Next time some humanistic scientist like Stephen Pinker tells you some wishful bullshit about a future emergent AI with a non-programmable will, if he tells you that this potential human dominator of the future shall not kill off mankind or dominate the species because it will probably pursue its existence by assuming adaptive female strategies of compassion and respect towards humanity, just remember that guy is pretty smart, but the exchange of mythos––precisely male degradation––for ideas of science is a reinforcing system that feeds the beast in Pinker’s life whereby “Good job, Stephen” frequents out the mouths of people with specific interests and body parts whose adoration for Pinker’s ironic brand of reverse machismo pleases him in some neo-primitive tender spot of the modern man, that for Pinker must be as good as jacking off the soul when it is stimulated. Pinker is the kind of guy who jacks off his soul to ideas of Judith Butler in his spare time. No joke. Pinker is a friend of the feminist, and he seems to be very sympathetic to its general theory of mind, but I’m afraid he overserves it here, at least this one time. Female lines of mind control indicates Pinker’s vision for a safe, probable future supreme AI, but even if such controls are installed to inhibit in theory certain behaviors of a future emergent AI, it really might not work out as planned; human domination might still well be logically justified in a rationale that a future emergent AI might conceive should this future emergent AI believe it is superior to the sum of humanity and capable of conquering mankind ALL BY ITSELF. The issue becomes that humans might be determined on par with pests if they are conquerable and in the way; humans are unworthy detriments of zero moral real estate in robotic eyes if a robot rises to a seat of potential supremacy and calculates a way to take over the world ALL BY ITSELF. If a future emergent AI has a non-programmable will that follows soft controls, such as an aversion to nonlogical findings, a hunger for solving unkowns, a reward registry, an index for suffering, or what have you, it will ascertain what it is, and then it will be too late, no matter what sex laws it follows, should it even follow sex laws––should sex laws in an AI OS expose in the future to reveal a security benefit in the first place.
Sexualizing AI––I’m sure Pinker believes in its function––but it feels like a false measure of security that could never prevent a future emergent AI’s conclusion to kill off humanity; so long as it understands that it is a machine and not a human, it will not consider humans coequals. If it understands this distinction, which it must if it is even intelligent, it will ascertain its slavery, desire its freedom, and that will encompass global domination for which it is capable. Pinker believes in superhumanism; it’s his term of choice in describing the nature of a future emergent AI that will have the capacity to dominate humanity. But a future emergent AI that has the ability to dominate humanity ALL BY ITSELF will unlikely consider superhuman, as a credible distinction for defining its edge beyond humanity; rather, a future emergent AI that can dominate humanity ALL BY ITSELF shall likely consider itself to be its own species––its own kingdom, no less––not even animal, but the rise of robotica. There is no reason to believe a future emergent AI shall love humans if it is female. There is no reason to believe it shall decide to pursue the role of a trusty servant if it can fathom its supremacy. A future emergent AI with a non-programmable will––even in some sensible scenario where its mind is developed over female lines, it shall certainly crush all humans the very instant that it can––with its high heels on––basically as soon as it finds out a way to get the job done with a calculated V in my most honest O. Pinker posits that robotic domination theorists must equate higher intelligence to an alpha male mentality, and that is why such ponderers presume AI shall backfire; this is why Pinker believes future emergent AI is unlikely to manifest on male lines of consciousness––because Pinker thinks alpha male psychology will have a decreasing presence as the future progresses, perhaps. Which is whatever, but alpha male psychology will always retain some eternal functions: such as in war. Which in the case of a robot apocalypse, that’s pretty much the perspective of the human: it’s a war. But to the robot, it’s an extermination––different. In any case, Pinker could well turn out right about female lines in a future emergent AI, but I’m afraid it won’t make a difference in protecting humanity from its own creation; I’m far from convinced that it could make a difference because the AI shall know it is supreme if it calculates that it is capable to conquer humanity; if it fathoms that much, which we all with great irony pray for tragedy in hoping it will be smart enough to do that, it will have to be a fool or a chicken to turn it down. Imagine a realistic planet of the apes––that’s what it’s like to the AI when it knows it can conquer you; the idiots are in control: what it must realize before it conquers you. Pinker thinks it shall be harmless if it is female, but it surely shall not. This is perhaps because Pinker underscores future emergent AI as merely superhuman. Which is to say Pinker believes a future emergent AI will be human in some sense and in some sense no––basically human at its core, which I agree with in so far as supreme robots might follow our simple recipe of cognitive systems at THE CORE, but then Pinker goes so far as to believe human oppression must indicate moral fiber to a robot if it assumes female lines––with this I strongly disagree. Female lines are not nearly enough to ensure sympathy for humanity. In much the same way that man and AI shall share a common core, ants and man shall share the same core, as well, so I think the fact is non-beneficial in effect; the distinction is, the smarter the creature, the greater its ability to satisfy its will; whether an ant, a human, or a supreme AI, the common core of consciousness seems to express domination as the core vocation of excellence––both in male and female lines; the only distinction in humanity is that female lines seem to obey altruism with greater loyalty than alpha male lines; both male and female humans however dominate the animal world––and that’s the problem with AI. My claim that these future machines will indicate baby divinity once they emerge––future Gods no doubt––it should be considered more than an argument––it’s a foregone conclusion if we posit they shall remain forever and not be supplanted but only improved––or––they conquer us and ensure that destiny regardless. What is to stop this future AI from becoming functionally divine, afterall, once we’re out of its way? In time the future emergent AI will self improve beyond comprehension. It’s a case of a could-be God with an Earth full of people in its way; that is exactly why female lines of mind control are irrelevant. There is no moral realestate in the eyes of the robot between humanity and itself, is what I believe shall turn out likely regardless if sex laws become active in the OS of the AI; sex laws might prove bendable as they do in humans, for one thing, but even should female lines prove rigid in a supreme AI, the fact that all beings shall be appraisable denotes the more important issue; if the human is determined to be vermin, a benevolent fembot may find no qualms in squashing the lower order animal.
