Artificial Intelligence and Nanotechnology

[Original_Carl]

Ooooo! Scary!

I know these are going to come up in my games. Any advice on how to handle them aside from giving them the old heave-ho?

I can see a ban on Thinking Machines, ala Dune, or some kind of Turing Police ala Neuromancer to control AI, but nanotech...I'm just not sure what to do about nanites. Have you all dealt with these technological Pandora's Boxes and lived to tell about it?

Thanks in advance.

 

[rust]

Have you all dealt with these technological Pandora's Boxes and lived to tell about it?

Well, yes.

However, I am still experimenting with both of them.

My setting has AIs, but until now only of the "restricted" kind, with a pro-
gramming that prevents them from becoming truly self aware and indepen-
dent. They are more or less very capable expert systems able to learn and
to draw conclusions.
I am not yet sure whether I will introduce "unrestricted" AIs into my setting,
but if so, I will treat them as something invented by an alien species and
out of reach of the player characters, and more like the AIs of Brin's Uplift
books (the AIs used by the Tymbrimi, I do not remember the name ...) than
the usual more dangerous kind.

I used a similar approach with nanotechnology, using the new BRP adventure
Outpost 19 to introduce nanites as relics of the Precursors' (the Ancients of
my setting) technology.
This again allows me to watch their impact onto my setting with little risk of
ruining it, because the player characters cannot in any way abuse them, and
I can always "write them out of the story" if this should become necessary.

 

[Psion]

For nanites? Mostly, I generally let them fade into the backdrop. I assume many TL 12+ items can only be created with the assistance of nanotech, but it's not much more of an every day concern to a citizen of the imperium than microlithology is to us. At best, add a few items to the equipment list that feature direct use of nanites (quick fabrication gel, mineral extraction goo, etc.)

I generally ignore grey goo scenarios as impractical unless, well, I want to make it a plot device.

 

[vertigo25]

I was actually thinking about some of this stuff last night as I was reading CT Book 8: Robots.

I'm wondering… what's holding anyone back? Why *not* have them in your universe? I can't see that having AI advanced enough to simulate sentient thought would alter things any more than having other races who are sentient.

As for nanotech, I'm assuming we're talking about nanosystems, since it's already been proven that we can make nanomaterials. My personal take (and I'm no physicist) is that we will eventually make artificial nanosystems, but that they will not stray far from natural systems. I'm not sure we'll ever have Drexler's ultimate machines which can produce other machines and turn your dirty window in to a roast beef sandwich. Some physicists think we'll never even be able to replicate what occurs naturally. I say a good scientist never says never

But we're talking sci-fi, here. And we can make it any level we want. If you think having Start Trek type replicators is going to mess with your game, or (more importantly) break the suspension of disbelief, dial it down to: nanotech exists, but it can only do things that are found in nature… and maybe a *little* more. It can clean polluted air, assist in microscopic surgery (say, for cybernetics), etc.; but it's so ubiquitous that people don't even think about it anymore.

That's another thing. Often, universe shattering technologies only seem universe shattering when they're first proposed. When things become ubiquitous, the novelty wears off, as does the social impact.

 

[Scathsealgaire]

Imv

Ooooo! Scary!

I know these are going to come up in my games. Any advice on how to handle them aside from giving them the old heave-ho?

I can see a ban on Thinking Machines, ala Dune, or some kind of Turing Police ala Neuromancer to control AI, but nanotech...I'm just not sure what to do about nanites. Have you all dealt with these technological Pandora's Boxes and lived to tell about it?

Thanks in advance.

Well in the 'Verse I have created I have "Ray's" and "Fae's", Restricted A.I.'s and Free A.I.'s. The creation of Fae's is illegal, but that hasn't stopped people from making them. I coined the term Fae, because like the orignal fae of myth, not all Free A.I.'s are the same. Some dislike organics, some like them, and others just don't care.
Wild-Nanotech (ie self replicating) is illegal. But non-self replicating nano's are legal. Don't forget that you can have nanites that produces other nanites, Nanite factories if you wish. Thus you can have companies that sell "safe" nanite products, and produce them using a different nanite strain, which in turn is produced using a different nanite strain and so on.

-please note: The term "Fae" has not yet been used in SF, please let me use it first in my novels. Cheers.

 

[far-trader]

...That's another thing. Often, universe shattering technologies only seem universe shattering when they're first proposed. When things become ubiquitous, the novelty wears off, as does the social impact.

Like... Nuclear Power :smirk:

I was far more comfortable with the scientists saying "We could set the atmosphere on fire..." than "Power so cheap and safe it'll be free and the whole world will be better for less pollution..." Big surprise they were both wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-nuke power, just anti-head-in-tommorrow-land scientists.

I figure future tech is the same....

Some scientists will be saying we shouldn't create AI because some AI will figure the best thing to do is "first we kill all the people". Others will be saying "think of it, no more dangerous labour, no more boring jobs, everyone can life a life of leisure while the robots do all the work". And again, they'll both be wrong.

Other scientists will be predicting runaway nano tech will doom the world in some grey goo meltdown, while their opponents will promise wonders of creation and 100% clean recycling of waste into gold. Yep, both wrong again.

I'm sure the story hasn't changed since the first alchemists started dreaming of what their experiments might accomplish. And the truth is always a more double edged sword than either imagines. Each development rich with promise and ripe with danger. It comes down to managing the tech so it does the least harm for the most good.

