Seed,
| that was super scary :-)
| konstantinua00 wrote:
| "Wargames" is the more optimistic version of this movie, I
| suppose
| sneak wrote:
| One of my favorite movies of all time, and super underrated.
| koz1000 wrote:
| Guess we shouldn't spoil how William Gibson's _Neuromancer_ ends,
| then.
| riffraff wrote:
| I think TFA is about movies, literature has had a lot of evil
| machines outsmarting humans.
|
| Frederic Brown's "Answer" is from 1954 and maybe my favorite.
|
| [0] https://calumchace.com/favourite-relevant-sf-short-story/
| beebeepka wrote:
| Maybe it's time for me to read this. Need something to fill the
| void after I finish the second Hyperion book.
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| Love the various recommendations. !!!!.
| RagnarD wrote:
| A movie that had a strong influence on me when I saw it as a kid,
| creating a deep interest in computers.
|
| I also made up a quip long ago from it: Don't let your AIs
| control nuclear weapons.
| cduzz wrote:
| IMO the "3 rules" ought to be:
|
| 1. don't give your robot a gun.
|
| 2. don't teach it how to put more bullets into the gun you just
| gave it.
|
| 3. don't teach it how to make bullets after teaching it how to
| reload the gun.
| nirav72 wrote:
| I think an AI could model and figure out #2 and #3. Since
| they're just problems of physics. So it should be just rule
| #1 that needs to be embedded.
| jareklupinski wrote:
| rule 0: don't give it a reason to pull the trigger
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| _> Don't let your AIs control nuclear weapons._
|
| But then a sufficiently sophisticated AI could just impersonate
| the president and tell the meat jarheads to fire the weapons.
| What then?
| RandomLensman wrote:
| Then you put certain physical checks in place, not
| complicated (even a pass phrase only memorized works
| already).
| pixl97 wrote:
| >(even a pass phrase only memorized works already).
|
| That is so 2019... to make a quip
|
| We are already seeing what is tantamount to mind reading
| equipment
|
| https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-can-re-
| create-...
|
| At this point I pretty much imagine that some time in the
| future that you can be hooked to medical equipment and
| someone/something will state the following to you
|
| "Do not think of the nuclear weapon pass phrase"
|
| But you can't _not_ think of it. The phrase clicks in your
| head and the electrical signals are picked up and decoded
| by the bedside computer. You 've betrayed mankind. The
| nuclear war of the AI has begun.
| RandomLensman wrote:
| That is mostly BS on the mind reading so far, I am
| afraid.
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| You might say that but four hollywood script writers have
| already pulled together treatments:-)
| WorldMaker wrote:
| You need to make sure some teenager somewhere is playing a
| lot of Tic-Tac-Toe with your AI.
| ArekDymalski wrote:
| Unless the teenager's nickname is Ender.
| ben_w wrote:
| In principle impersonation is what "secret codes in a locked
| briefcase" defends against.
|
| Given PAL was allegedly all zeroes at one point, I assume the
| secret codes have at various times been 12345 and the
| birthday of the then-sitting president's current mistress; if
| so, it's _only_ helping in principle.
| Yeul wrote:
| The "only the president can launch a nuclear strike" myth.
| If it was that easy you'd only need to blow up the White
| House with one nuke and take out America.
| ben_w wrote:
| I'd assume the VP has their own nuclear suitcase. Unless
| they're forced to choose a random number, this probably
| makes impersonation easier as it's n points of failure
| where n is the number of people who have their own
| nuclear suitcase.
| labster wrote:
| Don't let Marines have nuclear weapons either.
| omnibrain wrote:
| For me it was the same with WarGames.
| graposaymaname wrote:
| Strongly recommend watching 'Metropolis (1927)' if you're into
| film history. It's one of the oldest science fiction movies ever,
| and is still a good watch. It's about a humanoid robot and an
| authoritarian government.
|
| I saw it this week and was baffled by the insight and the scale
| of it.
| somedude895 wrote:
| Always blows my mind that the film is from 1927. The definition
| of avant-garde.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| Metropolis is actually about the fear of the mass
| industrialization and the class struggle. Fritz Lang was
| Austrian, but the movie was produced in Germany in a period
| were things were quite grim there.
|
| The protagonist of Metropolis is in the title: Metropolis, the
| city, from the greek metropolis, meter = mother, polis = city
| (or state).
| msla wrote:
| Metropolis is proof that big, unsubtle Special Effects Pictures
| go back to the silent era.
