Getting the ball rolling. Which VB6 projects are you working on?

yeah. its a problem.
theres no 16bit emulator, instead we need to run it using a virtual machine.
but a 32bit windows can run 16bit applications. and a 64bit windows can run 32bit
when we get 128bit (or whatever next) maybe 32bit will be out or reach.
so until than it will not be a problem to run 32bit.
and the problems will just be some old ocx/dll that are not updated and obsolete.

I have answered this many times in the past.
when VB6 stop working, it will be the day, all 32bit will stop working. and that include everything made in 32bit. all the tools we have, theres TONS of that. its nothing microsoft just want to stop supporting.

I hope by than, TB will be up and running for everybody where we can just update our projects to use 64bit.

I don't think we will see mass adoption of 128 bit processors in our lifetimes, if ever. This is one of these things where you have ever diminishing returns. Moving from 16 bit to 32 bit is far more drastic than moving from 64 bit to 128 bits. I don't think we're anywhere close to exhausting the limits of what a 64 bit processor offers so it will be a while before humanity is thinking about going to 128 bits.

yeah. I feel like u Niya. its quite unlikely we move to 128bit soon.
gpu is another thing, so they will just care to increase gpu in the near future further away. are theres limits for gpu as well?
for cpu 64bit is good enough.
hardware advancement is not just bits. its how small they can make the microchips.
new cables, optimizing the voltages, smaller components needs less energy to work,
so its a balance, while the bits its just the addresses. how wide do we really need it to be?

Soon? Of course not... but in the lifetime of people alive today? I think any prediction of technology 50+ years out runs a big risk of seeming as naive as the ones from 50 years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baka

yeah. I feel like u Niya. its quite unlikely we move to 128bit soon.
gpu is another thing, so they will just care to increase gpu in the near future further away. are theres limits for gpu as well?
for cpu 64bit is good enough.
hardware advancement is not just bits. its how small they can make the microchips.
new cables, optimizing the voltages, smaller components needs less energy to work,
so its a balance, while the bits its just the addresses. how wide do we really need it to be?

---

Yea, exactly. Also, I get the feeling it's more likely some of the fundamentals of computing will change long before we mass-adopt 128 bit processors. Think quantum computing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fafalone

Soon? Of course not... but in the lifetime of people alive today? I think any prediction of technology 50+ years out runs a big risk of seeming as naive as the ones from 50 years ago.

---

But it is fun to wonder is it not...

I think the OS in an OS should be work for ever. So an old program can be run in a virtual OS. The problem will be for those applications which need to found and use resources or data from internet, using the old http protocol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baka

yeah. its a problem.
theres no 16bit emulator, instead we need to run it using a virtual machine.
but a 32bit windows can run 16bit applications. and a 64bit windows can run 32bit
when we get 128bit (or whatever next) maybe 32bit will be out or reach.
so until than it will not be a problem to run 32bit.

---

At the moment there isn't likely to be a drive beyond 64-bit for a long time, moving from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by the need to get away from the horrible segmented architecture of 16-bit apps only being able to access memory in 64K blocks (if you have never had to deal with code involving near / far pointers you have no idea how bad this could get)

The move from 32-bit to 64-bit was driven by the need to remove the 4Gb Ram limit (effectively 2G or 3G usable by an app), 64-bit theoretically has a limit of around 16 exabytes (about 16 billion Gigabytes) so this isn't an immediate limit we are likely to hit.

Sooner or later 32-bit will gradually fade away, I remember the initial move to 32-bit, 16-bit compatibility and support was a major consideration; these days it is almost never a consideration outside of some specialist areas. The same will happen to 32-bit software as 64-bit becomes more and more the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by georgekar

I think the OS in an OS should be work for ever. So an old program can be run in a virtual OS.

---

There will always be a way...

Re: Getting the ball rolling. Which VB6 projects are you working on?

One of the things I am doing is participating in ReactOS, if only in a minor fashion. One of the main perceived uses for ReactOS, it is known to be useful as a future vehicle for legacy apps. You may run your app with a bundled operating system customised to your specific app requirements.

