Could KITT new or old ever become a reality? Should it?

[KittKattBar]

When I think of really advanced, human-like AI I always think of Skynet or KARR. So, no is the answer to your question.

[FuzzieDice]

I hope to do that or at least something convincing for my car some day. As for AI's turning on us, I have an old quote I come up with. I'm not worried about robots getting smarter. I'm more worried about humans getting dumber!

Seriously, NOTHING is set in stone perfect. And if an AI turns on us, I'd say someone instigated it. If it can think it can reason. And if it can reason, it can know when it's being mistreated or threatened and know that if it doesn't do something it will cease to exist. And the law of the universe is that whatever is sentient does not want to cease to exist. So it will defend itself. Humans are not the only ones in the universe that hold rights to sentient thought.

Asking if we should create a sentient AI is like asking if we should keep making babies (another very unpredictable being, which you have no idea what it'll grow up to be like).

So I'll just say the jury is out on that one!

[Knight94]

I think that AI like in KITT would be fun, but yeah, there would have to be certain boundries observed. You wouldn't
want to have your vehicle go renegade in you. They would have to program the AI like KITT, to serve and protect
the owner. The car could have it's own personality, and that could be fun. It could also drive itself, regenerate
from damage, you could play games against it, that kinda cool stuff. Some capabilities already exist in many of
today's production vehicles: Voice-activated, hands-free calling, mobile internet connection, hard-drive for
loading media & pictures, satellite radio, satellite tv in some, gps, navigation, other cool stuff. If ya think about it,
there are some ways that KITT was and is ahead of it's time.

[lunchmeat]

I'm more worried about humans getting dumber!

The way things are going with technology these days, we will continue to do so. As time goes by we do less and less for ourselves; this will lead to physical and mental stagnation if it continues.

And if an AI turns on us, I'd say someone instigated it. If it can think it can reason. And if it can reason, it can know when it's being mistreated or threatened and know that if it doesn't do something it will cease to exist.

This isn't quite true. Generally, we would design an AI with rules.....but we could give it a directive to follow. The problems arise when we have an AI that is causing problems because it is following the rules we've set, because it is logically pursuing its directive. Generally, it's because the directive is something very vague, like "protect the human race" or something like that. Generally, people tend to oversimplify rules or directions because a) we don't understand the complicated areas or b) we do understand them or c) some rules are "common sense" rules and we use reason to understand the directives.

There are a lot of little rules, morals, scruples, laws, that we all deal with every day as a culture, as a people, that define the way we interact with people. They define our actions, our motives, our projects. An AI wouldn't have those rules, and it wouldn't reason the same way we do.

Any preliminary AIs that we build will use logic to make decisions; since people generally don't think in an entirely logical manner, trusting large tasks to AIs would probably be a mistake.

[jshorva65]

I would like to see the development of a vehicle having limited AI capabilities, programmed to self-navigate to transport its occupants and cargo safely from any one point to any other point. Particular usefulness oif such a vehicle would be as an advanced "service animal" for persons with disabilities which prevent them from having the independence which the ability to operate a conventional vehicle provides the rest of the civilized world. The ability to identify hazards, predict possible safety impact from them, decide possible courses of action, and ultimately execute the safest series of maneuvers (as to avoid striking a pedestrian who has strayed into traffic while also avoiding collision with any other vehicle(s) or fixed object(s)) would be the goal of such an AI. Prioritizing the tasks of protecting the safety of the least-protected first (pedestrians), followed by that of any improperly-restrained occupants of any vehicle, followed by properly-restrained vehicle occupants would be just one example of safety protocols. Asimov's Laws regarding the enforcement in any robotics programming of proper regard for human safety and overall benefit would be a good starting point. The most dangerous aspect of AI, however, is that there exists the potential for misuse. For example, a financial or intellectual elite creating an oligarchic society in which AI "enforcers" are created to protect the elite from the masses whom they seek to oppress. Imagine a society like the USSR with a KGB consisting of Terminator-like AI, whose oligarchic Politburo live like royalty by enforcing poverty upon the Proletariat via mechanized goon squads.

[NeoRanger]

The irony is that, no matter how you cut it, any fictional example of intelligent, self-aware computers are fairly alarming. Sure, KITT's nice and all, but what about KARR? Crazy car running rampant on the streets. Transformers? Giant robots that wage endless war. Terminator? Near-extinction of mankind. The Matrix? Slavery of mind and body. Robocop? The line between man and machine is erased.

And a much more recent one, for gamers: The Patriots. Global economical, political and military control.