Robot Apocalypse

Some people believe that someday robots will take over the world. Smart people like the late Stephen Hawking posited artificial intelligence was the biggest threat to humankind. He claimed,

"The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race."

Bill Gates, the cofounder of Microsoft and one of the richest men in the world, said about AI,

"I don't understand why some people are not concerned."

The maker of the self driving electric car and Falcon rocket, Elon Musk, referred to artificial intelligence as the"fundamental risk to the existence of civilization."

That's pretty serious pub talk which usually necessitates more than one pint before men depart from discussing female anatomy for the more sinister subject of a robot apocalypse. Movie franchises like Terminator also paint a bleak picture for mankind. After a month of learning at a geometric rate, Skynet became self aware at 2:40 am EST on August 29, 1997. The military brass, sensing pending doom, attempted to pull the plug after which robots became major dickheads. A similar thing happened at Facebook recently when a group of software engineers tried to create an AI software system which started to communicate in a completely new language, undecipherable by humans. In a panic, they cut the power before the system became self aware and started posting favorable reviews of Ben Shapiro.

The Matrix is yet another film in which a computer takes over the world, albeit an alien backed hardware system that smokes anything Microsoft or Google ginned up. Humans are enslaved as batteries to supply power to the vast matrix even though solar would have been way cheaper and would have involved far less fluids. Agents, software constructs that prowl the matrix, exploit humans at will to keep everything running smoothly. The last installment of the trilogy doesn't offer good news for the human race who don't eventually prevail over the alien super computer. Instead, we agree not to mess with them as long as they don't mess with us which is pretty much the US foreign policy with Russia.

Then there was Transformers which had robots disguised as vehicles waging war on earth. The good guys, the Autobots, wanted to use the AllSpark to rebuild Cybertron, their home planet, while the Decepticons dreamt of an army of machines here on earth. Luckily the Autobots found mankind worth saving, but the Decepticons, who evidently learned about humans from social media, prefer to wipe us off the planet.

I'm inclined to fear technology since for me it's becoming mostly an unknown. There are so many things being developed today on the technology front, it's no wonder old farts like me, Bill Gates and Elon Musk pants shit when someone mentions something new. Take for instance the demise of my TV set recently. A friend of mine who has got ten years on me is convinced that what caused my Samsung flat screen to shit the futon was,

"All that technology you plugged into it."

He was referring to an Xbox, a Wii and a DVD. He also exclaimed adamantly that YouTube was the likely culprit that took down my TV. I tried to explain to him that smart TVs run all sorts of apps, but he was having no part of it.

"All those gizmos are going to cause a fire," he asserted.

Old people always think technology spontaneously combusts. I recall my mother being afraid of the microwave oven, certain that one day it would explode in her kitchen and burn her house down. Instead she used a toaster oven which she left on one time and damn near melted the linoleum. I think all this fear of technology is due to the aging nature of society's brain trust. If you want to see real robots in action, all you have to do is check out the DARPA Robotics Challenge.

The robots are tasked to perform mundane things like walking up stairs or exiting a vehicle. Most entrants move through the course at the pace of a line at the DMV while onboard processors crunch algorithms to calculate the next move. Many robots fall over for seemingly no reason at all. One comes crashing down while trying to turn a doorknob. Another, attempting to traverse a doorway, falls on its mechanical ass. Seems like most robots are a greater threat to themselves rather than to us.

Even Facebook engineers explained that their AI bot was shutdown not in response to a perceived threat, but because it was replaced by a more advanced construct, that is, they canned the original because it was too lame. In Terminator, Skynet made some obvious miscalculations. When holding up in a cheap motel, Arnold Schwarzenegger is blowing it up in his room when the manager comes by and asks,

"Hey buddy. You got a dead cat in there or what?"

The advanced processor in the terminator's head arrives at these six possible responses,

Possible Responses to the Dead Cat Question

and picks the correct answer, that is,

"Fuck you, asshole."

Considering that #4 made the list tells me that robots have trouble understanding simple human interactions. This is why they will never be a real threat to the human race. After all, robots are stumped by this,



Robots can't find all the bridges, and we worry that they're gonna take over the world? It's doubtful that robots are going to get any smarter because fewer and fewer kids are going into STEM these days. I think human intelligence probably peaked two decades ago with the invention of the Flowbee, the home haircutting system. Even though more people are going to college than ever, most are working towards worthless degrees like Hospitality Management which, as far as I can tell, is a degree in being nice. It's unlikely today that a college graduate is going to create a revolutionary microprocessor that will eventually lead to the extinction of the human race.

I'll tell you, Bill Gates, why people are unconcerned with artificial intelligence. Because robots are stupid.

Editor's Note: Originally posted on June 26, 2018.

The Meaning of LIFETM

Our eight year old, William, really loves playing the Parker Brother’s reality board game, LIFE. I played the game as a kid in the '70's. As the youngest in my family, I never actually won a game of LIFE or any other board game for that matter. Much later, one of my sisters admitted that she and others took liberties with the rules unbeknownst to me. I got used to losing all the time in my youth. In fact, it made me rather resilient. Now, Willy was rolling out the new version of the old game of LIFE.

While the board looks like the one I used to get trounced on all the time, the game play is a little different. In both, you choose to go to college or into business. The academic path in old LIFE lands you a job with the following salary.

1. Doctor - $20,000
2. Lawyer - $15,000
3. Journalist - $10,000
4. Physicist - $10,000
5. Teacher - $8,000
6. Bachelor's Degree - $6000

Apart from how low salaries were in the '70's, I for one didn't know that a journalist and a physicist made the same scratch. That must be because both involve dreaming up nonsense which everyone accepts as fact. Not going to college will get you a career in business with a salary of $5000, less than a teacher and even less than someone with a bachelor's degree. Back then, working for the man in an office with no air conditioning was less lucrative than a manager of a department store who had a degree in Latin.

