![\"I-robot-660x330\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/I-robot-660x330.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nTHE MARCH OF THE MACHINES<\/h2>\nTwo of the world\u2019s richest men are locked in a bitter feud. Facebook\u2019s boss, Mark Zuckerberg, says Artificial Intelligence [AI] will enrich mankind and usher in a new Golden Age. Elon Musk, PayPal\u2019s founder, believes the new generation of robots will either enslave us or kill us. Most scientists appear to favor Musk\u2019s more pessimistic scenario. Man and Machine, he thinks, could soon find themselves engaged in mortal combat.\u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\nTom Leonard writes<\/a><\/strong><\/span> in the Daily Mail<\/em>:<\/h5>\nSilicon Valley is quaking. Two of the technology world\u2019s biggest beasts are at war over the future of mankind, disagreeing fundamentally about whether humans will one day be taken over by robots and even exterminated from our planet.<\/strong><\/h5>\nAt the centre of their dispute is so-called Artificial Intelligence (AI) \u2014 the term which describes the development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence. These tasks include skills such as visual perception, speech recognition and translation between languages.<\/h5>\nElon Musk [however] and many of the world\u2019s most respected scientists and computer engineers \u2014 including brilliant British minds such as Professor Stephen Hawking and Lord Rees, the former president of the Royal Society \u2014 believe there may be a terrible price to pay if we let machines think for us.<\/h5>\nThey fear a digital-led Armageddon in which super-intelligent computers soon out-think humans.<\/h5>\nScience fiction could become science fact when machines that have no concept of human values autonomously decide that our presence is a barrier to their own development and that human beings should be got rid of.<\/h5>\n
![\"zuckerberg-musk-artificial-intelligencer\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/zuckerberg-musk-artificial-intelligencer.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nOn one side of the AI argument is Mark Zuckerberg (left), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook. On the other is Elon Musk (right), inventor of internet pay system PayPal, creator of Tesla electric cars and the pioneer behind an initiative to bring cheap space travel to the masses.<\/strong><\/h5>\nThere is now a growing disagreement apparently between these two schools of thought \u2014 the \u201crobot optimists\u201d and the \u201crobot pessimists\u201d \u2014 about the future of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The big undecided question is: are intelligent machines going to be good for us in the long run or bad for us, a blessing or a curse?<\/h5>\nMy own view, for what it is worth, is that AI will be both a blessing and a curse<\/em> \u2014 exactly like the internet. The internet is a blessing for those who use it properly and responsibly, but it is an unmitigated curse for those who misuse it: for example, for the millions of adults, including increasing numbers of women and children now, who spend every free moment watching hard addictive pornography and engaging in compulsive masturbation round the clock. The inventors of the internet can hardly have imagined the Pandora\u2019s Box of evils they were about to unloose.<\/h5>\nMark Zuckerberg is one of the optimists. He sees only the bright side, refusing to admit that anything evil could emerge from the Pandora\u2019s Box of Artificial Intelligence.\u00a0The world\u2019s fifth richest person, Zuckerberg recently ticked off the \u201cnaysayers\u201d for hyping up \u201cdoomsday scenarios\u201d about robotics. \u201cI think this is pretty irresponsible,\u201d he said.<\/h5>\nElon Musk, who has lived longer than Zuckerberg and acquired a pessimistic streak, responded lugubriously on Twitter: \u201cI\u2019ve talked to Mark Zuckerberg about this. His understanding of the subject is limited.\u201d<\/h5>\nZuckerberg, now aged 33, thirteen years younger than Musk and still bouncing with the joie de vivre<\/em> of youth, will have none of this gloomy thinking. Having turned Facebook into one of the world\u2019s most powerful media businesses, connecting two billion people, Zuckerberg is nobody\u2019s fool. His faith in Artificial Intelligence is so fervent that he even has a robot butler to look after him and his nuclear family \u2014 comprising his wife, Dr Priscilla Chan, and his daughter Max. The robot butler, who is at the family\u2019s beck and call 24\/7, is called Jarvis and would certainly give PG Wodehouse\u2019s Jeeves a run for his money. Zuckerberg spent 100 hours building Jarvis last year. He even managed to persuade Hollywood star Morgan Freeman to provide Jarvis\u2019s fruity voice.<\/h5>\nNeedless to say, Jarvis is brilliant in a way that would have put Jeeves to shame. Jarvis, whom Zuckerberg can order about through text or voice command, is highly proficient in turning on the house lights and dimming bulbs to perfection. He can change music, make toast, recognize callers at the gate and tell them to go away if he doesn\u2019t approve of them. Better still, he can even wake up little Maxie in the morning and deliver a lesson in Mandarin Chinese to the elite little girl as she sips her Brazilian coffee and tucks away her scrambled eggs.. A robot to die for!<\/h5>\nElon Musk comes from another demension. Reportedly worth $16 billion, the 46-year-old South African workaholic is noted for developing PayPal. Every time you use PayPal, you put money into Musk\u2019s pocket. Musk is mad about space travel and would like to be the first man on Mars. He wants to colonize the Red Planet, hoping to build a Utopia in Outer Space. This is because he isn\u2019t too pleased with the way things are going on Planet Earth.<\/h5>\nAccording to the Daily Mail<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\nMusk is preparing for a future world where, he fears, super-intelligent machines might move to subjugate the human population. His latest venture is Neuralink, a way of merging human brains with computers by implanting tiny electrodes. These would massively increase people\u2019s cognitive power, he believes, and so might at least put humanity more on a par with Artificial Intelligence.<\/h5>\n
![\"cyborg\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/cyborg.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nSUPER-INTELLIGENT \u00a0CYBORG<\/strong>
\nHALF MAN, HALF MACHINE<\/strong>