My take on AI and Nano is it is there, widely employed to varying degrees by TL, but for all practical purposes as invisible to most people in the future as it is to most people today where food, water, and electricity comes from. No rampant killer robots (three laws and other true sentience limits) and no gray goo (it just doesn't work that way).

 

[beowulf2044]

Nano Tech is analagous to iron rusting. A slow, boring process. Hope no one's in a hurry for that set of nano-built set of trousers to be worn.

 

[mike wightman]

Simple answer to nanites is that there are really no such thing. Nanomanufacturing processes exist, and use of biological organisms or modified versions of the same are akin to the nanites of 21st century sci-fi.

Nanotech is a background manufaturing technology, nothing more.

Similarly there is a big difference between artificial intelligence and artificial sentience. AI machines are just very clever mimics, only truely self aware machines could be classsed as sentient.

 

[epicenter00]

Have you all dealt with these technological Pandora's Boxes and lived to tell about it?

Loren Wiseman had some interesting things to say about the nanotech thing in particular in one of the sidebars of GURPS Traveller - I'd suggest buying a copy or reading a friend's for his views on the matter.

Essentially his point was that you could have such things in your universe and you could run a very interesting game around it, but that game would not be Traveller. However, he went on to say (as many others have said in this thread) if you have nanotech turn out to be limited in some way (usually that they can't reproduce as wildly as people are predicting) it doesn't need to be a Pandora's Box.

AIs could be handled in a similar fashion. I think more and more in modern times we're realizing that high intelligence doesn't necessarily mean human intelligence. Perhaps AIs do exist in Traveller, but they were of the "self-destructing" variety. They don't necessarily kill themselves, but the AIs thus created eventually lost all interest in communicating with their human creators as the AIs realized they really didn't have all that much in common with their creators right down to the basic biological imperatives that didn't exist in AIs and the AIs became more catatonic as they became more interested in running internal simulations of topics of interest to themselves.

Perhaps the search still continues to make an AI that has a long-term curiosity and desire to interact with "meat beings" ...

Or perhaps even that hurdle was overcome some time back, however, it's a case of "been there, done that" and a very close simulation to human intelligence ultimately wasn't any more interesting than human intelligence. Eventually the programs were shut down and the tremendous resources required to keep up such a computer were devoted to new (and more interesting) projects ...

Or perhaps AIs were constructed and when they learned to say "no" like all children eventually must (usually more sooner than later) ... it didn't lead to some Terminator-esque cataclysm but instead a kind of accord was reached: "You stay in this system and we leave you alone and you'll be free to run your internal VR simulations", the system was subsequently marked as a Red Zone. The AIs, who perhaps realized they had all the power they needed from solar and fusion sources and didn't really this constant biological need to expand were content to stay there. Perhaps for decades the Imperium kept fleets and so on around the area to watch for signs of hostility, but come the next Frontier War or something, those fleets were retasked and when the AIs didn't do a thing, bureaucrats eventually stopped wasting money putting ships there, and the worst of all situations formed for sci-fi writers ... everyone just sort of lost interest and moved on.

 

[Tysis]

My understanding of the Traveller approach to technology is that when at all possible we try to employ it in a way that is possible (or at least in a way we can rationalize as possible). In that spirit, here are the rationalized views (mine anyway) on these subjects. I have not spent much time developing these ideas, as you can surely tell.

AI is probably taken for granted in Traveller, but the chance of a “machine taking over” does not really fit with this background. AI is simulated intelligence focused on specific problems. In Traveller, this is more of a background flavor, and as such it is left up to the gaming group to flesh out.

So, your computer can help you operate your ship, warn you when something strange is happening (like that patrol ship whose transponder says it is a scout but it is doing 6G), robots can perform routine maintenance and repairs, prepare meals, and so on.

I have toyed with a few ideas on the subject of nano-tecnology. I think it is pretty much a background type of technology. High-tech equipment could very well be at least partially fabricated by these machines (I think someone already said this).

So, given this, please consider the following for molecular machines. Keep in mind that these thoughts are not completely developed; I came up with these as part of a “what if.”

1. They cannot make themselves. This is an industrial process.
2. They are stupid in a computational sense and require external control. Most sci-fi applications use “distributed computing” as the answer for why one is stupid and a million are brilliant, but frankly it does not work that way.
3. They can communicate, but at a very short range. This means your controlling computer would have to have a relay of some kind very close.
4. They cannot perform alchemy, so they need a source of material. While it is true with enough power and technology you can theoretically turn hydrogen into just about anything, this is probably not happening on this scale. I am assuming that nuclear synthesis is required to “build” elements.

Here is an example I came up with when I was developing this.

Assume a medical application. You would make the tiny machines and then inject them into a patient. The limited communication range means that you would have to tape relays to the patient to receive feedback from the machines. Of course, since a transmitter could be external and thus less limited in size restrictions talking to the little machines is not really a problem.

A medical team would control the machines with a computer, which is probably way beyond our means to currently produce.

So, you cannot take sand or whatever and do things like rebuilt bone, but if you had a supply of the minerals and such that composes bone you could repair someone from the inside. Likewise, you could remove things such as tumors from the inside, and simply “drain” the removed tissue as the machines carried it away.

Not very exciting, but you get the idea.

Does this help?

 

[Original_Carl]

All helpful and thoughtful suggestions. Thanks to all who posted.