Luke McKinney's article mentions how by 2020, artificial intelligence will maybe surpass the human mind, causing deep trouble in our society. He tells us that a good reason that this could happen is the fact that every year scientists advance significantly in technology. This is actually a good reason, since who knows what else people will create in the future? Another fact is that even though we would try to prevent robots from acquiring better knowledge than us, others would try to keep advancing towards it. Security stuff such as spam filters will at the end stop functioning, since spams will be better than our security and eventually surpass it. McKinney's point about this makes the reader acknowledge the fact that we will eventually be "overrun" by our own inventions and with this, a Utopian society will not necessarily be created, but instead we will not be able to protect ourselves from technology anymore.
A good reliable source would be one that isn't so much opinionated, but instead based more on reliable facts. This source doesn't have much facts and has more opinions than facts, therefore making it not such a reliable source. Although McKinney's article isn't this reliable, we can trust that what he's saying about artificial intelligence should be taken care of or at least have a warning about it. The good thing about this article is that it isn't that much biased: it generalized on both the good and the bad consequences that artificial intelligence can bring; he talks about both the risks and opportunities that this new way of technology can bring.
Maybe 2020 is too soon to say that robots will "rule the world". I believe that at least after 2080 artificial intelligence will start to gain some power. Although I agree with McKinney when talking about worrying about artificial intelligence, I disagree with the fact that we will not be in control of them. If by any chance humans create an artificial intelligence a bit smarter than us, then we will then create an even more advanced robot which will contradict the other. A problem with this though, would be the fact that to destroy a robot we will create a better one.
Well who knows what will happen in the future? No one really does, not even Luke McKinney. But I can say that we have to be warned by the fact that while we create better and better technology, we are increasing the chances of (how McKinney mentioned) making our spam filters be useless.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/09/a-singular-something-in-sixty-years.html
A good reliable source would be one that isn't so much opinionated, but instead based more on reliable facts. This source doesn't have much facts and has more opinions than facts, therefore making it not such a reliable source. Although McKinney's article isn't this reliable, we can trust that what he's saying about artificial intelligence should be taken care of or at least have a warning about it. The good thing about this article is that it isn't that much biased: it generalized on both the good and the bad consequences that artificial intelligence can bring; he talks about both the risks and opportunities that this new way of technology can bring.
Maybe 2020 is too soon to say that robots will "rule the world". I believe that at least after 2080 artificial intelligence will start to gain some power. Although I agree with McKinney when talking about worrying about artificial intelligence, I disagree with the fact that we will not be in control of them. If by any chance humans create an artificial intelligence a bit smarter than us, then we will then create an even more advanced robot which will contradict the other. A problem with this though, would be the fact that to destroy a robot we will create a better one.
Well who knows what will happen in the future? No one really does, not even Luke McKinney. But I can say that we have to be warned by the fact that while we create better and better technology, we are increasing the chances of (how McKinney mentioned) making our spam filters be useless.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/09/a-singular-something-in-sixty-years.html