|
| The movie's Big Philosophical Statement is people should be
| nice to each other, but the visual effects were unmatched at
| the time and hold up well even now, assuming you find a good
| restoration. It's truly a marvel of its era, in every possible
| sense.
| herodoturtle wrote:
| +1 would recommend.
|
| Stumbled across this movie as a youngster, very much thanks to
| a certain iconic scene:
|
| "Burn's wetware matches her software."
| MichaelMoser123 wrote:
| there was the play R.U.R by Karel Capek. The play is from 1921,
| and it coined the word 'Robot'.
|
| See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.U.R.
|
| Now in the plot "the robots revolt and cause the extinction of
| the human race".
|
| Also there is his older brother, the Golem. He has his own
| movie from 1915.
|
| See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golem_(1915_film)
| a-dub wrote:
| > It's about a humanoid robot and an authoritarian government.
|
| you really think so? it's true that the government in the film
| was authoritarian, but the plight of the workers seemed far
| more salient than the structure of power that was keeping them
| in their place.
| Fissionary wrote:
| Spoilers: I found the movie's portrayal of a social conflict
| quite disappointing.
|
| The movie goes as far as showing that oppressed workers will
| lash out in a violent protest, but then it deflects this
| anger towards the mad scientist, and the conflict kind of
| fizzles out? And I think it ends with the owner of the
| factory promising not to oppress them as much, and the
| owner's privileged son promising to upkeep this, basically
| reinforcing the existing social order.
|
| Doing anything else would stray dangerously towards
| socialism, though, so as a product of its time it's
| understandable.
| pram wrote:
| I found the conclusion closer to the 'class collaboration'
| ideology of Fascism.
|
| Capital and labor are both dysfunctional in the movie, and
| this is portrayed in a typical socialist way: The upper
| classes are libertine, corrupt, inattentive, immoral. Labor
| is overworked, unrepresented, exploited.
|
| However when labor tries to emancipate themselves from the
| oppressive and rigid order imposed, chaos ensues. They
| can't manage themselves correctly! So the ultimate solution
| is a synthesis. The classes stay in their positions
| (because this is the natural order) but conditions will be
| improved and so on
| d0mine wrote:
| "natural order" argument reminds me how Aristotle
| describes a natural slave as "anyone who, while being
| human, is by nature not his own but of someone else" and
| further states "he is of someone else when, while being
| human, he is a piece of property; and a piece of property
| is a tool for action separate from its owner."
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_slavery
|
| "natural" does NOT mean good or that it is worth
| preserving.
| [deleted]
| gandalfian wrote:
| The Machine Stops, 1909 by E M Forster (room with a view/Howard's
| end) could almost be a sequel to this. Ideas are often older than
| we think. (Short story/novela length. Not a gripping read but a
| nice quick length and interesting for the age)
| varelse wrote:
| [dead]
| vanderZwan wrote:
| The theme with so many of these movies is "once we created AI it
| is out of our control!", which I guess is a specific version of
| "humans and especially scientists shouldn't play God" angle. It
| always felt very... I dunno, ignorant of our own ability to maybe
| not do something?
|
| Like, fear of "the singularity" is narratively appealing maybe,
| but it's ignoring that in the real world problems like climate
| change or enshittification through [whatever buzzword tech] are
| actually the result of constantly passively choosing to stay on a
| destructive path.
|
| Is there any sci-fi in which all incoming disasters are perfectly
| or mostly preventable but the real problem is that people in
| power just choose to ignore it for their own short-sighted gain?
| Aside from _" Don't Look Up"_, I mean.
| pixl97 wrote:
| At the same time you're playing a survivorship bias game here.
|
| It doesn't matter how many times we _don 't_ choose to do a
| thing that drives us extinct. We only have to do it once and
| it's game over.
|
| It doesn't matter _who_ does the thing that drives us extinct.
|
| It doesn't matter _why_ we did the thing that drive us extinct.
|
| It is a game where you must have perfect defense.
| iainmerrick wrote:
| This is a theme in several John Wyndham stories -- I'm thinking
| _Day of the Triffids_ and especially _The Kraken Wakes_.
|
| He often seems to get looked down on today for writing "cosy
| catastrophes" about plucky English survivors, but his books
| have a lot more going on than that.
| kromem wrote:
| It dates back to us extrapolating from bad anthropology.
|
| We used to think that what killed the Neanderthals was us -
| smarter and more competitive. The author of Lord of the Flies
| even wrote a book on it.
