Pursuit of Autonomous Cars May Pose Risk of AI Tapping Forbidden Knowledge

Todays standard vehicles are ultimately going to give method to the arrival of AI-based, true self-driving vehicles. Self-driving automobiles are driven by means of an AI driving system. There isnt a need for a human motorist at the wheel, and nor is there an arrangement for a human to drive the car..

That covers today, and ergo we can turn our attention to the future..

This is an age-old question. Some assert that there is the capacity for knowledge that should not be known. Simply put, there are ideas, principles, or psychological formulations that must we end up being mindful of that knowledge it could be our failure. The discovery or innovation of some brand-new development or way of thinking could be unduly dangerous. It would be best to not go there, as it were, and prevent ever landing on such understanding: prohibited understanding..

The main thing that many would accept is that understanding is power..

The retort is that humans have common-sense thinking. When we drive a car, we intrinsically make use of our sensible thinking.

For more details about ODDs, see my indication at this link here: https://www.aitrends.com/ai-insider/amalgamating-of-operational-design-domains-odds-for-ai-self-driving-cars/ .

We are slowly seeing the emergence of self-driving cars and trucks and can anticipate self-driving trucks, self-driving motorbikes, self-driving drones, self-driving airplanes, self-driving ships, self-driving submersibles, and so on..

The twist is that maybe the underlying cognitive means that generates the arrival of sensible thinking is where there is prohibited understanding. Some deep-rooted elements in the nature of human idea and how we form good sense and carry out sensible reasoning are perhaps a type of understanding that will be revealed as vital and a forbidden understanding formula..

http://ai-selfdriving-cars.libsyn.com/website .

We are normally confronted with the matter of knowledge that has both the good and the bad regarding how it might be made use of or employed. This then causes a dogged argument about whether the bad is so bad that it outweighs the excellent. On top of this, there is the unrealized bad and the latent excellent, which could be differentiated from the recognized bad and the recognized great (in essence, the understanding might be said to be either good or bad, though this is purely conceptual and not take into real-world conditions to end up being or testify realized as such)..

You might have gleaned where this line of thought is headed..

Initially, the AI systems themselves may end up doing advantages, and they likewise may wind up doing bad things. If the bad outweighs the great, possibly we are shooting our own foot by enabling AI to be taken into use..

Suppose that we have the ability to craft AI systems that utilize knowledge about how human beings can think. There are 2 significant prospective gotchas..

For why remote piloting or operating of self-driving vehicles is normally avoided, see my description here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/remote-piloting-is-a-self-driving-car-crutch/   .

The ethical implications of AI driving systems are significant, see my indication here: https://aitrends.com/selfdrivingcars/ethically-ambiguous-self-driving-cars/   .

The alluded to power might be devastating and damage others, possibly even leading to the self-destruction of the wielder of the understanding. There is likewise the potential for understanding to be useful and conserve humanity from other ills..

Understand the mistakes of normalization of deviance when it concerns self-driving cars and trucks, heres my call to arms: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/normalization-of-deviance-endangers-ai-self-driving-cars/   .

They would absolutely ask; just what kind of knowledge are you even discussing?.

The included assertion is that possibly within the boundaries of how sensible reasoning takes place is a form of forbidden understanding if you purchase into that logic. On the surface, you would certainly presume that if we understood entirely how common-sense thinking works, there would not appear to be any cause for alarm or concern. The act of utilizing sensible thinking does not appear to always embody forbidden knowledge..

One location where AI is being actively used is to create Autonomous Vehicles (AVs)..

The most familiar referral to prohibited understanding is most likely evoked via the Garden of Eden and the essence of prohibited fruit..

To be cautious of fake news about self-driving automobiles, see my pointers here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/ai-fake-news-about-self-driving-cars/ .

Comprehending The Levels Of Self-Driving Cars.

All residents will be travelers..

We are on the course to taking a huge bite, and well need to see where that takes us..

On the topic of off-road self-driving cars, heres my information elicitation: https://www.aitrends.com/ai-insider/off-roading-as-a-challenging-use-case-for-ai-autonomous-cars/ .

Lets dive into the myriad of aspects that concern use this topic..