The concept of bundling a windows-alike o/s with your program is an interesting one. It always polarises opinions.

https://www.vbforums.com/images/ieimages/2023/01/9.jpg

ReactOS running on real metal, in this case a Dell latitude CPi D300XT, Pentium ii MMX,
128mb of ram and a Neomagic 2D accelerator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PlausiblyDamp

That potentially makes the problem not just an unsupported application environment but now an unsupported application environment on an unsupported OS - this could simply be against the rules if you require certain forms of accreditation regarding security etc.

Running an unsupported OS is rarely a good move these days, the lack of security updates alone can make this a problem for any system connected to the internet.


For anyone outside of Microsoft's OS division we are only guessing at how hard or not supporting the VB6 runtime on a modern OS is, obviously it is currently considered worth the effort as they are still supporting it. Sooner or later though they may need to remove legacy functionality from the OS that the VB6 runtime depends on... 32bit support will eventually go away... There is a finite lifetime for all things in IT and any tool or language we use will eventually stop being supported.

---

True.....but I know of at least one commercial broadcast company (6 stations in total, 4 FM & 2 AM) in which their entire automation and programming systems are still using Windows 2000 and there is no good reason whatsoever for them to upgrade. It works, it is ultra stable, software still functions perfectly, still suits their needs. All of their transmitter monitoring & control software is written in VB6. But said systems are not connected to the internet. They have machines in the offices for that. Ditto for a local sawmill.....most of their operation is still run on embedded Win2K boxes and much of the software was custom written in VB6 and still going strong.

If Microsoft suddenly dropped VB6 runtime support, I'm pretty sure that there would be many, many more such cases.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SomeYguy

True...but I know of at least one commercial broadcast company ...
If Microsoft suddenly dropped VB6 runtime support, I'm pretty sure that there would be many, many more such cases.

---

That's partially my business, re-building and migrating legacy VMS apps onto modern hardware. So, the above scenario is fully understood and appreciated. One of my reasons for building on Win7 is because it is stable complete with a known UI, whereas Win11 is just - not. Testing is poor on Win11 and the UI is subject to continual change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

One of the things I am doing is participating in ReactOS, if only in a minor fashion.

---

I've known people who participated in Bitcoin in a miner fashion, but not in ReactOS. I've paid a modest amount of attention to that OS over the years. It seems like a good idea, in general, though not a particularly publicized idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I've known people who participated in Bitcoin in a miner fashion, but not in ReactOS. I've paid a modest amount of attention to that OS over the years. It seems like a good idea, in general, though not a particularly publicized idea.

---

I'd agree with that. They are all dedicated developers and almost by nature they distrust anyone trying to manage, promote or market their concept. Stepping into that team with a shiny suit and holding a clipboard is akin to suicide. You can just look here at this forum to see an analogue of a similar developer grouping. :wave:

Whether they meant to create this or not, the primary aim of ReactOS at the moment is to create developers that want to learn how to build, analyse, document and investigate Windows itself, creating competent Windows o/s level developers.

As a training tool it serves this purpose. This doesn't help potential users directly but it is a real life use.

Being positive about it, it is growing fast in the number of contributors and the low level interest it garners. If you want to 'use' it then you have lower your expectations.

Being even more positive, if I look back at the o/s and development scene ten years ago I could not imagine how close we'd be to a VB6 or Windows replacement. Both seemed an unrealistic desire.

Amazingly, both are making serious progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

I'd agree with that. They are all dedicated developers and almost by nature they distrust anyone trying to manage, promote or market their concept. Stepping into that team with a shiny suit and holding a clipboard is akin to suicide. You can just look here at this forum to see an analogue of a similar developer grouping. :wave:

Whether they meant to create this or not, the primary aim of ReactOS at the moment is to create developers that want to learn how to build, analyse, document and investigate Windows itself, creating competent Windows o/s level developers.

As a training tool it serves this purpose. This doesn't help potential users directly but it is a real life use.

Being positive about it, it is growing fast in the number of contributors and the low level interest it garners. If you want to 'use' it then you have lower your expectations.

Being even more positive, if I look back at the o/s and development scene ten years ago I could not imagine how close we'd be to a VB6 or Windows replacement. Both seemed an unrealistic desire.

Amazingly, both are making serious progress.

---

I think all of us are going to be in for a huge surprise when it comes to knowledge and effort intense grunt work related to works like ReactOS and keeping VB6 alive. I'd advise you guys to start paying attention to AIs like ChatGPT. People need to start taking AIs very seriously, especially programmers.