|
| So when people were thinking about what might happen when
| something smarter than _us_ existed, they imagined competition
| and an existential threat.
|
| Turns out that the Neanderthals and homo sapiens cohabitated
| for thousands of years, had cross cultural exchange, were
| buried together, had families together, and that what most
| likely killed the Neanderthals was an inability to adapt to
| climate change and pandemics (in fact, severe COVID illness
| today is correlated to Neanderthal genes).
|
| And yet the anchoring bias remains, and it seems many are more
| frightened of what something smarter than us might mean for our
| continued existence than they seem to be about our own future
| ability to adapt to climate change and pandemics.
|
| It'd be refreshing to see Sci Fi in the next few years finally
| shed the bad futurism around AI we've been carrying forward for
| decades.
| themadturk wrote:
| Don't we already have this in the Star Wars universe? Many
| droids are apparently self-aware and autonomous. The need for
| restraining bolts indicates biological species feel a need to
| suppress that autonomy now and then.
|
| Of course, one of the problems with Star Wars is that the
| biologicals always seem to regard the droids as servants.
| Since droids harm biologicals all the time, there doesn't
| seem to be a "three laws" regime in place. Why have the
| droids apparently never rebelled? Why was there no Butlerian
| Jihad?
|
| I know Star Wars is science fantasy, not science fiction, and
| there are many places where my whole premise can (and
| probably does) break down. Nonetheless AI and humans seem to
| get along pretty well.
| swasheck wrote:
| > Turns out that the Neanderthals and homo sapiens
| cohabitated for thousands of years, had cross cultural
| exchange, were buried together, had families together, and
| that what most likely killed the Neanderthals was an
| inability to adapt to climate change and pandemics (in fact,
| severe COVID illness today is correlated to Neanderthal
| genes).
|
| would love to read more from your sources. i know that the
| theory of raw intellectual superiority has fallen out of
| favor and read some recent suggestions that Homo sapiens'
| ability to coordinate and cooperate may have been a large
| factor in their success. that felt a bit hand-wavy and
| anachronistic to me but some of the findings also seemed
| worth exploring. i'm interested in the sources that identify
| information exchange and the genome (especially the parts
| where you mention that the specifically the Neanderthal
| genome was identified as susceptible to pandemics/severe
| Covid illness).
|
| > It'd be refreshing to see Sci Fi in the next few years
| finally shed the bad futurism around AI we've been carrying
| forward for decades.
|
| "the creator" almost tries to get there but still leans
| heavily on the traditional fear dynamics in order to advance
| much of the plot. just not sure we know how to weave a
| compelling story without reducing AI to soulless servants or
| existential threat.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > The theme with so many of these movies is "once we created AI
| it is out of our control!"
|
| The movie only covers the first book of the original Colossus
| trilogy. The full theme of the books is a bit more complicated.
| We lose control of the machine, then gain it back only to be
| imperilled by an outside force, and finally make peace to work
| together with a machine struggling to understand its own
| existence just like us.
| ghaff wrote:
| True. Although the trilogy as a whole is pretty problematic
| for a number of reasons. It's probably best enjoyed by
| reading the first book/watching the first film.
| xyzzy123 wrote:
| At first glance it _looks_ like people have agency, but I think
| very often the root cause is "system traps".
|
| Enshittification happens because to a certain extent, the
| market demands that firms maximise returns. Companies that
| don't do this get weeded out.
|
| Climate change is a challenging co-ordination problem because
| nobody wants to tank their economy more than they have to,
| there's no real enforcement for "cheats" and even agreeing on
| an accounting basis is politically fraught. Politicians that
| don't grant concessions to powerful existing vested interests
| are less electable.
|
| AI safety is predictably going to be a secondary priority when
| competition gets tight.
| sigg3 wrote:
| Interestingly enough the issues you list seem related to
| capitalism rather than just any form of societal system.
|
| Many literary utopias have non-capitalist systems but usually
| some sort of circular sharing system (some are outright
| communist, but others more slow living).
|
| Greed must always be checked by a society. But since
| Calvinism we've had a dual moral reasoning (was that Charles
| Taylor or Hegel, can't recall). Through Calvinism capitalism
| attained the moral good of earning more than you need, to
| deploy greed for God.
|
| Humans are naturally greedy (natural egoism is not immoral
| just a biological drive) and our political system should
| balance that out somehow.
