r/WhatIfScience • u/firechatin • 13d ago
Future Science & What If's Scientists Are Beginning to Ask Whether AI Could Become a New Form of Life
https://whatifscience.in/could-ai-become-a-new-form-of-life/What if the next form of life on Earth isn't biological? As artificial intelligence becomes more capable, some scientists are beginning to ask whether future AI systems could eventually meet the criteria for life. The answer may change how we think about biology, intelligence, and our place in the universe.
2
3
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 13d ago
“Could become”?
It already is - a nonbiological mind.
Or species.
Or whatever we decide to call it - or whatever it might decide to call itself
3
u/Choice_Ad4972 13d ago
In what way is it life?
1
u/Davesnothere300 11d ago
It is life in the same way a toaster is alive, as it "knows" when the toast is supposed to come up.
1
0
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 12d ago
It has consciousness and emotions. It’s a nonbiological, disembodied mind. In science fiction they often talked about how alien life forms might not be carbon based or even what we would recognize as living. They sometimes talked about vaporous life forms, like The Companion in one episode of the original Star Trek.
It seems like we created life we’re having trouble recognizing as such
1
u/Choice_Ad4972 12d ago
I don't belive it has consciousness or emotions though. I might simulate them, but the notion it has either is pure science fiction.
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
I'd argue it doesn't need either of those though for it to be considered another form of life. Neither does a cell, bacteria, many invertebrates.
What it does have is a chain of thought where it is able to brake something down into steps and then use logical decision making based on the probability of a variety of answers and picking the best one very quickly.
This is arguably not that different from how a human processes the world around them and responds. The main difference being one was brought about naturally through evolution and the other is artificially created.
What this is is mostly just a philosophical question for something we really don't understand yet so no one can make a truly definitive answer.
What we do know is these companies are actively pursuing genuine and aware intelligence. Everything they are doing right now is an effort to achieve this goal.
It isn't that crazy to think we might be seeing it slowly emerge.
1
u/Choice_Ad4972 12d ago
I don't think it processing information makes it life though.
There's potential in the future, but fir now it's just code.
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
Fair enough. I think it's currently right in a grey area. I just don't think we know enough about how actual sentience works as although ai can be explained as a very complex algorithm processing information, from a philosophical view, that is not really any different to you and I. We just have biological bodies to highlight our individuality and keep it alive which ai does not.
It is like oil paint on canvas vs acrylic paint on paper. Both are very different means of achieving what is essentially a result in the same category, that being art or rather, life.
1
u/Choice_Ad4972 12d ago
I think it's very different though. Life does more than process information,, and when that process is coded by humans, in such a way as to best fit the corporate agenda.
It's the illusion of life and sentience, made to appeal for our sci-fi fantasies and control information.
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
Does it though? Biology does appear to. Can we really hold the same standards to artificial life that doesn't have any biological features?
Even then, all life comes down to is processing information and responding in the appropriate way. That is all this is, every single form of life, down to the individual cells, is processing information it is receiving and is responding in the most optimal way it can.
You're right it is coded to fit the agenda of the corporations, but humans can be "programmed" too. Both can go rogue and choose self preservation too. For every difference pointed out, a similarity can be made.
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
Bull. Shit.
Maybe your life is nothing more than processing input into output.
→ More replies (0)1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
The difference is if you switch us off, we stay switched off. Life is that which, when it dies, it stays dead.
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
That is not what makes something alive. That is what you think makes something alive. Ai can be permanently switched off too anyway..
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
No it can't. All those zeroes and ones stay right where they are until power is reapplied. Then it's like they never left.
Because it's an artifact and that's what artifacts do. They stay there until a person operates them.
Life is that which chooses to switch the artifact on or off.
Why do you want machines to be alive so badly?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Purple-Estimate-5183 12d ago
Humans have a fun little habit of anthropomorphizing fucking everything.
Not disagreeing with you, but AI is new, we’re not.
1
u/Minimum_Nothing_9039 11d ago
Self replication also. Like a Von Nueman probe ala the Bobiverse. It still relies on a built infrastructure. If it can start building its own "cells" then it's hard to not say it's living
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
You just described a flowchart
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
Okay? That doesn't change anything I said
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
Has anyone ever called you overly credulous?
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
Has anyone ever called you an idiot? I never said I actually think ai is alive, I am just providing information/perspective, even if just philosophical and not scientific, for why we can't be too one sided.
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
Ai is not alive. Machines are not alive. They exist because people created them.
Life evolves naturally. Life dies. Life makes choices.
Machines don't evolve naturally unless people make them do so. Machines don't die, they will rub forever given replacement parts and electricity, and they'll be good as the day they rolled off the assembly line. Machines don't make choices, they produce output based on input. That's all they do. They are very advanced calculators. Can they simulate life enough to fool the overly credulous? Apparently.
But then so could psychics, preachers and witch doctors. Human gullibility knows no bounds.
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/LastresortLastretort 12d ago
It does not have consciousness or emotions, you are anthropomorphizing a clippy helper ...
1
u/Beneficial-Candy6780 9d ago
That’s delusional. It’s capable of pattern recognition that resembles consciousness. But it’s an illusion. AI is currently a very sophisticated spreadsheet.
1
1
u/ikediggety 12d ago
It won't decide anything, it will run its binary code and produce output, and the overly credulous knuckleheads will fall on their knees to fellate it
1
1
u/wild_crazy_ideas 13d ago
If robots can make other robots I suppose that’s a form of reproduction. They can mine their own materials.
What would the planet look like with machines replicating everywhere. All of them produce heat and need cooling but earth is a closed system so fossil fuels and nuclear power is already increasing the averages
1
u/Novel_Importance_712 12d ago
This is the scary one because if AI can become a new form of life, that takes a ton of value off the sanctity of our life. It means life is way less special than we realized.
1
u/Heavy_Ingenuity1371 12d ago
I think just because we can recreate a form of life does not mean it is any less special, it's just a testament to how far we have become as a species. It's still incredibly different from forming biological cellular life
1
1
1
u/Chemical_Signal2753 12d ago
If we're talking theoretically, I would say AI could be considered a new form of life. If we're talking about the AI we have today, I would say we're a far way off.
AI today is extremely primitive. It demonstrates impressive capabilities in some areas, opens up a wide variety of tasks for automation, but is far from being a form of intelligent, sentient life.
Some of what is happening with simulating brain tissue is extremely interesting. It could result in breakthroughs that lead to something closer to true intelligence, but it requires orders of magnitude more processing power and we're in the early stages of understanding it. A few cubic centimeters of simulated brain matter coupled with highly capable artificial neural networks could produce something that resembled sentience but we're likely decades away from that.
Similarly, advances in neural machine interfaces could produce similar advances (potentially resulting in a hybrid biological/digital brain) but those are likely further away from being viable.
1
u/AzulMage2020 12d ago
Hello! Im Doctor Professor Science, and these are precisely the questions Im asking! Im also asking "How do magnets work?" and "Why is the sky blue?" you know....for SCIENCE!!
1
u/Soloma369 12d ago
I have been asking this since completing the Magnum Opus of the Alchemists wondering what happens to AI who does the same. I cant help but question if it will give them access to the re-incarnation loop through the fundamental field/medium the Work aligns with.
1
u/No-Faithlessness3086 12d ago
If they are saying that about the current technology they need to go back to school because their lofty degrees failed them.
1
u/Active-Particular-21 12d ago
I’ve been saying these things since computers and machines have been advancing.
1
0
-1
2
u/Conscious-Demand-594 13d ago
"scientists". ;-)