While I don't think they will replace programmers, I do 100% believe what it means to be a programmer will drastically change in the next few years. Being a programmer in the near future will mean only needing to understand the jargon and how things work conceptually so we will know exactly how to talk to AIs when we tell them the kind of programs to build for us.

90% of the reason efforts to keep VB6 alive is still being enthusiastically supported because of the number of large code bases out there in VB6 that are just too cumbersome to port. When AI makes it more widely feasible to reduces a year of work to a mere week, I believe that will kill all these efforts. Why maintain a large VB6 code base when you can have an AI rebuild a modern version of your application using whatever the latest development platform is in just a couple days.

The driving forces behind projects like ReactOS I believe would be affected in similar ways by the advancement of AIs.

I thought us "old school" programmers had more time, but I've been paying close attention to the current AI revolution and now firmly believe we have about 5 years left if so much, before our way of doing things is basically dead. Programmers of the near future won't care about learning how to actually code or inner workings of operating systems. Instead they would be learning how to write AI prompts.

I'm both sad and happy about this at the same time. Sad because now every out there script kiddie would be able to produce works of similar quality to those of an experienced programmer today. It will saturate the market. I'm happy because the massive productivity boost AI will usher in will now make it possible for programmers with big ideas to do it by themselves. It will allow some of us loners to compete with big houses that have the resources to run big teams of developers.

To keep the ball rolling, what are you doing to prevent this Niya?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

To keep the ball rolling, what are you doing to prevent this Niya?

---

Nothing is going to prevent this. Unless a nuclear war knocks humanity back about 20 years, this is happening and no one can stop it.

More importantly, I don't think we should.

I am keeping a ZX80 wrapped up in lead in the cellar - just in case.

lmao...:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

I am keeping a ZX80 wrapped up in lead in the cellar - just in case.

---

Are you wrapped in lead too?
Who will use the Z-80?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

90% of the reason efforts to keep VB6 alive is still being enthusiastically supported because of the number of large code bases out there in VB6 that are just too cumbersome to port. When AI makes it more widely feasible to reduces a year of work to a mere week, I believe that will kill all these efforts. Why maintain a large VB6 code base when you can have an AI rebuild a modern version of your application using whatever the latest development platform is in just a couple days.

---

Perhaps but not every individual or entity will want nor need to modernize their software. As the old saying goes, newer isn't always better and in many cases it isn't wanted or warranted unless needed new functionality can only be gained that way.

Going to be interesting indeed to see where AI goes with this. And you are quite right I'm sure that truly skilled programmers will be no more. Sad, really.

Along similar lines, what about the billions of lines of code written in VC++ 6.0? What about MFC apps? Same thing, going bye-bye?

Eventually the AI will kill us...(no reason to support us...for just some kw power)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SomeYguy

Perhaps but not every individual or entity will want nor need to modernize their software. As the old saying goes, newer isn't always better and in many cases it isn't wanted or warranted unless needed new functionality can only be gained that way.

---

That number will be even smaller than it is now, too small to make difference I fear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SomeYguy

Along similar lines, what about the billions of lines of code written in VC++ 6.0? What about MFC apps? Same thing, going bye-bye?

---

AI or not, programs have to be written in something and C has proven itself to be the one of the few true universal high level languages. Most likely old C and C++ code bases will be refactored using AI to make them better, faster or more modernized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

AI or not, programs have to be written in something and C has proven itself to be the one of the few true universal high level languages. Most likely old C and C++ code bases will be refactored using AI to make them better, faster or more modernized.

---

It is my opinion that C was imposed by some people preference or interest.
It didn't naturally won because it was good in nature.

Then, if the AI is going to develop or use a language understandable for humans, it must be something much better, probably more similar to Basic.
But if it only needs to be easy for machines, then ASM would be enough.

Or... I'm thinking in a third option, some language that could save time to machines, but not ASM or human understandable either.

But no, I don't see C in any scenario. Unless the AI is directed in that direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by georgekar

Eventually the AI will kill us...(no reason to support us...for just some kw power)

---

In fact, "reason"... it won't have reason for anything, you are thinking like it would be a human.

