Facebook Is Already Testing Artificial Intelligence

Facebook uses Artificial Intelligence to automatically offer suggestions to you by surfacing an article it thinks you'll find interesting or using advertisements to target different brands based on your liking. Personally, this source has been tremendously helpful. Although I do not have a Facebook, I am an active user of Instagram. I use Instagram to follow the most popular fashions and cosmetics of today. This provision of Artificial Intelligence allows me to surface an infinite number of brands due to its suggestions, instead of narrowing my options to one-- which is a great enhancement for developing creativity with different brands. This is another form of Post Humanism because A.I is studying my interests and resurfaces other items that I adore. Therefore it is easy to conclude that it assists me in my daily decision making. It does seem as if Artificial Intelligence is the inclusion of a network between humans and A.I because it aids in decision making and provides suggestions tailored to a persons interests. But I don't think we are close to Vernor Vinge’s inflection point solely because we don't visibly have A.I present to determine whether or not it will be a detriment to the human species. It is understandable that A.I has a competitive advantage with the goal of dominating. Although it is very likely that despite the government creating A.I it does have the possibility of outsmarting humans and taking advantage of the sources available to them in regards to building a whole another civilization. But so far, I can only vindicate that A.I has only been a beneficial thing because of how effective it has been in aiding human beings through the uses of technology. 

http://www.businessinsider.com/artificial-intelligence-is-the-next-frontier-for-social-networks-2014-4

Apple vs The FBI

The Apple corporation truly takes a magnificent stance in regards to upholding the peoples rights outlined in the United States Constitution. Apple claims on their defense that releasing material within a persons iPhone is an infringement on peoples rights of privacy. On the other hand, the FBI argues that information held on their cellular device could resolve all matters in which other United States citizens rights to life are infringed on and therefore results to death. Personally, I do recognize the severity in regards to American citizens lives being taken. In the sense that the government feels compelled to protect and serve their people even if it means infringing on their rights to privacy.

From a business perspective, it is morally right to protect the privacy of its users and ensure that their rights are not infringed upon regardless of the severity in circumstances--since privacy is a very important aspect of the lives of Americans. While on the other hand, from a governments perspective, it is morally right to protect the nation as a whole even if that means invading the privacy of others in hopes of achieving justice which is viewed as the morally right thing to do. Although I disagree with invasion of privacy, providing citizens with a secure and safe way to life (environment) is more important than data stored within technology. If perhaps the government infringed on my companies rights to secure the privacy of my customers I would, just like Tim Cook, stay true to my beliefs and customer standards despite the threats FBI secures because supplying value and trust within my consumers is most important that invading privacy for the governments gain.
Quote: "Your own efforts to protect against unauthorized access play an important role in protecting the security of your personal information." https://www.fbi.gov/privacy_policy

The Blade Runner

Blade Runner really encapsulates the mind and defines the differences between moral deeds and immorality from a humanistic perception compared to that of an artificial intelligence. In this film, there were " humanlike beings" or replicas in the form of a human beings. What truly affected my perception was the way the replicas reacted to tests of emotion and lifespan. Although they displayed human like form, thoughts, and opinions they did not have the capability of displaying emotion of empathy and sympathy for others different from themselves. As soon as the replicas identified themselves as experiments their mentality turned to destruction of their creator. They couldn't grasp the reasoning within their encoding that limits their lifespan. In comparison, if we did decide to use artificial intelligence to aid and grow our nation economically through the use of technology it is important to weigh in these factors that can potentially endanger an entire nation due to discrepancies with motives, roles, and lifespans.