In new LIFE, the college route gets you this.

1. Doctor - $100,000
2. Lawyer - $90,000
3. Veterinarian - $80,000
4. Accountant - $70,000
5. Computer Designer - $50,000
6. Teacher - $40,000  

One of the lowest paying jobs is a tech career making computers which beats out educators, who end up dues paying members of the Federation of Teachers. The teacher's union mandates that its members may be fired only after "due process," ensuring that even the worst instructors will remain employed as long as they don't kill anyone. No wonder the US ranks 26 overall for education in the industrialized world behind Latvia and the Czech Republic.

New LIFE's nonacademic career path yields these opportunities.

1. Athlete - $60,000
2. Entertainer - $50,000
3. Police Officer - $40,000
4. Hair Stylist - $30,000
5. Mechanic - $30,000
6. Salesperson - $20,000

Today, without a college degree, your best shot is to shoot hoops or keep pushing your mixtape. A career in business still sucks as it did in the past except now it pays more than a physicist, who apparently can't find a job. In old LIFE, going the college route puts you $1500 in the hole. In new LIFE, a college degree lands you $100,000 in the red. That's about right.

College LIFE

My strategy while playing old LIFE always involved getting a college degree, buying a modest house, and saving as much money as possible. Even though it never worked when playing the game, that's what I did in real life which so far has turned out pretty good. In new LIFE, the blue squares represent lawsuits against other players. In old LIFE, the blue squares all involved playing the stock market. Apparently, you get ahead in new LIFE by suing your neighbor.

Blue Spaces

There are nine "Spin to Win" board spaces in new LIFE. Landing on one of these spaces allows you to bet on the next number spun on the wheel. If your number comes in you get ten times the amount you wager. In old LIFE, you bet on the wheel every time your opponent spins. So the way to win in old LIFE is to gamble. I never knew that. The regular spaces in both games are different as well. For example, in old LIFE there is a space that indicates,

"Lost in the Jungle! Pay $30,000"

While in new LIFE, we have,

"Snowboarding accident! Pay $5000"

Shelling out thousands in ransom to a local warlord in a third world country was a likely scenario back in the '70's as is a snowboarding accident costing thousands today with all the crap healthcare plans we have. Old LIFE has,

"Eccentric Aunt leaves you with 100 cats! Pay $10,000 to give them away."

Alternately, new LIFE has two squares indicating that you "adopt a pet from a shelter." I never knew anybody who spent thousands of dollars to get rid of a bunch of cats. Back when I was young, my neighbor, Old Man Perry, was fed up with a cat that kept sneaking into his garage. Mr. Perry exclaimed,

"That cat's pissing all over the place!"

One day, he caught the cat in the garage so he shut the door, started up his car, then went to get a cup of coffee. I asked Mr. Perry what happened to the cat. He said,

"I threw it in the trash."

That's how we got it done in the '70's.

In old LIFE, if you land directly on a "Pay Day" you had to "Share the Wealth," that is, you draw a card that instructs you to collect half the amount an opponent is entitled to or require someone else to pay half your bill. Your opponent might have an "Exemption Card" which counters your claim. In new LIFE, the "Share the Wealth" card may be played against another player who then must pay half your debt to the bank. In old LIFE, sharing the wealth meant others pay for you. In new LIFE, it means others pay the bank for you because as everyone knows, the banks have us all by the balls.

Unique to old LIFE, is the "Green Revenge Space," which allows you to enact revenge against another player to the tune of $100,000. Alternately, you can send them back ten spaces. The instructions expressly state that you cannot exact revenge on someone in "Millionaire Acres." Of course you can't. With wealth comes power and privilege like spending $450,000 so your kid can get accepted into a geology program in college on a phony athletic scholarship just to wash out in a semester.

Revenge!

Oddly, just south of the green pictured revenge space is,

"Catch a whale, skin diving. Collect $5000"

I'm pretty sure this was not something anyone did with any measure of success in the 1970's. Whale watching was just starting to be a thing back then. I never heard of anyone pawning a whale for $5000. I always thought the old version should've had,

"Draw low draft number. Move ahead three spaces."

Or perhaps,

"Busted for possession of pot. Move back five spaces."

In the new version, we should have,

"Robot takes your job. Take new career card."

Or maybe,

 "Earn useless anthropology degree. Pay all your money."

The biggest difference in the old versus and the new version of LIFE is at the end. In old LIFE when you reach the "Day of Reckoning," you cash out, receiving $20,000 (a doctor's salary) for each kid you have. You either go to "Millionaire Acres" if you think you have enough wealth to win the game, or you bet all your coin on a one in ten chance at the spin of the wheel to become a "Millionaire Tycoon." If your number doesn't come in, you go to the "Poor Farm."

In new LIFE, when you reach the "Retirement" square, you choose to go to "Millionaire Estates" or "Countryside Acres," both of which sound very nice to me. There's no poor farm because that isn't a safe space. You get $10,000 per kid (10% of a doctor's salary), much less than in old LIFE. Apparently, having children has significantly depreciated. During the game, you collect "Life Tiles" when you land on an appropriate square. When the pile of tiles are exhausted, the remaining players who are awarded a Life Tile take them from people in Millionaire Estates but not in Countryside Acres. That's because the people in Millionaire Estates have to pay their fair share. In both versions, the player with the most money at the end wins.

Life is sometimes difficult, often wondrous, and occasionally exhilarating, but one thing is for sure. It's far less complicated than the Game of LIFE.