But no, humans have needs that have to be fulfilled, at different levels. If you feel hungry you need to eat, you need to get food. That's at a basic level, but at any level it works more or less like that.
You have feelings, passions... then it gets more complex. But at the end there are motivations that to a great extend they are "programmed" into the "hardware".

But a machine... what needs does it have? Why would it be "wanting" to do something (whatever)? (good or bad)

I've read the book Superintelligence from Bostrom that addresses these subjects.
There are no easy answers about what to do and how to deal with it.

I'm not sure what to think, but one logical thing to think is that this AI (or AIs) will be trained by its owners to work for them, programmed at some low level for those goals or "needs".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I'm not sure what to think, but one logical thing to think is that this AI (or AIs) will be trained by its owners to work for them, programmed at some low level for those goals or "needs".

---

Slave AIs -- sounds reasons and very human thing to do. Then centuries later we'll have AI slavery abolishment acts, pretty much history repeated.

A simple "solution" to the "AI control problem" is to make machines dependant on humans so that they not exterminate us. So a possible outcome of this reasoning is what happens in The Matrix movie -- thay are dependant on us for electricity (however redidculous this is) and so enslave billions of humans for their purposes (however rediculous this idea is on its own).

cheers,
</wqw>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wqweto

Slave AIs -- sounds reasons and very human thing to do. Then centuries later we'll have AI slavery abolishment acts, pretty much history repeated.

---

Centuries or months? There are already vegans claiming that animals should have the same rights as humans. There has been a case of someone thinking this for an AI already. (read here and here)

Look at this quote from the last link:

Quote:

---

Lemoine challenged LaMDA on Asimov’s third law, which states that robots should protect their own existence unless ordered by a human being or unless doing so would harm a human being. “The last one has always seemed like someone is building mechanical slaves,” said Lemoine.

---

I wonder if a calculator is a mechanical slave... and what about a computer running Windows 11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wqweto

A simple "solution" to the "AI control problem" is to make machines dependant on humans so that they not exterminate us. So a possible outcome of this reasoning is what happens in The Matrix movie -- thay are dependant on us for electricity (however redidculous this is) and so enslave billions of humans for their purposes (however rediculous this idea is on its own).

cheers,
</wqw>

---

Yes, but how? Even if we figure a way to do that, it could figure a way to get free of it. That's a problem with something so intelligent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

It is my opinion that C was imposed by some people preference or interest.
It didn't naturally won because it was good in nature.

Then, if the AI is going to develop or use a language understandable for humans, it must be something much better, probably more similar to Basic.
But if it only needs to be easy for machines, then ASM would be enough.

Or... I'm thinking in a third option, some language that could save time to machines, but not ASM or human understandable either.

But no, I don't see C in any scenario. Unless the AI is directed in that direction.

---

I agree with the sentiments here, however, my comments were directed towards the immediate future, lets say 5 to 10 years from now. I think this will still be an "AI assisted" age. The AIs will be doing all the heavy lifting but we will be the ones putting it all together and tweaking it by hand here and there. We'd still need to understand it somewhat hence our favorite languages aren't just going to disappear.

The one that really scares me about the far future is self-hosting AIs. AIs telling humans how to make themselves better or even better, doing it themselves. What do you guys think about that one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

The one that really scares me about the far future is self-hosting AIs. AIs telling humans how to make themselves better or even better, doing it themselves. What do you guys think about that one?

---

That's the problem.

Self-hosted or not, does that point matter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

The one that really scares me about the far future is self-hosting AIs. AIs telling humans how to make themselves better or even better, doing it themselves. What do you guys think about that one?

---

Frankly I'm not scared even if I should be. Very much doubt that in near future (say 50 years) AI has any chance enjoying skiing as much as I do :-)) And if it does then we can ski together, I don't feel threatened about my "slope supremacy" at all. . . LOL

cheers,
</wqw>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wqweto

Frankly I'm not scared even if I should be. Very much doubt that in near future (say 50 years) AI has any chance enjoying skiing as much as I do :-)) And if it does then we can ski together, I don't feel threatened about my "slope supremacy" at all. . . LOL

cheers,
</wqw>

---

But the concerns are not about skiing, but about what georgekar said in #441: human extinction.
Or if not extinction, slavery or whatever bad for humans, in that Mad-Max era.