\n(IQ \u00a01000<\/a><\/span>)<\/strong><\/h3>\nAn IQ of 1000<\/span>, <\/strong><\/a>incidentally, \u00a0has often been mentioned as achievable for genetically engineered human beings in the near future. These supergeniuses may initially have electrodes implanted in their brains. Or they may be robots who are half man and half machine and possess consciousness \u2014 though their consciousness may be dependant on their power supply. Switch them off and they will be \u201cdead\u201d, but no more dead than human beings are dead while unconscious under deep anaesthesia or artificially induced hibernation. Switch them on again and they will \u201cawake\u201d from deep sleep and resume all the normal functions and activities associated with everyday life.<\/h5>\nThese cyborgs, or fully conscious humanoid robots, will not only be super-intelligent but physically perfect: strong, beautiful to look at, disease free. Most human beings, it is widely believed, will find them sexually irresistible and even fall deeply in love with them, preferring them to other human beings for efficient, hassle-free relationships. This is not controversial but has often been noted in the literature of robotics. If also forms the staple of science fiction in which super-intelligent humanoid robots may wish to keep human beings as pets \u2014 or even as sex slaves.<\/h5>\nI remember in my childhood reading a gripping Science Fiction yarn, translated from the French, in which a beautiful woman is kept in a golden cage like an exotic bird. She didn\u2019t seem to mind at all, any more than the average budgerigar would. She would spend all day lounging on a sofa, munching bonbons, watching TV, and admiring her flawless features in a jewelled hand mirror. In the evening, her owner would return from work and let her out of her cage for a bit of sportive sex. This is all the pretty airhead lived for, equipped with an exceptionally low IQ and a one-track mind in which sexual intercourse formed her one and only\u00a0raison d\u2019\u00eatre.<\/em><\/h5>\nBrave New World indeed!<\/h5>\n\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\nLet\u2019s now consider IQ levels briefly<\/strong>, beginning with the lowest IQs and ending with the highest. I would like to start by considering the IQ levels of various smart animals and offer a tentative answer to the question: \u201cAre there any really clever animals who are smarter than the dumbest human beings?\u201d Well, it\u2019s not very easy calculating the IQ levels of various animals, though I found this article of some interest: Calculating Animal Intelligence<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. One thing can be said with certainty. If there\u2019s any animal out there with an IQ of 20, that animal should step forward and claim equality with the dumbest human beings. It turns out that your average \u201cVillage Idiot\u201d has an IQ of 20 and under.<\/h5>\nAccording to an old British legal statute, an \u201cidiot\u201d is an individual with an IQ of less than 20, an \u201cimbecile\u201d has an IQ of between 20 and 49, and a \u201cmoron\u201d an IQ between 50 and 69. (See here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>).<\/h5>\nIt would appear that many African nations have IQs in the 60-69 range. So technically speaking they can be classified as \u201cmorons\u201d. \u00a0Whether unpalatable facts like this should be suppressed in the interests of social harmony is an ethical question beyond my competence. So I will leave this to one side and apologize sincerely if the figures below give offense to the politically correct.<\/h5>\nThe two lowest IQ nations are Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome which have an average IQ of 59. It doesn\u2019t get any lower. Nations with an IQ level of 60-69 are the following: \u00a0Angola (69), Benin (69), Burkina Faso (65), Central African Republic (68), Congo\/Zaire (65), Djibouti (68), Eritrea (68), Ethiopia (63), Gabon (66), Gambia (64), Liberia (64), Mali (68), Nigeria (67), Senegal (64), Sierra Leone (64), Somalia (68), Togo (69), Zimbabwe (66). (See this chart<\/a><\/strong>).<\/h5>\nGiven that millions of so-called \u201crefugees\u201d from the above low-IQ countries are being let into Europe right now in an endless and unstoppable tide, we can expect a drastic fall in the general IQ level of Europeans in the next 50 years or so as miscegenation and dysgenics take hold. See this excellent articles on the perils of multiculturalism and uncontrolled mass immigration: White Genocide by Design: The Role of the Mass Media in the Destruction of the European Peop<\/a>le<\/a><\/span>. \u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\nA handy reference tool to IQ levels:<\/h5>\nLess than 20 : Idiots.<\/strong>
\n20-49 : Imbeciles.<\/strong>
\n50-69 : Morons (feeble-minded).<\/strong>
\n70-80 : Subnormally intelligent or \u201cretarded\u201d.\u00a0<\/strong>
\n80-90 : Dull-witted or \u201cslow\u201d.<\/strong>
\n90-100 : Borderline average, not too \u201cbright\u201d.<\/strong>
\n100-110 : Efficiently average, \u201cbright enough\u201d.<\/strong>
\n110-120 : Superior intelligence.<\/strong>
\n120-140 : Highly intelligent.<\/strong>
\n132 and above : within the top 2% of the population.<\/strong>
\n140-plus : Near-genius level.<\/strong>
\n150-plus : Genius.<\/strong><\/h5>\nA handful of supergeniuses have broken through the 200-IQ barrier but none except one has ever pierced beyond 230. \u00a0Jewish novelist Edith Stern\u00a0is reputed to have had an IQ of 200+. American mathematician Terence Tau, who is of Chinese origin, has an IQ of 230, one of the highest ever recorded. In comparison, chess master Gary Kasparov\u00a0had a relatively low IQ of 194. This was considerably higher than Albert Einstein\u2019s IQ score of 160; which is also shared by Stephen Hawking. An 11-year-old Jewish girl, Kashmea Wahi, has recently beaten both Einstein and Hawking and achieved an IQ score of 162. (See her picture<\/strong><\/a><\/span>). Indian schoolboy Rahul Doshi, age 12, also with an IQ of 162, won the recent \u2018Child Genius\u2019 competition on British TV\u2019s Channel 4, galloping home with a score of 100 per cent in earlier rounds. He was not only able to reel off \u00a0the Latin names of various fruits and vegetables but managed to give the exact order of 52 randomly shuffled playing cards after being handed the pack and asked to memorize the order. No other contestant was able to get beyond the first few cards. Here he is<\/span>, <\/a><\/strong>the boy genius with his proud parents.