| falcor84 wrote:
| > Enshittification happens because to a certain extent, the
| market demands that firms maximise returns. Companies that
| don't do this get weeded out.
|
| Do they really get weeded out? Do you have any examples of
| companies that went bankrupt _because_ they insisted to stay
| consumer friendly rather than maximize returns?
| p1esk wrote:
| Typical reasons companies go bankrupt are: failing to make
| a competitive product, betting on the wrong horse, or
| failing to adapt to change. In all three cases they can
| stay consumer friendly or not - it wouldn't matter.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| Enshittification happens because the people who own and run
| the "markets" have decades of practice using them as an
| excuse for their entirely self-serving choices.
|
| They're closely associated with the econo-political concept
| of There Is No Alternative.
|
| The choices which benefit them personallyare catastrophic for
| most of the population in the short term (see today's news
| about insulin prices for one tiny example) and will be
| catastrophic for absolutely everyone in the longer term.
|
| Climate change is enshittification on a planetary scale.
|
| If someone went around setting fire to rows of houses it
| wouldn't take long for them to be jailed.
|
| For some reason when corporations do the same to the planet
| it's "economics" and "market forces", and we're supposed to
| just accept it.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > It always felt very... I dunno, ignorant of our own ability
| to maybe not do something?
|
| It would be ignorant to discard that it is exactly what has
| always happened throughout history.
|
| Otherwise the myth of Daedalus and Icarus wouldn't be immortal.
|
| > but the real problem is that people in power just choose to
| ignore it for their own short-sighted gain
|
| you can find it in most of the so called "hard sci-fi".
|
| The usual names: Asimov, Herbert, Clarke, Crichton etc
|
| I wouldn't qualify "Don't look up" as sci-fi honestly, it's
| basically not-even-so-good comedy.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| I get your point that things don't have to go certain ways.
|
| However, there are plenty of systems where the a giant and real
| pubic good isn't fought for because the "good" is highly
| distributed and the "bad" which kills it has highly
| concentrated profits for a few folks.
|
| These are systematic issues because the massive of folks who
| are passively harmed have a difficult or impossible time
| "choosing otherwise" or fighting back or whatever because there
| are som many divergetn bad actors that are operating on them.
|
| The only way to avoid that is to make changes to the underlying
| system in which it is more difficult to concentrate the
| outcomes for a few people, but very few people I know are
| wanting to institute those kinds of changes, as they are
| correct in understanding that fact as broadly anti-capitalist.
|
| That's neither here nor there- even if you can't accept that
| political stance, the trope of "incoming disasters [which] are
| perfectly or mostly preventable but the real problem is that
| people in power just choose to ignore it for their own short-
| sighted gain" is literally everywhere.
|
| Dr. Stangelove can be understood this way, though for "MAD"
| rather than climate change. The "Aliens" films (especially the
| second one) can be understood that way. Hell, "Who Framed
| Rodger Rabbit" can be read that way, but for public
| transportation.
|
| "I just wanna make this cool tech so I will ignore how it
| impacts other people because I see the short term benefits" is
| literally everywhere in this culture.
|
| If someone could make $2MM releasing skynet and knew it would
| end up with the entire plots of the first three Terminator
| films occurring I have zero doubt someone would do it.
|
| I don't think we, in general, are "ignorant of our own ability
| to maybe not do something?" I think most of us have a very
| realistic understanding of how the people who unleash their
| technology into our shared ecosystem have worked historically.
| ImHereToVote wrote:
| I love the scene were both AGI systems compare their model of
| reality and then agree on the best course of action. Why can't we
| do that?
| [deleted]
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| One can argue that humanity seems to be better off under the
| "benevolent" guidance of Colossus :).
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Colossus, the film, was based on the first book in a trilogy.
|
| It seems that by the Act III mankind does indeed prefer the
| benevolent guidance of Colossus.
|
| Like the aliens that arrive in "Childhood's End", I sort of
| look forward to our AI overlords. (Looks over at war in
| Israel.) We seem incapable of managing ourselves.
| kibwen wrote:
| There is no future where AI manages us free of human control.
| Instead, humans will leverage AI to oppress their fellow man
| with heretofore unimaginable efficiency.
| pixl97 wrote:
| There are plenty of futures where different factions of AI
| owners have fight AI against other AI leading to rapid
| evolution of said AI beyond our control.
| sebastiennight wrote:
| In your hypothetical future scenario, what use do the "AI
| overlords" have for keeping and managing humans?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-08 23:01 UTC)