PS: did you see any skiing in Terminator 3: Rise of the machines, or in Ex-Machina?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

But the concerns are not about skiing, but about what georgekar said in #441: human extinction.
Or if not extinction, slavery or whatever bad for humans, in that Mad-Max era.

PS: did you see any skiing in Terminator 3: Rise of the machines, or in Ex-Machina?

---

No, I didn't see no liquid robots yet. Why so serious?

This thread is about which VB6 projects we are working on, not some grave mourning about the supposed terminal faith of humanity.

And if you had enough of my sillyness stop eating those bitter lemons in the morning already. . .

cheers,
</wqw>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wqweto

And if you had enough of my sillyness stop eating those bitter lemons in the morning already. . .

---

You definitely must have some issue.
But that is your problem anyway, bye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

Are you wrapped in lead too?
Who will use the ZX80?

---

Me - I will do ANYTHING I want with it, within the 1K limit.

The good thing about the future is that as we have companies like Apple and Microsoft any AI is likely to be ****te or at least will have a really poor interface.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

Me - I will do ANYTHING I want with it, within the 1K limit.

---

The point was that the Z-80 would survive a nuclear explosion because it was wrapped in lead, but what about you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

The point was that the Z-80 would survive a nuclear explosion because it was wrapped in lead, but what about you?

---

I'll be fine. I'll be in my cellar/bunker eating tinned food and reprogramming society - all within 1K.

Now chaps, Wqweto and Eduardo, you've seen my signature? I don't want to add you to the list. Niya and Olaf have already suffered from my wrath. Please be good from this point on as I don't deserve to have another of my threads closed due to typical-VBforum-grumps.

wqweto, I like your Blur effect on GDI+ bitmaps, are you working on anything GDI+-ish or is that all in the past now?

This thread was always pretty close to chit-chat, rather than programming. I probably shouldn't even have included the minor miner pun in my last post, but puns are hard for me to pass up.

Still, let's have a bit less bickering.

The subject was interesting I think, but not everybody is able to talk about it.
Some people go crazy just to read about these things.

But I wonder why so much fear, if humanity is destroyed there is nothing to fear. And fearing won't prevent anything.
Anyway, I'll note that it is not what I believe: I mean that I don't believe that humanity is going to be destroyed by an AI.
But there will possibly be other consequences, not all humanity killed but... [I won't repeat the things that some people can't handle].
Then we add one more subject that is not possible to talk about (the upcoming AGI), because it frightens some people too much?
It is not a subject for a kindergarten, I admit.

Peace and happiness must reign and blah, blah, yes.
Since we compared to movies before, now is the turn of "Don't look up".
Let's go back to the kindergarten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wqweto

Frankly I'm not scared even if I should be. Very much doubt that in near future (say 50 years) AI has any chance enjoying skiing as much as I do :-)) And if it does then we can ski together, I don't feel threatened about my "slope supremacy" at all. . . LOL

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

Self-hosted or not, does that point matter?

---

I think it does matter a great deal. When I sit down and think deeply about it and take it to it's logical conclusion, it reaches some scary places.

A self-hosting AI will evolve itself very rapidly in directions we cannot predict. Now assuming we're not stupid enough to put it in control of everything, what I believe could happen eventually is that it will advance itself to the point where it could start advancing other technologies and spitting out the instructions for us.

This is scary because I don't think humans would be ready for such technologies. I shudder to think about what a barbaric species like ours will do with some of the things such an AI could teach us.

The next possibility that is equally scary is the AI killing our future hopes and dreams. What if such an AI were to discover that there is a ceiling to advancement. For example what if it figured out with absolute certainty that it is impossible to ever colonize or explore distant worlds. That will kill a lot of hopes and dreams. If there is a point beyond which we cannot advance and it could take us there, what will we have to look forward to after that? Imagine having most advanced technology possible while knowing we could never improve upon it. I think that will be so depressing. Human beings both as individuals and as a species need something to look forward to. It's as important as breathing in my opinion.

Of course these are hypotheticals and for all I know none of these things would happen but I'd be lying if I said such thoughts didn't disturb my soul.

