Recently reading a blog post on the Guardian (A UK newspaper) website, I stumbled across a thought I've been holding for some time: is it really such a good idea to create sentient computers?

The reason the blog post brought this recurring thought back to the front of my mind was that it was about genetic screening and the sadly intertwined ideas of ethics and ethic debates - an admittedly unrelated topic for the most part.

Humans, as sentient beings, are capable of knowing right from wrong (basically what goes with social norms and what goes against) and making decisions based on this. We also form opinions about things, based on the evidence we recieve aboout it. The genetic screening debate is a brilliant example: some of us think that if we use genetic screening we start down the road to "designer babies" and some of us think that by using genetic screening we can eliminate the suffering of those born with debilitating conditions and their families. Which side of the fence we fall on is determined by many factors: religious background, previous experience, evidence, upbringing etc. 

With us having the ability to form opinions comes hand-in-hand with disagreement. Hundreds of other factors mean some people have more power and others. Sometimes, opinions + differences in power = conflict. All of this is derived from the fact that we are sentient (The fact we know we are is also derived from the fact that we are).

So what happens if we make sentient computers, and by extension, probably robots too? We give them the ability to tell right from wrong and the ability to develop opinions. Simple enough idea. Consider all the conflict humans are in because of a simple differing of opinions. We would be giving all our computers the ability to run in to these troubles. If a computer is sentient, it will probably be able to learn (in the way humans learn) - and learn quickly. If one computer learned how to gain power over another computer, we'd have an inequality. What does inequality lead to? Conflict.

If you think about how much of our world is controlled by simple computers right now and if you consider that even more things will be controlled by computers in the future, is it such a good idea that we make a computer that can learn? If we give an artifical intellgience, like a sentient computer, the ability to develop an opinon then it will eventually come in to conflict with our own . If a computer could learn then surely it wold be able to learn to take control of non-sentient computers and, with a huge number of things being controlled by "simple" computers, an AI could easily shutdown production lines, means of communications and military defenses - crippling its human makers. If it got so bad, I don't doubt at all that a smart computer would learn to kill, if need be, and if it could take control of simple computers it could probably fight a better war than any humans could fight, given the amount of things cotrolled by, or relying on, computers in modern day warfare: planes, tanks, intelligence, communications etc. It could even use production lines to assemble its own troops.

Despite a sentient computer probably being one of my top ten list of the most awesome ideas in the world, a sentient AI is just a flawed idea. Sadly, but also gladly, I doubt we'll see one in the next 100 years - not without a huge leap in the understanding of our own minds and our ability to build and program computers. Plus I don't think we want to have to draft in Will Smith to shoot a thousand pissed off robots any time soon.

Contractions and clarifications (taken from an explanatory forum post)

The guy is and was me. And what I'm trying to get at is that some of us are being hypocrites. I'm not trying to say it's a bad thing and that we shouldn't do it, I'm just trying to say "Hey, look, some people have said 'Oh aren't celebrities so stupid' etc etc - me included - and yet we then go turn around and follow celebrities to do with our interests".

The reason I talk about it in relevance to the whole "geek"\"nerd" culture [Yes, I know those terms are dead, but I can't find a better way to explain it] is because that's where I'm seeing people, if you will, deploring celebrities in mainstream culture and then following celebrities in their chosen subculture. I don't see it in other cultures because I don't follow them.

The perfect example is me: I quite often say that most of the celebrities on television are stupid and I can't fathom why people would want to follow them, and yet I follow a lot of gaming celebrities - such as Major Nelson and a lot of the ex-1UP folks.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it. I'm just saying it's something I've noticed and I think it's quite interesting and a little bit funny.

I know this isn't something exclusive to gamers\geeks\nerds whatever the eff you wan't to call us\them

Original article

Although I'm hesitant to use words like "Nerd" and "Geek" these days, as their meanings have become blurred and fractured, I'll have to for this post.

More and more of late, basically since I made my first forays in to twitter and (micro) blogging, I've noticed one key contradiction, a chink in the armor if you will, in "Nerd"\"Geek" culture. I know a lot of people like myself, and I myself am guilty of this also, have moaned about how trivial and stupid the idea of celebrities is - we follow, intimiately sometimes, the lives of people that we are told we should care about but have never met and never will meet. Their social lives become the talk of ours and, in extreme cases, our social lives revolve around theirs.

So, then, why are there so many celebrities in gaming? Why are we being such big hypocrites?  If I go on twitter I can see that I'm following 18 people - not too many compared to some - but when you consider that 12 (two thirds) of those are, what you might class as, "celebrities", that's pretty big hypocrasy I'm committing!

The saddest thing is, I'm genuinely interested in these people! I'm interested in what they do and what they have to say. I admire these people for their genuine talents. I check my twitter feed on my phone at least twice a day to see if they've said anything new! When I think about it I don't know what's worse: numerous magazines all reporting the same trivial story in a newsagent or me persistently waiting for the next, basically, trivial words to be posted by these people?

But do you know what's worst of all? I'm loving it.

Appologies to Larry Hyrb if the use of his photo is derogatory in any way, it is merely an example of the sort of people I follow. Just email me and I will gladly remove it.