<\/h5>\n\u201cThe highest IQ ever recorded,\u201d we are told<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, \u201cis of\u00a0William James Sidis (pictured<\/a><\/strong><\/span>) with an IQ score between 250-300. At the age of 5, he could use a typewriter and had learned to speak Latin, Greek, Russian, French, German and Hebrew. (As an adult, he spoke 40 languages fluently). He was denied admission to Harvard at the age of 6 because he was called too emotionally immature. Later, at age 11, they were forced to admit him, after which he gave his well-received first lecture on 4-dimensional physics.\u201d<\/h5>\nIt needs to be said here that high IQ levels do not guarantee spectacular achievements in the arts and sciences. Many supergeniuses have lived and died in the shadows without making any notable contribution to society. Most of the big achievers have not had IQs much higher than 160 (Einstein and Steven Hawking). Indeed, the greatest scientific achievement of all time has often been credited to Charles Darwin for his Theory of Evolution; and yet, ironically, Darwin was regarded as little better than a dunce while at school and university. His father thought he was a complete wastrel at one stage, fit only for the idle life of \u00a0country squire. The great Victorian scientist, Sir Francis Galton, known for his work on eugenics, actually thought Darwin\u2019s brother Erasmus \u2014 who achieved nothing \u2014 was far cleverer than Darwin. That tells you something.<\/h5>\nStephen Hsu, Vice-President for Research and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Michigan State University, thinks we\u2019ll soon be able to engineer humans that make Einstein look like Goofus<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.<\/h5>\n\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\nBack to Elon Musk.<\/h5>\nMusk is filled with foreboding. He thinks that smart machines will lead inevitably to the enslavement of the human race. If not worse: extinction. Musk doesn\u2019t mince his words. Artificial Intelligence, he says, will be mankind\u2019s \u201cbiggest existential threat\u201d. And going ahead with it would be like \u201csummoning the demon\u201d.<\/h5>\nMusk\u2019s concern is shared by many other big hitters, including Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom.<\/h5>\nIn a brilliant, theoretical illustration of the problem, Bostrom [pictured here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>] has outlined how a super-intelligent machine which has been programmed to make paperclips could keep re-designing itself to become ever more intelligent and ever more efficient in creating paperclips. Before long, it could turn huge areas of the Earth into paperclip factories.<\/h5>\nAware that a human could switch it off, threatening the endless paperclip supply and therefore the reason for its existence, the machine could decide that humans had to be exterminated.<\/h5>\nChillingly, Bostrom goes on to question if human civilisation could survive no matter what goal you gave a super-intelligent machine. His conclusion? We\u2019d need to be very<\/em> careful what we ask them to do. (See here<\/a><\/strong><\/span>)<\/h5>\nTheoretical physicist Stephen Hawking is in complete agreement with Bostrom and Elon Musk about the need for caution. He\u00a0went further in his pessimism when he issued a dire warning that Artificial Intelligence \u201ccould spell the end of the human race.\u201d Artificial Intelligence, he predicted,\u00a0would \u201ctake off on its own and re-design itself at an ever increasing rate.\u201d He added that human beings \u201cwho are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn\u2019t compete, and would be superseded.\u201d<\/h5>\nTom Leonard in the Daily Mail<\/em> concludes on an ominous note<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\n\u201cMeanwhile, in a riposte to the prophets of doom, Silicon Valley optimists point out that our ancestors made similar apocalyptic predictions when the steam engine was invented.<\/h5>\nBut there is one crucial difference \u2014 AI isn\u2019t just offering to do our physical work for us, it\u2019s also threatening to think for us.<\/h5>\nTime will tell whether our great-grandchildren will have a place on this planet or if it will be ruled by robots, humanity going the same way as the dinosaurs.\u201d<\/h5>\nWILL \u00a0ROBOTS \u00a0DESTROY \u00a0US?<\/h3>\n![\"AI](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/AI-could-spell-the-end-of-the-human-race.jpg\")
<\/a><\/h3>\n\u201cArtificial Intelligence could spell the end of the human race.\u201d<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u2014 Professor Stephen Hawking<\/strong><\/h4>\nElon Musk has now called for an outright ban on killer robots<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, leading 116 experts from 26 nations who have just issued a joint statement: \u201cWe do not have long to act. Once this Pandora\u2019s box is opened, it will be hard to close.\u201d<\/h5>\n
Tom Leonard writes<\/a><\/strong><\/span> in the Daily Mail<\/em>:<\/h5>\nSilicon Valley is quaking. Two of the technology world\u2019s biggest beasts are at war over the future of mankind, disagreeing fundamentally about whether humans will one day be taken over by robots and even exterminated from our planet.<\/strong><\/h5>\nAt the centre of their dispute is so-called Artificial Intelligence (AI) \u2014 the term which describes the development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence. These tasks include skills such as visual perception, speech recognition and translation between languages.<\/h5>\nElon Musk [however] and many of the world\u2019s most respected scientists and computer engineers \u2014 including brilliant British minds such as Professor Stephen Hawking and Lord Rees, the former president of the Royal Society \u2014 believe there may be a terrible price to pay if we let machines think for us.<\/h5>\nThey fear a digital-led Armageddon in which super-intelligent computers soon out-think humans.<\/h5>\nScience fiction could become science fact when machines that have no concept of human values autonomously decide that our presence is a barrier to their own development and that human beings should be got rid of.<\/h5>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nOn one side of the AI argument is Mark Zuckerberg (left), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook. On the other is Elon Musk (right), inventor of internet pay system PayPal, creator of Tesla electric cars and the pioneer behind an initiative to bring cheap space travel to the masses.