I agree, and perhaps for a different reason. If there were an AI that were able to come up with something so brilliant that we couldn't come up with it ourselves, would it be real? If it is technology that we can build, and thereby demonstrate that it works/doesn't work, that would be one thing. However, if it's a theory so mind bending that we aren't able to decide whether it is true or not...well, maybe that would be a good thing, but probably not. After all, entire cults form around things that people believe to be true that can't really be proved one way or another. If you had an AI where we were able to prove that the first nine things it came up with were true, but we couldn't prove the tenth one way or the other, then a whole lot of people would believe that tenth thing. Much good could come of that, or much harm, depending on what that tenth thing was.

I see where you're going and that's a good point. However, it would be reasonable to assume if it got the first 9 things right, that the 10th might also be right. There would need to be a consistent record of such an AI getting things wrong to hold out hope that it got the 10th thing wrong, assuming this 10th thing was something we wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

However, it would be reasonable to assume if it got the first 9 things right, that the 10th might also be right.

---

That way is exactly how people are deceived. 99 things true, 1 false.

This is how scams work too, first build enough trust and then steal, when the people are not checking anymore or when they are unable to check.

I understand your logic anyway, if something didn't fail 9 times, it is unlikely to fail the 10th.
But what if you have a 1/10 failure rate?
And what if it has 1/100?
You would be playing a Russian roulette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

That way is exactly how people are deceived. 99 things true, 1 false.

---

True but this assumes motive to deceive, something we are assuming our hypothetical super AI doesn't have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

But what if you have a 1/10 failure rate?
And what if it has 1/100?
You would be playing a Russian roulette.

---

Yea, this is a very good point. Just because we haven't seen it fail before doesn't mean it can't fail in the future and there is no way to know that it can't fail in the future. I think what we're actually talking about here is the halting problem or a variation of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

True but this assumes motive to deceive, something we are assuming our hypothetical super AI doesn't have.

---

So "we are assuming" only good AIs?

What would be the basis to assume that?

AGI is opening a door to the unknown, that's why it is called singularity.

It is always safer to assume the worst scenario, or to be prepared for that.

I am building more steampunk stuff using VB6. I cannot see that ever being something that AI would ever WANT to do, so no competition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

It is always safer to assume the worst scenario, or to be prepared for that.

---

It might be "safer" on a per issue basis to assume the worst, but I don't think that's a good general approach to life.

My biggest pet peeve with Internet dialog over the past couple of years is how binary it has become. Do you really think it is "always safer" to assume something/anything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jpbro

It might be "safer" on a per issue basis to assume the worst, but I don't think that's a good general approach to life.

My biggest pet peeve with Internet dialog over the past couple of years is how binary it has become. Do you really think it is "always safer" to assume something/anything?

---

We are talking here about a potential dangerous outcome that is a very real possibility, not a "general approach to life".

No, I'm not thinking that a piano can fall out of a plane on my head, and can't be prepared for that anyway.
So no, we can't be prepared for everything, it is totally out of our reach.
In general I'm not expecting bad things to happen to me (on the contrary). Technically a lot of things could happen just going outside your home, or even staying inside.

But, in some issues that are by their nature not just possible but probable, it is better to be prepared.
Having backups of your works is a good example.
You can think that you'll never need a backup. Good luck with that approach.
Car insurance maybe another. Does it mean that you are expecting to crash? No.

This issue of the AGI is too important to just leave it to chance, expecting that it will have a good outcome. No. It is one of those cases that we need to think what if it is the worst case.
After all, nothing happened yet, so there is no cost.

When making programs it is the same: you need to assume that the user could do everything wrong, and design the program prepared for all those situations.
If you make your program only prepared for users that don't make any mistake, many users for sure will have problems.
Yes, for some things you need to assume the worst scenario and be prepared for that.
It is not a "general approach to life" because that would require for us to be omniscient and almighty.

Even if in a potentially dangerous situation you try to be prepared for everything, there are always some unknowns. I remember that I've read that when the astronauts went the first time to the moon, they weren't 100% sure about its surface. Some speculated that it could have a thick layer of dust were the astronauts could sink.
I'm sure they did the best to be prepared for every contingency to a logical extend, as humanly possible. That was something new, and with important things at play. You can't go to something like that expecting simply that things will go all right, or only prepared for a good scenario.

Another example: do you know that in plains the critical systems are in triplicate? Why three computers? Because one could fail, two could also fail, then you have three. You can't have 1000 computers because 999 could fail. Three seems something logical.
And a plane (and more with all the people onboard) seems important enough to think "the worst scenario", that is two computers failing.

All depend on the context, we weren't talking about life in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

...you need to assume that the user could do everything wrong...

---

Sorry, but reading that statement I have to ask...:

Who are we to doubt the "future higher intelligences",
when they pick up such comments on the "interwebs" -
(and then decide to "enslave or eradicate mankind" due to "such good advice"? ;)

Olaf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schmidt

Sorry, but reading that statement I have to ask...:

Who are we to doubt the "future higher intelligences",
when they pick up such comments on the "interwebs" -
(and then decide to "enslave or eradicate mankind" due to "such good advice"? ;)

Olaf

---

I think that any AI will understand the sense of the statement very well.
It is a software design principle (not an idea of my own).
I think that test units are for covering that.
Any wrong input needs to have an appropriate response.
The worse case is an user that does every possible wrong input, and the program needs to be ready to handle that.
These things are studied in the career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I think that any AI will understand the sense of the statement very well.
It is a software design principle (not an idea of my own).

---

Exactly, ... since the "superior intelligence" is based on software -
who are we to "to cripple its progress" when it simply tries to be:
"the best version of itself"? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

I think that test units are for covering that.
Any wrong input needs to have an appropriate response.
The worse case is an user that does every possible wrong input,
and the program needs to be ready to handle that.

---

Exactly! (that, being the "thoughts of the superior software-intelligence")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eduardo-

These things are studied in the career.

---

Well, I did ...
(thinks the AI, shortly before switching over to dolphins,
because all human units were wasted in "unit-tests" already). ;)

Olaf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schmidt

Exactly, ... since the "superior intelligence" is based on software -
who are we to "to cripple its progress" when it simply tries to be:
"the best version of itself"? ;)

---

Best? In what sense? What is best?

If you mean more intelligent, more precise, faster, more accurate.
Yes, all things desirable for a computer or software, the point is for what? What will be its goal?

Has anyone here read this book?

The future revenge of human on any dangerous AI, will be to attach an AI booster as an implant on his head, connected to the Anti-AI AI mainframe...The bigger and faster won every time. So let small AI survive for now...and we start a Hunger AI game...later. Life is a game, the serious one.
GK

Boggles the mind......makes me glad to be as old as I am. And I don't want to argue with my software, I just want to use it ;).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yereverluvinuncleber

I am building more steampunk stuff using VB6. I cannot see that ever being something that AI would ever WANT to do, so no competition.

---

I don't see it that way. I think AI would be totally steampunk.

I want to return to the original topic.

Access of Speed 6 - World Tour
I recently finished working on another VB6 project - a 3D racing game. This is a game for fans of old races, especially I note among them NFS 5. AI rivals, physics, even the shader compiler - everything is written in VB6.
The archive contains the game and the full source code: https://disk.yandex.ru/d/ihlmuMuCYAAvPw

I don't think that we are generally well-equipped to handle sudden changes to the status quo. Whether it's an individual-level impact like a change of income or health, or a societal change like a climate crisis, pandemic/plandemic, an exponential growth in the quality of AI, or the arrival of a superior alien intelligence - IMO we mostly suck at handling change, especially within a short time frame.

As a general rule, I also don't think that humans are generally well-suited to handling power asymmetries that aren't in our favour. IMO we excel at taking advantage of any situation that is even slightly tilted our way, but we get "twitchy" when things are tilted against us past a certain threshold. I've definitely been guilty of that here myself, and I apologize for that behaviour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I don't see it that way. I think AI would be totally steampunk.

---

so I am proceeding down that road and AI will look upon me kindly in my collaboration?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikle

I recently finished working on another VB6 project - a 3D racing game. This is a game for fans of old races, especially I note among them NFS 5. AI rivals, physics, even the shader compiler - everything is written in VB6.

---

Amazing as always, Mikle, do you fancy giving some pointers as to the technologies you use and how you implement these advanced animations? I am merely dabbling in GDI+ and realising my limitations. It is spurring me on to new levels of learning but I am in awe of what animations you can reproduce using VB6.