Ethics in Artificial Intelligence

In my opinion, all weapons do not satisfy nor respect the principles of humanity and public conscience. Therefore all weapons, in my defense, violate the Martens clause of 1977. Majority of people today handle weapons as a form of recreation and self defense, instead of aiding and protecting all people in society. These weapons consisting of guns, knifes, and bombs have threatened many civilians lives and placed fear upon the hearts of men. Meaningful human control over all sorts of weapons including ones designed along the basis of artificial intelligence would mean setting limits on the independency of artificial intelligence. In the beginning of the article, the author stated "Autonomous weapons systems select and engage targets without human intervention". Meaning, despite coding and inputting limitations, this robot can still achieve any goal it has set forth even if it has been preprogrammed or preordained to not rebel and terminate humanity. The scope of the four conservations seemed to have highlighted the fact that artificial intelligence has the capability of aiding society in such a way that improves health through technology such as cancer and aiding the elderly with their daily routines. The article recognizes and addresses people's fear's and limitations on the expansion on artificial intelligence, and instead of supporting the negative exploitations, it really focused it's attention on the potential advancements it could provide economically and health wise on the behalf of fellow civilians. According to the article, A.I has the potential to "develop systems that could help the elderly, improve health care, make jobs safer and more efficient, and allow us to explore space or beneath the oceans." After

reading this article, I am slightly convinced that artificial intelligence might have a opportunity to aid society instead of hindering it from advancements. But only if it satisfies and protects the rights of humanity and serves the countries military purposes. Just as military weapons are created for the protection of United States citizens, artificial intelligence should be geared towards the success of the country in the sense that if they were created, it must be able to fight for the country and defend the land of the people. Due to advancements in technology, this would be a great provision for military preciseness and combatting challenges against oppressors.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3361746/US-military-reveals-hopes-use-artificial-intelligence-create-cybersoldiers-help-fly-F-35-fighter-jet-admits-playing-catch-up.html

2001 A Space Odyssey 1968 Fantasy

This fictional film highlights the ideal outlook and perception that many people behold today in including myself in regards to Artificial Intelligence. These feelings are grounded on the possibility of the advancement through the provision in technology but also the belief that robots, despite their ability to advance society, will act in accordance to rebellion and go against humanism. Within the film, Dr Hayward Floyd traveled to the moon from earth, and was focused on a particular area of the moon which was Clevis. Based on what I've gleaned from the film, Clevis was being researched to see whether or not the land was inhabitable in which people can live forever. Aiding this adventure was a H.A.L 9000 Computer whos name was Hal. Through Hal's virtual assistance, it has been proven there are no malfunctions or errors existent within its manufacture. Hal has been created to respond humanistic-ally  and display genuine emotions as if he were human. Despite Hal's unfaulty pretense, he predicted an error within satellite functions and when Dave (astronaut) checked the part it was unfaulty and the opposite of what Hal had declared. They began questioning the reliability of Hal and once Hal noticed these emotions and actions being displayed he began his rebellion in terminating the humans on board of the spaceship. This scares me personally because people are so enthusiastic about the advancements in technology that they crave more. The development of Artificial Intelligence in a humanistic form, if containing human brain functions and consciousness, could open up a possibility of rebellion and extinction of the homo sapiens.

Cybernetics vs Humanism According to Hayles

The Macy Conferences on cybernetics viewed human beings as informational technologies in the sense that consciousness and intelligence could be separated from the body with the belief that information can circulate unchanged amongst different material substrates. These ideas have been connected with the term post-human which shares a common a theme in regards to the union of the human with intelligence machines. Hayles definition of humanism is based on embodiment which is a feature common to both the liberal humanist subject and the cybernetic post-human. The humanism perspective is the human essence of freedom without regards to being at-willed to somebody and their wishes. Both cognitive science and artificial life in regards to humanism illustrates that biologically unaltered (human beings) or homo sapiens is constructed as a form of humanism. Personally, I believe that humanism is a biological characteristic within everyone that aids in environmental survival. Hayles believes that post humanism is in the presence of non biological components, and to that extent, I agree. The difference between humanism and a post-human is that one possesses biological organs and the other does not. Post-humans tend to identify humans as informational to the extent that they behold a rational mind that are subject to different processes rather than beings. Despite this position, humans are self liberating and have a sense of self identity.

Quote: " A culture inhabited by post-humans who regard their bodies as fashion accessories rather than the ground of being." (Hayles P.5 II2)