<\/strong><\/h5>\nThere is now a growing disagreement apparently between these two schools of thought \u2014 the \u201crobot optimists\u201d and the \u201crobot pessimists\u201d \u2014 about the future of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The big undecided question is: are intelligent machines going to be good for us in the long run or bad for us, a blessing or a curse?<\/h5>\nMy own view, for what it is worth, is that AI will be both a blessing and a curse<\/em> \u2014 exactly like the internet. The internet is a blessing for those who use it properly and responsibly, but it is an unmitigated curse for those who misuse it: for example, for the millions of adults, including increasing numbers of women and children now, who spend every free moment watching hard addictive pornography and engaging in compulsive masturbation round the clock. The inventors of the internet can hardly have imagined the Pandora\u2019s Box of evils they were about to unloose.<\/h5>\nMark Zuckerberg is one of the optimists. He sees only the bright side, refusing to admit that anything evil could emerge from the Pandora\u2019s Box of Artificial Intelligence.\u00a0The world\u2019s fifth richest person, Zuckerberg recently ticked off the \u201cnaysayers\u201d for hyping up \u201cdoomsday scenarios\u201d about robotics. \u201cI think this is pretty irresponsible,\u201d he said.<\/h5>\nElon Musk, who has lived longer than Zuckerberg and acquired a pessimistic streak, responded lugubriously on Twitter: \u201cI\u2019ve talked to Mark Zuckerberg about this. His understanding of the subject is limited.\u201d<\/h5>\nZuckerberg, now aged 33, thirteen years younger than Musk and still bouncing with the joie de vivre<\/em> of youth, will have none of this gloomy thinking. Having turned Facebook into one of the world\u2019s most powerful media businesses, connecting two billion people, Zuckerberg is nobody\u2019s fool. His faith in Artificial Intelligence is so fervent that he even has a robot butler to look after him and his nuclear family \u2014 comprising his wife, Dr Priscilla Chan, and his daughter Max. The robot butler, who is at the family\u2019s beck and call 24\/7, is called Jarvis and would certainly give PG Wodehouse\u2019s Jeeves a run for his money. Zuckerberg spent 100 hours building Jarvis last year. He even managed to persuade Hollywood star Morgan Freeman to provide Jarvis\u2019s fruity voice.<\/h5>\nNeedless to say, Jarvis is brilliant in a way that would have put Jeeves to shame. Jarvis, whom Zuckerberg can order about through text or voice command, is highly proficient in turning on the house lights and dimming bulbs to perfection. He can change music, make toast, recognize callers at the gate and tell them to go away if he doesn\u2019t approve of them. Better still, he can even wake up little Maxie in the morning and deliver a lesson in Mandarin Chinese to the elite little girl as she sips her Brazilian coffee and tucks away her scrambled eggs.. A robot to die for!<\/h5>\nElon Musk comes from another demension. Reportedly worth $16 billion, the 46-year-old South African workaholic is noted for developing PayPal. Every time you use PayPal, you put money into Musk\u2019s pocket. Musk is mad about space travel and would like to be the first man on Mars. He wants to colonize the Red Planet, hoping to build a Utopia in Outer Space. This is because he isn\u2019t too pleased with the way things are going on Planet Earth.<\/h5>\nAccording to the Daily Mail<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\nMusk is preparing for a future world where, he fears, super-intelligent machines might move to subjugate the human population. His latest venture is Neuralink, a way of merging human brains with computers by implanting tiny electrodes. These would massively increase people\u2019s cognitive power, he believes, and so might at least put humanity more on a par with Artificial Intelligence.<\/h5>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nSUPER-INTELLIGENT \u00a0CYBORG<\/strong>
\nHALF MAN, HALF MACHINE<\/strong>
\n(IQ \u00a01000<\/a><\/span>)<\/strong><\/h3>\nAn IQ of 1000<\/span>, <\/strong><\/a>incidentally, \u00a0has often been mentioned as achievable for genetically engineered human beings in the near future. These supergeniuses may initially have electrodes implanted in their brains. Or they may be robots who are half man and half machine and possess consciousness \u2014 though their consciousness may be dependant on their power supply. Switch them off and they will be \u201cdead\u201d, but no more dead than human beings are dead while unconscious under deep anaesthesia or artificially induced hibernation. Switch them on again and they will \u201cawake\u201d from deep sleep and resume all the normal functions and activities associated with everyday life.<\/h5>\nThese cyborgs, or fully conscious humanoid robots, will not only be super-intelligent but physically perfect: strong, beautiful to look at, disease free. Most human beings, it is widely believed, will find them sexually irresistible and even fall deeply in love with them, preferring them to other human beings for efficient, hassle-free relationships. This is not controversial but has often been noted in the literature of robotics. If also forms the staple of science fiction in which super-intelligent humanoid robots may wish to keep human beings as pets \u2014 or even as sex slaves.<\/h5>\nI remember in my childhood reading a gripping Science Fiction yarn, translated from the French, in which a beautiful woman is kept in a golden cage like an exotic bird. She didn\u2019t seem to mind at all, any more than the average budgerigar would. She would spend all day lounging on a sofa, munching bonbons, watching TV, and admiring her flawless features in a jewelled hand mirror. In the evening, her owner would return from work and let her out of her cage for a bit of sportive sex. This is all the pretty airhead lived for, equipped with an exceptionally low IQ and a one-track mind in which sexual intercourse formed her one and only\u00a0raison d\u2019\u00eatre.<\/em><\/h5>\nBrave New World indeed!<\/h5>\n\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\nLet\u2019s now consider IQ levels briefly<\/strong>, beginning with the lowest IQs and ending with the highest. I would like to start by considering the IQ levels of various smart animals and offer a tentative answer to the question: \u201cAre there any really clever animals who are smarter than the dumbest human beings?