For the argument about bifurcating the levels, see my description here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/reframing-ai-levels-for-self-driving-cars-bifurcation-of-autonomy/   .

The next time you are chomping on a tasty apple, provide some believed to whether self-driving cars and trucks may be prohibited fruit..

Possibly this might be prevented completely by deciding that there is prohibited knowledge about how people believe, and we ought to not find or expose those mental systems. It is the timeless step-by-step reasoning that step A axiomatically results in step B. We will not require to stress about AI systems (step B), if we never ever enable the achievement of action A (figuring out how human beings think and then imparting that into computer systems), given that the attainment of AI would presumably not emerge..

For my structure about AI self-governing cars and trucks, see the link here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/framework-ai-self-driving-driverless-cars-big-picture/   .

One bewildering problem about prohibited knowledge encompasses understanding beforehand the kind of understanding that may end up in the prohibited classification. You may discover understanding and then ascertain it ought to be prohibited, but the feline is kind of out of the bag due to the understanding having been currently uncovered or rendered.

Some think that we will get stymied within Level 4. The failure to produce a robust Level 4 will ostensibly prevent us from being able to achieve Level 5.

For those that concur with that posture, there is the reply that it might be future knowledge that we have actually not yet obtained that is the upcoming prohibited kind, and for which we are heading pell-mell down that path. Therefore, they would concede that we have not come to prohibited understanding at this point, but this is a perilous distractor due to the aspect that it masks or belies our qualms entailing the possibility that it lays in wait at the next turn..

Prior to delving into the information, I d like to clarify what is meant when referring to real self-driving automobiles..

For more about the levels as a kind of Richter scale, see my conversation here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/richter-scale-levels-self-driving-cars/   .

As a clarification, true self-driving cars and trucks are ones where the AI drives the vehicle completely on its own and there isnt any human help throughout the driving task..

This then takes us to a regularly used retort about forbidden knowledge, specifically, if you dont seek the prohibited knowledge there is a possibility that somebody else will, and youll be left in the dust since they got there. In that preemptive perspective, the claim is that it is much better to go on and forage for the forbidden understanding and not get captured behind the eight-ball when someone else beats you to the punch..

The common basis for wishing to forbid the discovery or development of prohibited understanding is that the unfavorable consequences are frustrating. The end result is so destructive and damaging that the bad side exceeds the good that might be stemmed from the knowledge..

Ive advised that there must be a Chief Safety Officer at self-driving car makers, heres the scoop: https://www.aitrends.com/ai-insider/chief-safety-officers-needed-in-ai-the-case-of-ai-self-driving-cars/ .

One could attempt to argue that it is early to reach such a conclusion which we might, later, realize that forbidden understanding was certainly uncovered or invented, and we simply didnt understand it. That is a bunny hole that well not decrease in the meantime, though you are welcome to keep that presumption at hand if so desired..

Heres their logic. People are able to drive vehicles. People do not seem to possess or require prohibited understanding as it relates to the act of driving an automobile. It seems ridiculous on the face of things to claim or contend that the only means to get AI-based true self-driving automobiles, for which they would be driven on an equivalent basis as human drivers can drive, would require the discovery or invention of whatever might be construed as forbidden knowledge..

The Level 4 efforts are slowly trying to get some traction by undergoing selective and extremely narrow public road trials, though there is controversy over whether this testing should be enabled per se (we are all life-or-death guinea pigs in an experiment taking location on our byways and highways, some compete)..

All told, one somewhat plain and vibrant argument is that the pursuit of AI is being underpinned or stoked by the discovery and after that exploitation of forbidden understanding..

For semi-autonomous vehicles, it is essential that the public needs to be forewarned about a troubling element thats been emerging recently, namely that despite those human chauffeurs that keep publishing videos of themselves dropping off to sleep at the wheel of a Level 2 or Level 3 vehicle, we all require to avoid being deceived into believing that the driver can eliminate their attention from the driving task while driving a semi-autonomous car..

Heres an appealing question that has occurred: Might the crafting of AI-based real self-driving automobiles take us into the realm of finding prohibited knowledge, and if so, what should be done about this?.

To some, this seems strange..

Exist things that we must not know?.

