If I don’t build it, someone else will, and with my technology, no doubt. I would much rather that history’s first artificially created human being be the result of my painstaking research than the work of some reckless Swiss scientist who doesn’t share my commitment to safety.

I would also prefer not to live in a world where someone else not-named-Frankenstein wins the Monster race and then gets to call his creation the “Frankenstein’s Monster.” That would be both scientifically unfair and, frankly, a branding nightmare.

1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 14 points 2 weeks ago*

Personally I think the west needs Frankenstein technology, because China is already working on theirs. We can't let our dead fall behind! They need to hussle if they're going to afford nice pine boxes.

  • source
  • 5 comments in c/theonion@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    "My predition of my creation is, in the next 10 years, it might actually destroy the humanity and lay waste to this planet we called home."

    "So why do you build it?"

    "We do what we must, because we can. Have you seen the human mantis hybrid we created? Magnificent creature."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago
    [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child)

    Currently watching Fringe - Dr Bishop is a perfect example of the regretful Frankenstein, and the show continuously goes out of its way to explain to you, dear watcher, why even his atrocities were ultimately for the good of all mankind. It makes me wanna puke, but not really, because I never had any expectations. This is good entertainment. He's also a really nice variation on the mad scientist trope.

    Anyhow, "the ends justify the means" is such a prevalent thought pattern in the American Public's Mind, which people advocating AI know how to play like a fiddle.

    But the fact that Amodei couldn't even bring that narrative across without anybody except SNL noticing, is deeply worrying.

    "The end justifies the means, but the end is till horrifying"

    AI people really are smoothbrained af.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    the show continuously goes out of its way to explain to you, dear watcher, why even his atrocities were ultimately for the good of all mankind

    I also currently watch Fringe (middle of season 2). Up until this point I don't see it done this way. Maybe that changes later on. What I have seen is, that Bishop tries to justify his actions that way, though trying to graple with the attrocities, that he caused. Others - like Olivia, the main character - think of this with disgust. Yes, she steps up and uses, what was dealt to her by Bishop and Bell. But it is also made clear, that the attrocities are not justified and that the problem at hand with the two universes is conpletely and utterly Bishops fault. It many episodes the case involves Bishops and Bells own research, which did and does horrible things to humans. At the time of the show Bishop is different than before, but not completely. We constantly see the mad scientist without any qualms fighting to get the better of him.

  • source
  • parent
  • 1 comment in c/theonion@sh.itjust.works view that post
    [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago

    That's "Fronkensteen."

  • source