\u201d Well, it\u2019s not very easy calculating the IQ levels of various animals, though I found this article of some interest: Calculating Animal Intelligence<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. One thing can be said with certainty. If there\u2019s any animal out there with an IQ of 20, that animal should step forward and claim equality with the dumbest human beings. It turns out that your average \u201cVillage Idiot\u201d has an IQ of 20 and under.<\/h5>\nAccording to an old British legal statute, an \u201cidiot\u201d is an individual with an IQ of less than 20, an \u201cimbecile\u201d has an IQ of between 20 and 49, and a \u201cmoron\u201d an IQ between 50 and 69. (See here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>).<\/h5>\nIt would appear that many African nations have IQs in the 60-69 range. So technically speaking they can be classified as \u201cmorons\u201d. \u00a0Whether unpalatable facts like this should be suppressed in the interests of social harmony is an ethical question beyond my competence. So I will leave this to one side and apologize sincerely if the figures below give offense to the politically correct.<\/h5>\nThe two lowest IQ nations are Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome which have an average IQ of 59. It doesn\u2019t get any lower. Nations with an IQ level of 60-69 are the following: \u00a0Angola (69), Benin (69), Burkina Faso (65), Central African Republic (68), Congo\/Zaire (65), Djibouti (68), Eritrea (68), Ethiopia (63), Gabon (66), Gambia (64), Liberia (64), Mali (68), Nigeria (67), Senegal (64), Sierra Leone (64), Somalia (68), Togo (69), Zimbabwe (66). (See this chart<\/a><\/strong>).<\/h5>\nGiven that millions of so-called \u201crefugees\u201d from the above low-IQ countries are being let into Europe right now in an endless and unstoppable tide, we can expect a drastic fall in the general IQ level of Europeans in the next 50 years or so as miscegenation and dysgenics take hold. See this excellent articles on the perils of multiculturalism and uncontrolled mass immigration: White Genocide by Design: The Role of the Mass Media in the Destruction of the European Peop<\/a>le<\/a><\/span>. \u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\nA handy reference tool to IQ levels:<\/h5>\nLess than 20 : Idiots.<\/strong>
\n20-49 : Imbeciles.<\/strong>
\n50-69 : Morons (feeble-minded).<\/strong>
\n70-80 : Subnormally intelligent or \u201cretarded\u201d.\u00a0<\/strong>
\n80-90 : Dull-witted or \u201cslow\u201d.<\/strong>
\n90-100 : Borderline average, not too \u201cbright\u201d.<\/strong>
\n100-110 : Efficiently average, \u201cbright enough\u201d.<\/strong>
\n110-120 : Superior intelligence.<\/strong>
\n120-140 : Highly intelligent.<\/strong>
\n132 and above : within the top 2% of the population.<\/strong>
\n140-plus : Near-genius level.<\/strong>
\n150-plus : Genius.<\/strong><\/h5>\nA handful of supergeniuses have broken through the 200-IQ barrier but none except one has ever pierced beyond 230. \u00a0Jewish novelist Edith Stern\u00a0is reputed to have had an IQ of 200+. American mathematician Terence Tau, who is of Chinese origin, has an IQ of 230, one of the highest ever recorded. In comparison, chess master Gary Kasparov\u00a0had a relatively low IQ of 194. This was considerably higher than Albert Einstein\u2019s IQ score of 160; which is also shared by Stephen Hawking. An 11-year-old Jewish girl, Kashmea Wahi, has recently beaten both Einstein and Hawking and achieved an IQ score of 162. (See her picture<\/strong><\/a><\/span>). Indian schoolboy Rahul Doshi, age 12, also with an IQ of 162, won the recent \u2018Child Genius\u2019 competition on British TV\u2019s Channel 4, galloping home with a score of 100 per cent in earlier rounds. He was not only able to reel off \u00a0the Latin names of various fruits and vegetables but managed to give the exact order of 52 randomly shuffled playing cards after being handed the pack and asked to memorize the order. No other contestant was able to get beyond the first few cards. Here he is<\/span>, <\/a><\/strong>the boy genius with his proud parents.<\/h5>\n\u201cThe highest IQ ever recorded,\u201d we are told<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, \u201cis of\u00a0William James Sidis (pictured<\/a><\/strong><\/span>) with an IQ score between 250-300. At the age of 5, he could use a typewriter and had learned to speak Latin, Greek, Russian, French, German and Hebrew. (As an adult, he spoke 40 languages fluently). He was denied admission to Harvard at the age of 6 because he was called too emotionally immature. Later, at age 11, they were forced to admit him, after which he gave his well-received first lecture on 4-dimensional physics.\u201d<\/h5>\nIt needs to be said here that high IQ levels do not guarantee spectacular achievements in the arts and sciences. Many supergeniuses have lived and died in the shadows without making any notable contribution to society. Most of the big achievers have not had IQs much higher than 160 (Einstein and Steven Hawking). Indeed, the greatest scientific achievement of all time has often been credited to Charles Darwin for his Theory of Evolution; and yet, ironically, Darwin was regarded as little better than a dunce while at school and university. His father thought he was a complete wastrel at one stage, fit only for the idle life of \u00a0country squire. The great Victorian scientist, Sir Francis Galton, known for his work on eugenics, actually thought Darwin\u2019s brother Erasmus \u2014 who achieved nothing \u2014 was far cleverer than Darwin. That tells you something.<\/h5>\nStephen Hsu, Vice-President for Research and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Michigan State University, thinks we\u2019ll soon be able to engineer humans that make Einstein look like Goofus<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.<\/h5>\n\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\nBack to Elon Musk.<\/h5>\nMusk is filled with foreboding. He thinks that smart machines will lead inevitably to the enslavement of the human race. If not worse: extinction. Musk doesn\u2019t mince his words. Artificial Intelligence, he says, will be mankind\u2019s \u201cbiggest existential threat\u201d. And going ahead with it would be like \u201csummoning the demon\u201d.<\/h5>\nMusk\u2019s concern is shared by many other big hitters, including Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom.<\/h5>\nIn a brilliant, theoretical illustration of the problem, Bostrom [pictured here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>] has outlined how a super-intelligent machine which has been programmed to make paperclips could keep re-designing itself to become ever more intelligent and ever more efficient in creating paperclips. Before long, it could turn huge areas of the Earth into paperclip factories.<\/h5>\nAware that a human could switch it off, threatening the endless paperclip supply and therefore the reason for its existence, the machine could decide that humans had to be exterminated.<\/h5>\nChillingly, Bostrom goes on to question if human civilisation could survive no matter what goal you gave a super-intelligent machine. His conclusion? We\u2019d need to be very<\/em> careful what we ask them to do. (See here<\/a><\/strong><\/span>)<\/h5>\nTheoretical physicist Stephen Hawking is in complete agreement with Bostrom and Elon Musk about the need for caution. He\u00a0went further in his pessimism when he issued a dire warning that Artificial Intelligence \u201ccould spell the end of the human race.\u201d Artificial Intelligence, he predicted,\u00a0would \u201ctake off on its own and re-design itself at an ever increasing rate.\u201d He added that human beings \u201cwho are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn\u2019t compete, and would be superseded.\u201d<\/h5>\nTom Leonard in the Daily Mail<\/em> concludes on an ominous note<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\n\u201cMeanwhile, in a riposte to the prophets of doom, Silicon Valley optimists point out that our ancestors made similar apocalyptic predictions when the steam engine was invented.<\/h5>\nBut there is one crucial difference \u2014 AI isn\u2019t just offering to do our physical work for us, it\u2019s also threatening to think for us.<\/h5>\nTime will tell whether our great-grandchildren will have a place on this planet or if it will be ruled by robots, humanity going the same way as the dinosaurs.\u201d<\/h5>\nWILL \u00a0ROBOTS \u00a0DESTROY \u00a0US?<\/h3>\n<\/a><\/h3>\n\u201cArtificial Intelligence could spell the end of the human race.\u201d<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u2014 Professor Stephen Hawking<\/strong><\/h4>\nElon Musk has now called for an outright ban on killer robots<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, leading 116 experts from 26 nations who have just issued a joint statement: \u201cWe do not have long to act. Once this Pandora\u2019s box is opened, it will be hard to close.\u201d<\/h5>\n
At the centre of their dispute is so-called Artificial Intelligence (AI) \u2014 the term which describes the development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence. These tasks include skills such as visual perception, speech recognition and translation between languages.<\/h5>\nElon Musk [however] and many of the world\u2019s most respected scientists and computer engineers \u2014 including brilliant British minds such as Professor Stephen Hawking and Lord Rees, the former president of the Royal Society \u2014 believe there may be a terrible price to pay if we let machines think for us.<\/h5>\nThey fear a digital-led Armageddon in which super-intelligent computers soon out-think humans.<\/h5>\nScience fiction could become science fact when machines that have no concept of human values autonomously decide that our presence is a barrier to their own development and that human beings should be got rid of.<\/h5>\n
They fear a digital-led Armageddon in which super-intelligent computers soon out-think humans.<\/h5>\nScience fiction could become science fact when machines that have no concept of human values autonomously decide that our presence is a barrier to their own development and that human beings should be got rid of.<\/h5>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nOn one side of the AI argument is Mark Zuckerberg (left), co-founder and chief executive of Facebook. On the other is Elon Musk (right), inventor of internet pay system PayPal, creator of Tesla electric cars and the pioneer behind an initiative to bring cheap space travel to the masses.<\/strong><\/h5>\n
There is now a growing disagreement apparently between these two schools of thought \u2014 the \u201crobot optimists\u201d and the \u201crobot pessimists\u201d \u2014 about the future of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The big undecided question is: are intelligent machines going to be good for us in the long run or bad for us, a blessing or a curse?<\/h5>\n
My own view, for what it is worth, is that AI will be both a blessing and a curse<\/em> \u2014 exactly like the internet. The internet is a blessing for those who use it properly and responsibly, but it is an unmitigated curse for those who misuse it: for example, for the millions of adults, including increasing numbers of women and children now, who spend every free moment watching hard addictive pornography and engaging in compulsive masturbation round the clock. The inventors of the internet can hardly have imagined the Pandora\u2019s Box of evils they were about to unloose.<\/h5>\n
Mark Zuckerberg is one of the optimists. He sees only the bright side, refusing to admit that anything evil could emerge from the Pandora\u2019s Box of Artificial Intelligence.\u00a0The world\u2019s fifth richest person, Zuckerberg recently ticked off the \u201cnaysayers\u201d for hyping up \u201cdoomsday scenarios\u201d about robotics. \u201cI think this is pretty irresponsible,\u201d he said.<\/h5>\n
Elon Musk, who has lived longer than Zuckerberg and acquired a pessimistic streak, responded lugubriously on Twitter: \u201cI\u2019ve talked to Mark Zuckerberg about this. His understanding of the subject is limited.\u201d<\/h5>\n
Zuckerberg, now aged 33, thirteen years younger than Musk and still bouncing with the joie de vivre<\/em> of youth, will have none of this gloomy thinking. Having turned Facebook into one of the world\u2019s most powerful media businesses, connecting two billion people, Zuckerberg is nobody\u2019s fool. His faith in Artificial Intelligence is so fervent that he even has a robot butler to look after him and his nuclear family \u2014 comprising his wife, Dr Priscilla Chan, and his daughter Max. The robot butler, who is at the family\u2019s beck and call 24\/7, is called Jarvis and would certainly give PG Wodehouse\u2019s Jeeves a run for his money. Zuckerberg spent 100 hours building Jarvis last year. He even managed to persuade Hollywood star Morgan Freeman to provide Jarvis\u2019s fruity voice.<\/h5>\n