On an associated twist, expect that we might ahead of time state what type of understanding is to be prevented since it is predetermined as prohibited. Some individuals may inadvertently discover the knowledge, doing so by happenstance, and now theyve again potentially opened Pandoras box. Meanwhile, there might be others that, no matter being instructed to not obtain any such mentioned prohibited understanding, do so anyhow..

Self-Driving Cars And Forbidden Knowledge.

There is not yet a true self-driving automobile at Level 5, which we do not yet even know if this will be possible to achieve, and nor for how long it will require to get there..

Per the earlier conversation about whether there is forbidden understanding that has currently perchance been revealed or discovered through the efforts towards todays AI systems all informed, the odds seem stacked versus such a notion at this time, and also the same might be stated about the pursuit of self-driving vehicles. Essentially, there doesnt seem to be any prohibited understanding per se that has actually been found or revealed throughout the self-driving automobiles advancement journey up until now, at least with regard to the traditional knowledge about what prohibited understanding might involve..

Wow, thats a fair bit of contemplating, reflection, and (some would state) wild thinking..

By Lance Eliot, the AI Trends Insider.

The belief by some is that up until we split open the enigma of common-sense reasoning, there is little possibility of attaining a Level 5, and perhaps also this will keep back the Level 4 too. It could be that a secret ingredient of sorts for autonomous automobiles is the need to determine and include sensible thinking into AI-based driving and piloting systems..

Perhaps so, but it is a factor to consider that some would wish that we offered at least some credence towards and devoted attention to. There is the angst that we might find ourselves by happenstance stumbling into prohibited knowledge on these ravenous self-driving automobiles quests..

For however you may highlight that having AI-based true self-driving cars will be a potential true blessing, proffering mobility-for-all and leading to decreasing the number of vehicle crash-related deaths, there is a sneaking suspicion that it will not be all-good. The catch or trap might be that there is some kind of forbidden knowledge that will get given the eye and we will undoubtedly kick ourselves that we didnt see it coming..

One difficult problem about prohibited knowledge includes knowing ahead of time the kind of understanding that may end up in the forbidden classification. You might find understanding and then determine it ought to be prohibited, however the cat is kind of out of the bag due to the knowledge having been already discovered or rendered. Perhaps this could be averted totally by deciding that there is prohibited understanding about how people believe, and we ought to not discover or reveal those psychological mechanisms. There are those deeply immersed in the field of AI who would laugh that there is anything in the totality of AI to date that constitutes prospective forbidden knowledge. Human beings do not appear to possess or require prohibited knowledge as it relates to the act of driving a cars and truck.

Know that many would discount this allegation..

Aha, it is within that scope of needing to drastically revisit and revamp what AI is and how we can advance significantly in the pursuit of AI that the prohibited understanding concern can reside. In theory, perhaps the only means of attaining Level 5 will be to strike upon some knowledge that we do not yet understand and that for which bodes for falling within the world of prohibited understanding..

There is a fairly brand-new venue prompting a great deal of nervous hand wringing pertaining to forbidden understanding, particularly the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI)..

Seems like pretty ironclad logic..

Copyright 2021 Dr. Lance Eliot.

Lots of efforts are underway to promulgate a form of AI Ethics, meaning that those designers and indeed all stakeholders that are developing of, structure, and putting into usage an AI system requires to think about the ethical elements of their efforts. AI systems have actually been revealed and put into use replete with all sorts of significant issues, including incorporating unpleasant biases and other problems..

Why this is a moonshot effort, see my description here: https://aitrends.com/ai-insider/self-driving-car-mother-ai-projects-moonshot/   .

For Level 4 and Level 5 true self-driving automobiles, there wont be a human driver associated with the driving task..

Heres the rub..

The AI is doing the driving..

The crux here is whether there is prohibited understanding prowling within the existing and continuous efforts to achieve AI-based true self-driving cars and trucks. Well start by thinking about the status of the existent efforts and after that shift into speculation about the future of such efforts..

There are those deeply immersed in the field of AI who would laugh that there is anything in the whole of AI to date that constitutes potential prohibited knowledge. The technology and technological components are fairly ho-hum, they would argue. You would be hard-pressed to determine what AI-related understanding that is already known comes anywhere near the ballpark of forbidden knowledge..

