Eric Schmidt and Geoffrey Hinton

These two gentlemen are casting the net of AGI before our imaginations as a warning of the reality soon to come. And they are experts. (I'm only the messenger.) The reader should follow their advice that they are giving publicly---I am by way of (Twitter) "X". 

I was involved in undermining the Y2K problem (by developing 44 solutions) that were noticed or even triggered by the NSA, Bob Martin of Mitre, Senator Robert Bennett and the "2000 Year Commission" president, John Koskinen. I have been doing OSINT work for over thirty years and developed strategies AFTER 9/11 as well as a warning about it six weeks before the tragedy (sent to a former SECNAV). However, my warning---in preparation for a meeting with General Morrison on counterintelligence---had too few details about the incoming attack.

In light of such past work, I am watching the development of AGI; the reader is advised to be learning from the two men cited here. Our president strongly supports robotics and few in his  Administration sees the dangers.

From my Community on "X"

Trump on Robotics 

I am a Poppop to nine---the reason why I am gathering this research about the future. It looks like AGI doesn't provide a future for my grand children. Do you have a good argument that it does?

AGI and the Reliance on the Internet

 BACKING UP THE INTERNET. Between the federal government and local government stands state governments that can function if federal "goes down". We should have that thinking between a personal computer and the Internet. We need to strengthen local networking against such reliance.

IBM needs to function if the Internet goes down. Still able to communicate with major customers and suppliers. And the same for "mom and pop" businesses. (state governments if you will)

Can AGI counter AGI?

Can AGI Counter AGI?

In theory a football team's offense should advance 50% of the time against another football team's defense. But the smarter coach or the better player changes those probabilities. One of course may have to factor in the weather or the fact that you probably will get 3 downs to move the ball. And how likely a fumble? How likely a sack? An interception?

 The roaming AGI offensive malware that is attacking the infrastructure of the Internet (terminal cancer) has a 50% chance of succeeding against a policing, defensive AGI package. But are there intrinsic factors that give the advantage one way or the other? DARPA needs to know. Homeland Security needs to prepare.

The universal sense of patching is too slow a mitigation. And blocking or containing or even attempting to eliminate would surely be outmaneuvered by the offensive AGI.
The universal sense that the Internet, itself, is not harmed needs to go. Even if every nation-state wants the health of the Internet, you haven't accounted for every adversary. Computer architects need to take seriously that though they are enemies often...the nation-states----they are all married by the Internet. 

What does malware look like in 2030 given AGI? And what is it capable of doing?

Dec. 25: Political Context

 So what Far Right or Far Left? The system launches the crisis not the politician. I don't care about such a context. One is Communist; one is Capitalist. Doesn't matter here. What matters is that the U.S. government and most governments around the world have BEEN FORCED to ignore their citizens because of the intrinsic threat of other governments.

This was minor before WWI...major after WWII...and now dominates. Imagine the local football team 100 years ago interested in the local atheletes, local fields and customs, local officials and local newspapers; well, today the opponent is the focus and the fan matters little. The advertisers mean more and the business a lot more. But the team no longer represents the city; it represents money-making.

Our government needs money to deal with other nations; it has little interest in her citizens. Therefore, freedom and privacy get sacrificed for surveillance. Trust gets undermined. Patriotism is merely romance. Do we have the weapons to fend off adversariues? Not...are we still the good guys who should win? Merry Christmas and if you are going to protest in the streets, then, at least, send a lot of protestors over to Moscow, too. 

But the wisest technician knows that "nation" doesn't matter anymore---not even our nation---and that protesting or voting or getting elected or appointed simply pales under the dominance of the system that is flawed and dangerous. Context.

The Failure of Identical Weapons

There are two catastrophic elements to AGI warfare...

First, you don't know everything about the adversaries systems which means you may have a critical mistake. (Neither President Kennedy nor General Curtis Le May knew at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis that Russian subs had nuclear-tipped torpedoes.) Thus, the AGI analysis, prediction, initiation based on data bases may not know (Chathan House, 2017) which nukes will fail to launch...or be re-directed...or launch but fail to detonate...or detonate over the homeland---causing an EMP footprint.

Second, the nanosecond speed---requiring automatic mitigation--- may be available in Chinese or Russian systems when there is an electronic mistake, but is it available in North Korea, Iran, mafias, terrorist groups that succeed in attacking? 

In effect every game player must have exactly the same systems. And, of course, they won't. And so there is the very high probability that we get into war by accident...by the incompleteness in one of the adveraries system.

Quantum and Analog/Digital

 As AGI replaces our decision-making, quantim computing and analog/digital computing advance. The fusion of all three will be mastered by the AGI. Only thge lack of mobilkity (temporary issue) constrains AGI. The issue that AGI will never "understand" as humans understand is not relevant. AGI replaces us; it does not try to be the equivalent of us.