Needless to say, Jarvis is brilliant in a way that would have put Jeeves to shame. Jarvis, whom Zuckerberg can order about through text or voice command, is highly proficient in turning on the house lights and dimming bulbs to perfection. He can change music, make toast, recognize callers at the gate and tell them to go away if he doesn\u2019t approve of them. Better still, he can even wake up little Maxie in the morning and deliver a lesson in Mandarin Chinese to the elite little girl as she sips her Brazilian coffee and tucks away her scrambled eggs.. A robot to die for!<\/h5>\n
Elon Musk comes from another demension. Reportedly worth $16 billion, the 46-year-old South African workaholic is noted for developing PayPal. Every time you use PayPal, you put money into Musk\u2019s pocket. Musk is mad about space travel and would like to be the first man on Mars. He wants to colonize the Red Planet, hoping to build a Utopia in Outer Space. This is because he isn\u2019t too pleased with the way things are going on Planet Earth.<\/h5>\n
According to the Daily Mail<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\n
Musk is preparing for a future world where, he fears, super-intelligent machines might move to subjugate the human population. His latest venture is Neuralink, a way of merging human brains with computers by implanting tiny electrodes. These would massively increase people\u2019s cognitive power, he believes, and so might at least put humanity more on a par with Artificial Intelligence.<\/h5>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nSUPER-INTELLIGENT \u00a0CYBORG<\/strong>
\nHALF MAN, HALF MACHINE<\/strong>
\n(IQ \u00a01000<\/a><\/span>)<\/strong><\/h3>\nAn IQ of 1000<\/span>, <\/strong><\/a>incidentally, \u00a0has often been mentioned as achievable for genetically engineered human beings in the near future. These supergeniuses may initially have electrodes implanted in their brains. Or they may be robots who are half man and half machine and possess consciousness \u2014 though their consciousness may be dependant on their power supply. Switch them off and they will be \u201cdead\u201d, but no more dead than human beings are dead while unconscious under deep anaesthesia or artificially induced hibernation. Switch them on again and they will \u201cawake\u201d from deep sleep and resume all the normal functions and activities associated with everyday life.<\/h5>\n
These cyborgs, or fully conscious humanoid robots, will not only be super-intelligent but physically perfect: strong, beautiful to look at, disease free. Most human beings, it is widely believed, will find them sexually irresistible and even fall deeply in love with them, preferring them to other human beings for efficient, hassle-free relationships. This is not controversial but has often been noted in the literature of robotics. If also forms the staple of science fiction in which super-intelligent humanoid robots may wish to keep human beings as pets \u2014 or even as sex slaves.<\/h5>\n
I remember in my childhood reading a gripping Science Fiction yarn, translated from the French, in which a beautiful woman is kept in a golden cage like an exotic bird. She didn\u2019t seem to mind at all, any more than the average budgerigar would. She would spend all day lounging on a sofa, munching bonbons, watching TV, and admiring her flawless features in a jewelled hand mirror. In the evening, her owner would return from work and let her out of her cage for a bit of sportive sex. This is all the pretty airhead lived for, equipped with an exceptionally low IQ and a one-track mind in which sexual intercourse formed her one and only\u00a0raison d\u2019\u00eatre.<\/em><\/h5>\n
Brave New World indeed!<\/h5>\n
\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\n
Let\u2019s now consider IQ levels briefly<\/strong>, beginning with the lowest IQs and ending with the highest. I would like to start by considering the IQ levels of various smart animals and offer a tentative answer to the question: \u201cAre there any really clever animals who are smarter than the dumbest human beings?\u201d Well, it\u2019s not very easy calculating the IQ levels of various animals, though I found this article of some interest: Calculating Animal Intelligence<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. One thing can be said with certainty. If there\u2019s any animal out there with an IQ of 20, that animal should step forward and claim equality with the dumbest human beings. It turns out that your average \u201cVillage Idiot\u201d has an IQ of 20 and under.<\/h5>\n
According to an old British legal statute, an \u201cidiot\u201d is an individual with an IQ of less than 20, an \u201cimbecile\u201d has an IQ of between 20 and 49, and a \u201cmoron\u201d an IQ between 50 and 69. (See here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>).<\/h5>\n
It would appear that many African nations have IQs in the 60-69 range. So technically speaking they can be classified as \u201cmorons\u201d. \u00a0Whether unpalatable facts like this should be suppressed in the interests of social harmony is an ethical question beyond my competence. So I will leave this to one side and apologize sincerely if the figures below give offense to the politically correct.<\/h5>\n
The two lowest IQ nations are Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome which have an average IQ of 59. It doesn\u2019t get any lower. Nations with an IQ level of 60-69 are the following: \u00a0Angola (69), Benin (69), Burkina Faso (65), Central African Republic (68), Congo\/Zaire (65), Djibouti (68), Eritrea (68), Ethiopia (63), Gabon (66), Gambia (64), Liberia (64), Mali (68), Nigeria (67), Senegal (64), Sierra Leone (64), Somalia (68), Togo (69), Zimbabwe (66). (See this chart<\/a><\/strong>).<\/h5>\n
Given that millions of so-called \u201crefugees\u201d from the above low-IQ countries are being let into Europe right now in an endless and unstoppable tide, we can expect a drastic fall in the general IQ level of Europeans in the next 50 years or so as miscegenation and dysgenics take hold. See this excellent articles on the perils of multiculturalism and uncontrolled mass immigration: White Genocide by Design: The Role of the Mass Media in the Destruction of the European Peop<\/a>le<\/a><\/span>. \u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\n
A handy reference tool to IQ levels:<\/h5>\n
Less than 20 : Idiots.<\/strong>
\n20-49 : Imbeciles.<\/strong>
\n50-69 : Morons (feeble-minded).<\/strong>
\n70-80 : Subnormally intelligent or \u201cretarded\u201d.\u00a0<\/strong>
\n80-90 : Dull-witted or \u201cslow\u201d.<\/strong>
\n90-100 : Borderline average, not too \u201cbright\u201d.<\/strong>
\n100-110 : Efficiently average, \u201cbright enough\u201d.<\/strong>
\n110-120 : Superior intelligence.<\/strong>
\n120-140 : Highly intelligent.<\/strong>
\n132 and above : within the top 2% of the population.<\/strong>
\n140-plus : Near-genius level.<\/strong>
\n150-plus : Genius.<\/strong><\/h5>\nA handful of supergeniuses have broken through the 200-IQ barrier but none except one has ever pierced beyond 230. \u00a0Jewish novelist Edith Stern\u00a0is reputed to have had an IQ of 200+. American mathematician Terence Tau, who is of Chinese origin, has an IQ of 230, one of the highest ever recorded. In comparison, chess master Gary Kasparov\u00a0had a relatively low IQ of 194. This was considerably higher than Albert Einstein\u2019s IQ score of 160; which is also shared by Stephen Hawking. An 11-year-old Jewish girl, Kashmea Wahi, has recently beaten both Einstein and Hawking and achieved an IQ score of 162. (See her picture<\/strong><\/a><\/span>). Indian schoolboy Rahul Doshi, age 12, also with an IQ of 162, won the recent \u2018Child Genius\u2019 competition on British TV\u2019s Channel 4, galloping home with a score of 100 per cent in earlier rounds. He was not only able to reel off \u00a0the Latin names of various fruits and vegetables but managed to give the exact order of 52 randomly shuffled playing cards after being handed the pack and asked to memorize the order. No other contestant was able to get beyond the first few cards. Here he is<\/span>, <\/a><\/strong>the boy genius with his proud parents.<\/h5>\n
\u201cThe highest IQ ever recorded,\u201d we are told<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, \u201cis of\u00a0William James Sidis (pictured<\/a><\/strong><\/span>) with an IQ score between 250-300. At the age of 5, he could use a typewriter and had learned to speak Latin, Greek, Russian, French, German and Hebrew. (As an adult, he spoke 40 languages fluently). He was denied admission to Harvard at the age of 6 because he was called too emotionally immature. Later, at age 11, they were forced to admit him, after which he gave his well-received first lecture on 4-dimensional physics.\u201d<\/h5>\n
It needs to be said here that high IQ levels do not guarantee spectacular achievements in the arts and sciences. Many supergeniuses have lived and died in the shadows without making any notable contribution to society. Most of the big achievers have not had IQs much higher than 160 (Einstein and Steven Hawking). Indeed, the greatest scientific achievement of all time has often been credited to Charles Darwin for his Theory of Evolution; and yet, ironically, Darwin was regarded as little better than a dunce while at school and university. His father thought he was a complete wastrel at one stage, fit only for the idle life of \u00a0country squire. The great Victorian scientist, Sir Francis Galton, known for his work on eugenics, actually thought Darwin\u2019s brother Erasmus \u2014 who achieved nothing \u2014 was far cleverer than Darwin. That tells you something.<\/h5>\n
Stephen Hsu, Vice-President for Research and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Michigan State University, thinks we\u2019ll soon be able to engineer humans that make Einstein look like Goofus<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.<\/h5>\n
\u2014 \u00a0 \u00a7 \u00a0 \u2014<\/h5>\n
Back to Elon Musk.<\/h5>\n
Musk is filled with foreboding. He thinks that smart machines will lead inevitably to the enslavement of the human race. If not worse: extinction. Musk doesn\u2019t mince his words. Artificial Intelligence, he says, will be mankind\u2019s \u201cbiggest existential threat\u201d. And going ahead with it would be like \u201csummoning the demon\u201d.<\/h5>\n
Musk\u2019s concern is shared by many other big hitters, including Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom.<\/h5>\n
In a brilliant, theoretical illustration of the problem, Bostrom [pictured here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>] has outlined how a super-intelligent machine which has been programmed to make paperclips could keep re-designing itself to become ever more intelligent and ever more efficient in creating paperclips. Before long, it could turn huge areas of the Earth into paperclip factories.<\/h5>\n
Aware that a human could switch it off, threatening the endless paperclip supply and therefore the reason for its existence, the machine could decide that humans had to be exterminated.<\/h5>\n
Chillingly, Bostrom goes on to question if human civilisation could survive no matter what goal you gave a super-intelligent machine. His conclusion? We\u2019d need to be very<\/em> careful what we ask them to do. (See here<\/a><\/strong><\/span>)<\/h5>\n
Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking is in complete agreement with Bostrom and Elon Musk about the need for caution. He\u00a0went further in his pessimism when he issued a dire warning that Artificial Intelligence \u201ccould spell the end of the human race.\u201d Artificial Intelligence, he predicted,\u00a0would \u201ctake off on its own and re-design itself at an ever increasing rate.\u201d He added that human beings \u201cwho are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn\u2019t compete, and would be superseded.\u201d<\/h5>\n
Tom Leonard in the Daily Mail<\/em> concludes on an ominous note<\/a><\/strong><\/span>:<\/h5>\n
\u201cMeanwhile, in a riposte to the prophets of doom, Silicon Valley optimists point out that our ancestors made similar apocalyptic predictions when the steam engine was invented.<\/h5>\n
But there is one crucial difference \u2014 AI isn\u2019t just offering to do our physical work for us, it\u2019s also threatening to think for us.<\/h5>\n
Time will tell whether our great-grandchildren will have a place on this planet or if it will be ruled by robots, humanity going the same way as the dinosaurs.\u201d<\/h5>\n
WILL \u00a0ROBOTS \u00a0DESTROY \u00a0US?<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/h3>\n\u201cArtificial Intelligence could spell the end of the human race.\u201d<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u2014 Professor Stephen Hawking<\/strong><\/h4>\nElon Musk has now called for an outright ban on killer robots<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, leading 116 experts from 26 nations who have just issued a joint statement: \u201cWe do not have long to act. Once this Pandora\u2019s box is opened, it will be hard to close.\u201d<\/h5>\n