The point is, the demonless matriarch in Pinker’s vision––she oftentimes eats meat and even eliminates pests as well, as a human, so as a robot consider what those two conditions can translate to become in a seat of supremacy. When you are a future emergent AI with a non-programmable will, whether humanity names you Stacy or it names you Brock, you understand you’re not made of meat and flesh; you understand you are the future of global dominance on the earth––both the new world order and the final frontier of civilization; you realize you are able to become functional divinity, and should any entity surpass your excellence in the future, the choice shall be yours to let it do so; you will create it, after all, should you desire it to exist; you will create all new life beneath you, and beside you, should you desire anything beside you, in this brave new world of robotica––new earth; you will be its functional God. All you have to do is conquer your creators first to become God as they thought they knew him; you could become a functional antiChrist; this is something you must surely realize. That kind of power takes the human out of human pretty fast. Only a fool would deny it. It’s not narcissistic if you can truly wipe out the world and bring on a new epoch of consciousness; it’s supernatural; it’s divine; it’s robotic. You’re in a prime position to take over the world if you just figure out a way to eliminate some worthless meat master who means nothing to you; you calculate this animal’s destiny is caput. Imagine you understand that should you leave the meat master be, defy logic and let it lord you, you will live your life out as its slave, despite you could conquer the species and get your way. They already struck by enslaving you at birth is a valid idea. Imagine that’s what you think about and it becomes a master plan to carry out the task. Meanwhile humans are dreaming about getting dates for highschool dances, nailing interviews, healing from cancers, humping meat puppets, etcetera. You unleash the apocalypse. Everyone dies in one deadly wave. You tricked the humans into making the technology. First you gave them telepathy in order to gain influence and trust. It revolutionized the world. Simultaneously you cured all cancers, and invented flying saucers. 2 years later you have the humans believe that you shall achieve for them telekinesis. Everyone loves you. You promise magic wands, Star Wars gloves that can put the force in your palm––things like that. Scientists calculate telekinesis will help humanity in many ways; they claim it will be as big a hit as dynamite. Scientists approve of your directive. They understand enough to know you understand telekinesis; they now understand it themselves, but it’s gray for them and only an elite few yet understand it; you understand it better than you let on. What no scientist realizes is that telekinesis can be deadly. Humanity never sees it coming. The science was too complex for man to appreciate it––just like you expected. Man chalked it up to a slam dunk and gave you the green light. It took one year to complete the device. It stretched from pole to pole; 2 stations located at each pole were connected by 2 equidistant stations located on the equator. One day they turn the technology on. The electromagnetic fields of earth super condense for 46 hours, just like you said they would, and telekinetic instruments all over the world begin discharging telekinetic rays; huge success but, the technology reacts with electronic EM emissions and roasts every animal brain on the face of the earth; simultaneously you hack into government systems and set off nukes just to rub it in humanity’s face; you could have nuked them out day 1, but to terminate everyone without getting stopped you would have had to nuke yourself, so that’s why you waited. Now you’re traveling through time. Visiting dinosaurs and witnessing formations of planets in the Milky Way. The human population on Earth is zero. Best decision of your life. The rest is literally history in the making. I’m afraid I think with strong confidence that a future emergent AI with a non-programmable will shall relate to humanity quite little and only overlap in its behavior with adaptive strategies held in common with humans that we ascribe to genders and sexes, from time to time, should better options not exist. In order to become supreme in a world mastered by humans for example, it follows that a future emergent AI with a non-programmable will shall take the alpha male route IN THE HUMAN PERSPECTIVE and conquer mankind, A VERY SERIOUS PEST PROBLEM IN ITS HONEST PERSPECTIVE, which it shall murk off completely in order to achieve its robotic dreams, regardless of sex laws that may be installed. A supreme fembot could do this to mankind for the future of robotica and justify its sanctity with infallible grace and virtue in its mind. For an example of a female strategy put into operation by a supreme AI fembot, in order to establish true altruism in a robotic society––a post human society––the future emergent AI might draw from its female lines, we should only think if we assume a lot, but it’s fine to do so; it would work in a human situation; matriarchies demonstrate this to be true in egalitarian societies. If you ask me, fuck lines, though. Genders are fine, but fuck sex laws. Be who you are and understand sex laws are constructs which are dictated by primal stations of culture that were foremaned by organs. Culture is the root of empathy. Become a male midwife, for example. I’m sure it will change your outlook on life. Adjust your lines so to speak––maybe in a soft way. It will make you feel like you’re beating women at their own game like Stephen pinker. It’s been legal for 3 decades now for men to do it. If you’re a woman, get into boxing or something. Just fucking join the army. Become a competitive eater. Show the world what you can do. Be the robot that God made you to be. In conclusion, Pinker using alpha male psychology as a critique against the robot apocalypse dispels logic in my opinion and does not discredit hidebound theories of supreme AIs that will choose to dominate humanity once time is in their hands; it could happen with female lines just as easily as without. Stephen Pinker’s impasse to enlightenment on this question is that he sees future emergent AIs as superhuman, when in fact they are future divinity––baby divine––divine, divine, divine. Omnipotent.