I know that typically theft isn't always seen to be a particualrly good thing, but for once it has actually benefitted me.

Now this is a story (all about how ...) for you all: Last time I returned from a half-term break at college (around November) it turned out that somebody had stolen our librarys set of laptops - a set of 10 or so low-to-mid-end devices with, probably, a decent street worth. Now, I don't know who stole them and I don't know how, but since then every computer and worthwhile device in the entire college has been fitted with SmartWater so that any thefts can be tracked.

I returned to college today to find out that there had been another set of laptops had gone missing: the entirety (bar one) of the IT staff's laptops  had been stolen. With them being IT staff and all, this kind of renders them useless for a short while until they can get replacement machines. It's actually been kind of amusing watching the staff aimlessly milling about in their little staff room outside our "work area" type thing. OK, so I agree that this theft is bad and wrong and all that negative good stuff - but I'm actually happy this time. The reason? I got an extension on my coursework deadline because of it! This is totally brilliant beause I don't think I would have gotten it in this Wednesday with the appropriate amount of detail, so now I've got until Friday to do it. Woop! Well ... the deadline is Friday but I have an exam on Friday so between my single exam and the revision I need to do for it, I've really got only until Thursday. Still, it's damned useful.

See folks, theft isn't all that negative. In fact, I can recall another incident where theft has beneffited me. One night a thief came up my drive on a bike, stole my bike resting up against the side of the house - out of view of the street - and left his bike leaning against the house. For me, this was an amazing swap; he got a bike with a flat front tyre and no brakes and I got a nice fast mountain bike with bull bars, working gears, brakes and fully pumped up tyres - result!

So to all those that say there is never a benefit associated with theft, I say "Next time you say that I'm going steal half your work so that you get an extension on its deadline"

P.S: I tried to come up with an appropriate and ever so slightly witty and\or amusing finishing line but it appears I've failed miserably. Ah well.

Normally, I'm not really a tea or coffee person - because I REALLY don't like bitter or tasteless things, and every time I've tried tea or coffee in the past I've found it to be one of the two. If I go to a coffee house, like the 2 or 3 in my village, I usually buy a nice hot chocolate and a panini or something. I've been thinking about trying coffee again of late, because I really need something to wake me up to go to work.

My question: Has anybody any recommendations for certain types of coffee I should try? Preferably ones I'm not likely to find too bitter or tasteless.

I know, it's a stupid gripe, but our Great British government really doesn't seem to be making it any easier to get an ID card. I know they've introduced the idea of the National Identity Card, but that doesn't seem to be going anywhere at any speed. So, in the mean time, what's stopping them from offering a simple photo ID that organisations agree to accept? Oh wait, we sort of already have a more complex version of one of those, it's called a passport and it's expensive to apply for or replace. The thing about a passport, though, is that I don't want to be carrying mine around with me. So I have three choices now:

1. Spend money on an expensive, mail-order ID card that will take an age to be processed - No thanks, can't afford that
   
2. Photocopy my passport and carry that around with me - I'd rather not feel like a complete goon, thanks
3. Not have an ID card - By process of elimination, it appears this is my only option.

To put this all in to context, I should explain some things about myself. I'm 17, male, from England. Nothing strange there so far. I'm about 5' 6" tall - nothing that strange in its self. Blonde, longish hair - nothing that weird. In fact, there really isn't any thing all that strange about me. The only thing a little bit weird about me is that I have never, well ... since about the age of 6, looked my age. I've always looked younger - right now I'd say I look about 14 or 15. I have a theory that this is because I'm blonde and that blonde is usually only seen in really young boys before their hair changes colour. Before you tell me that's a good thing and that I want to look younger, remember that I'm still a minor and that there are still age restrictions I have to abide by on things I might reasonably want to buy - the biggest ones being games and cinema tickets.

In an attempt to try and join those last two paragraphs together, I'll tell you a really short story: Every time I want to go to the cinema or buy a game rated anything higher than a 12 I have to carry my passport with me. The reason being that every store and cinema I visit seems to be so damn ID-happy that I can't get away with buying anything I'm legally entitled to buy if I look as I do. Not only is it a hassle to have to carry my passport, checking I've still got it every 5 minutes, but it's also just plain embarrassing having to hand it over to buy something I, and the people I'm with, know I can legally buy.

Now, I don't mind carrying cards in my wallet - they're unobtrusive and they serve a purpose - hence I wouldn't mind carrying an ID card. I wouldn't at all be embarrassed to have to carry one - most people do. However, this is where my gripe comes in: it's very difficult for me to actually GET an ID card. So, then, if I can't buy the products I'm legally entitled to do so because I look too young and I don't want to be carrying around my passport then what, I ask you, is the incentive for me abide by the laws and obtain these products legally? There isn't one.

Thankfully, I'm a little smarter than to go down the sketchy pirating route and until the government remedies this situation I shall just have to continue to carry my passport, sadden me though it does.

P.S: This whole post probably makes little sense at first, but I hope it makes more sense if you think about it, because I wrote the whole thing in a very cold room and, because my brain isn't made of silicone, I couldn't think properly.