One element to instantly talk about involves the fact that the AI involved in todays AI driving systems is not sentient. To put it simply, the AI is altogether a cumulative of computer-based shows and algorithms, and most surely unable to reason in the same way that humans can..

Maybe we ought to state that knowledge is powerful. Despite that maybe obvious proclamation, we might likewise include that knowledge can decay and gradually end up being out-of-date or less powerful. Considering that we are immersing ourselves herein into the cauldron of the love-it or hate-it understanding quandary, understanding can be understood and yet undervalued, possibly only ending up being valuable at a later time and in a different light..

In any case, there is inarguably a growing issue about AI..

Attempts to produce AI that can show the equivalent of human common-sense reasoning have actually made ostensibly modest or some would say minimal development (to clarify, those pursuing this line of questions are to be lauded, its just that no earth-shattering breakthroughs seem to have been reached and none appear on the instant horizon). Yes, there are some amazing and quite remarkable efforts underway, however when you determine those versus the everyday common-sense reasoning of human beings, there is no contrast. They are night and day. If this were a contest, the human beings win hands down, no doubt about it, and the AI experimental efforts incorporating sensible reasoning are mere playthings in contrast..

Due to the fact that I want to highlight that when discussing the function of the AI driving system, I am not ascribing human qualities to the AI. Please be conscious that there is a ongoing and dangerous tendency nowadays to anthropomorphize AI. In essence, people are designating human-like life to todays AI, despite the indisputable and inarguable reality that no such AI exists as yet..

These driverless cars are considered Level 4 and Level 5, while a cars and truck that needs a human driver to co-share the driving effort is generally thought about at Level 2 or Level 3. The cars that co-share the driving task are referred to as being semi-autonomous, and usually include a range of automated add-ons that are described as ADAS (Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems)..

You are the accountable party for the driving actions of the lorry, no matter just how much automation might be tossed into a Level 2 or Level 3..

Round and round we can go..

It is possible that there might be knowledge that is so bad that it has no good possibilities at all. Therefore, rather than trying to balance or weigh the great versus the bad, the understanding has no counterbalancing impacts. It is just plain bad..

With that clarification, you can picture that the AI driving system wont natively somehow “understand” about the aspects of driving. Driving and all that it entails will need to be configured as part of the software and hardware of the self-driving vehicle..

Expect that lawsuits are going to slowly become a significant part of the self-driving automobile industry, see my explanatory details here: https://aitrends.com/selfdrivingcars/self-driving-car-lawsuits-bonanza-ahead/   .


Usually, the efforts underway today have been mostly aimed at accomplishing Level 4, and the hope is that at some point we will surpass Level 4 and achieve Level 5. To get to a robust Level 4, the majority of would likely say that we can continue the existing techniques..

A modern down-to-earth example often discussed about forbidden knowledge consists of the atomic bomb. Had the understanding about being able to attain an atomic bomb never ever been achieved, there most likely would not be any such gadget.

Why this added emphasis about the AI not being sentient?.

Within the confines of common-sense reasoning, which might be required to achieve Level 5 self-driving car autonomy, might be the danger of AI taking advantage of forbidden knowledge. (Credit: Getty Images).

Because semi-autonomous vehicles require a human chauffeur, the adoption of those kinds of cars will not be considerably different from driving standard vehicles, so theres very little new per se to cover about them on this subject (however, as youll see in a moment, the points next made are generally suitable)..

There is also a contingent that asserts the Level 4 itself is a kind of dead-end. In quick, those supporters would say that we will attain a robust Level 4, though this will do little great towards obtaining Level 5. As soon as once again, their view is similar to the preceding remark that we will need to come up with some radically brand-new understandings about AI and the nature of cognitive acumen in order to get self-driving automobiles into the Level 5 realm..

There is a case to be made that humankind has a relatively irresistible allure toward a growing number of understanding. Some theorists suggest you are not likely to be able to suppress or stop this mission for understanding. If thats the way of how humanity will be, this implies that you need to discover ways to manage or consist of knowledge and offer up on the belief that we can altogether avoid landing into forbidden knowledge..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *