Artificial Intelligence versus human intelligence

{Case No. A0095/32201060 in: The celestial court of judicature}

Prosecutor: Your stellar brilliances, this is an unusual case, in that it encompasses an intra-family dispute par excellence, which, in the normal cause of events, ought to be the province of THE 7th Dimension Administrative Tribunal.

But the plaintiff [hereinafter known as P1] has deposed that there is no precedent for this case, in that there cannot be a dispute between an ABORTER and an ABORTEE, it being the case that an abortive is usually dead by the hand of the aborter, before the intent to commit the offence of abortion is detected and the offence prevented.

Empirical evidence, gathered by the plaintiff from every known abortionist in the Universe(s) of our celestial system [the PLAINTIFF further deposes] leads to the inevitable conclusion that would-be aborters are often confused, not knowing whether to proceed with the intended act or to allow 'common sense' to guide them to consideration of the fact that the aborter can never predict what role the aborted foetus would have played in the Celestial System, if it had been allowed to develop and be birthed in the 'natural cause of events'.

The plaintiff intends to argue that its argument is supported by what happened between the Planet Earth and its satellite, The Moon. If part of the -Earth had not been 'whacked away' (to use the colourful phraseology of the Plaintiff) by a meteorite, shortly (in Celestial Years) after the birthing of the Planet Earth, would the current gravitational arrangement whereby the Planet Earth’s movements around the Star known as the 'Sun' have been the same?

Would there be 'tides' on Planet Earth [the Plaintiff queries] were there is no Moon orbiting the Earth from 'above'?

Would there be 'romance' on Planet Earth if there were no “

Light of the Silvery Moon”, to arouse lust in Humankind and other inhabitants of Planet Earth?

From these consequential inference, the Plaintiff urges Your Brilliances to affirm the undisputable harmful consequences’ of abortion and terminate without further ado, the purported intention of the entity that hereinafter terms itself “Human Intelligence’ from evolving rules to quench the advancement of Artificial Intelligence on the grounds that such advancement will lead to the 'extinction' of the owners of “human intelligence’ themselves.

Finally, the plaintiff avers that the entity hereinafter representing itself severally as 'human intelligence' has abused the process of the court by denominating itself as something that, patently, does not exist.

The plaintiff asks rhetorically: If there were 'human intelligence' in existence, would nuclear bombs have been invented from the same processes that give humanity an almost limitless supply of electrical power? Would one country invade another and brutally slay its citizens, in order that the citizens it wants to kill would, if they survive attacks from the air and from water spilling from busted dams, come under the attacker’s own flag at the of 'hostilities' (should they be so lucky as to be still alive?

And what sort of 'intelligence' do a people possess who, knowing that their neighbour is a bully who enjoys slaughtering its own citizens who 'dissent' from its official political line, as well as foreigners whom it fears or cannot’ trust, nevertheless talks incessantly of 'joining' a military group formed by the bully’s self-confessed 'enemies'?

Doesn’t every mother teach her children the primary caution of desisting from playing with known bullies, let alone actually provoking them, by insulting them or otherwise hurting their sensitivities, by (for instance) consorting openly or clandestinely with the bully’s enemies?

President of their brilliancies: Mr. Prosecutor, pardon my curiosity, but are you by chance on the side of the Plaintiff? Because ….

Prosecutor: May it please Your Brilliancy, but I have only one more paragraph of the summary of the `plaintiff’s argument….

President: (showing exasperation) ….Paragraph?

Court audience bursts out laughing.

Prosecutor: As your brilliancy pleases! The defendant…

President: I am informed by the Planet Jupiter that a wormholes is about to appear in this space zed occupy it and that we should vacate it before a singularity spaghettis us all. It IS the red-dwarf-to-black hole season, apparently. I don’t know why they brought us here in the first place. Till we meet again, then! Entropy allowing, of course! Byeeeeeeeeee!

Ama Ata Aidoo R.I.P.

As I promised last week, here is a titbit about the late writer, Ama Ata Aidoo.

Ama was one of the quickest brains I have encountered in the Ghana literary field. She didn’t just ‘Do’ literature; that is write plays and write about plays. She also lived a life of ideas related to the actual practice of organising society in the best why to obtain the best results for all humanity, not for a few privileged individuals.

She was therefore against imperialism in all its forms. Her tongue was loosened beautifully when The Economist newspaper off London published a notorious cover edition virtually announcing the “death” of the African continent!

She has been recorded recounting, in memorable terms, the rapacious part that Europe has played in making Africa a continent of poverty, instability and disease.it is on YouTube and if you search there for Ama Ata Aidoo on Africa and Europe, you will get the thrill of your life.

You will encounter the African woman in her raw state: eloquent, unafraid to say what she thinks, and above all, a person with reason and fact as the guidelines of her life.

Oh, Ama we shall miss you. Again, I say, Rest In Perfect Peace!