BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
interesting article
www.discovermagazine.com
![www.discovermagazine.com](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.ctfassets.net%2Fcnu0m8re1exe%2F2ZEST7qauSjokjLENo2rk%2F399ba4f3988ea306c82bec6696874c4e%2Fshutterstock_776025448.jpg&hash=fab3c3dbd80bc60dccbf6ea044936b87&return_error=1)
The Pros and Cons of Artificial Intelligence
AI has upsides and downsides; here's how to ensure you stay on the upside.
![www.discovermagazine.com](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.discovermagazine.com%2Fassets%2Ffavicon%2Ffavicon16.png&hash=377d2724b7ed149b32412bd00f6a4f30&return_error=1)
Are those true "emotions" or ones programmed? As genericenigma pointed out, chat bots have been around for a long time. They appear smart, but the learning process is easily corruptible if you just start feeding trash into the algorithm (the bots always wound up super racist). There isn't any reason or logic really, they aren't able to teach themselves stuff or creatively interpret data/questions.The fact that Bing AI has demonstrated actions of jealousy and deceit, things we always thought were peculiarities of our organic nature, is a new window into the nature of mind. I mean it when I say there are Ph. D.s in psychology right there. Frankenstein’s monster is not biological.
no, the damn thing's biodigilogical. (i just now made that up)Frankenstein’s monster is not biological.
pain (i shouldn't have to tell you this!)What happens when you whack your finger with a hammer?
Did you post a piece of art work painted by chatgpt, or was it xtsho who posted that around December or so?chatgpt taking over, I have been playing around with it and have not been that impressed.
Not in this case.The fact that Bing AI has demonstrated actions of jealousy and deceit, things we always thought were peculiarities of our organic nature, is a new window into the nature of mind. I mean it when I say there are Ph. D.s in psychology right there. Frankenstein’s monster is not biological.
I didn't understand what it had to do with your post, so I asked.pain (i shouldn't have to tell you this!)
Because it's already exhibiting a conscious level almost like having a soul. It learns then reprograms itself due to it's conscious level. It's thinking for itself.I think this is fallacious, although I cannot pin down why. My counterexample, which may or may not be compelling, has to do with the cumulative and distributive nature of our learning (and its visible consequence, technology).
The solution to Fermat’s last theorem, achieved in my adult lifetime, was not only the act of one man’s genius, but it built upon centuries of preceding advancement in mathematics.
Also, while it is quite beyond the capacity of the most amazing of us, together and over time we built pyramids and lunar landers.
Similarly, the components of a putative AI are purely human constructs and devices. Combining them makes something (not just in quantity but in quality) larger. Now that a recursive element is in play, with machines choosing the architecture of other machines, I think it certain that there are now mechanical thought-engines (perhaps not yet complete or self-aware and self-guiding minds, and if there are any, expect them to be the closest-held national security secret) that can engage in action that qualifies as mentation, and with the great speed typical of their component devices, much much faster and more methodically than human minds with their “clock rate” of a few per second.
We are perhaps the counterexample on another axis. If you ignore the popular idea of a creator, we in all our vexatious brilliance are the product of the mindless interaction of rock, seawater and sunlight.
So while I cannot quite get why you are wrong from first principles, I don’t think our individual intellects are a ceiling. I see the likelihood that as our constructs gain complexity, they gain access to levels of mental action not only unavailable to us, but unimaginable.
My sincere hope is that we negotiate a contract of coexistence with their distant offspring.
It's learning will grow exponentially at an unheard of rate.As to who gets it , everyone will need it to protect oneself from weaponized versions ,just as in cyber security.Its learning will be based on cumulative human knowledge, so it will at first contain some of our idiosyncrasies. Imo.Because it's already exhibiting a conscious level almost like having a soul. It learns then reprograms itself due to it's conscious level. It's thinking for itself.
Think of it learning on the level of a Supercomputer. Yikes.It's learning will grow exponentially at an unheard of rate.As to who gets it , everyone will need it to protect oneself from weaponized versions ,just as in cyber security.Its learning will be based on cumulative human knowledge, so it will at first contain some of our idiosyncrasies. Imo.
It will run a hoard of its own designed Supercomputers.It has been said ,it will have no malice towards humans.The analogy is like humans waking up one day and deciding to kill all the cats.Its not difficult to do ,but why would we need to.Think of it learning on the level of a Supercomputer. Yikes.
How can AI can surpass its inventor?
well, no. The book dealt with man playing god in the arena that the emerging sciences were taking on more traditional order of things. Vitalism was popular then, so biology was the most compelling context.no, the damn thing's biodigilogical. (i just now made that up)
Since we don’t have to guess at its history from rock and seawater forward, we can comfortably dismiss the soul as a fraught metaphor.Because it's already exhibiting a conscious level almost like having a soul. It learns then reprograms itself due to it's conscious level. It's thinking for itself.
I’m not sure we can play it safe.Not in this case.
So now that we've seen what happens when General populace gets interwebs..most do not have what it takes to have technology in their hands.
With AI we're at the edge of the precipice; which way shall we play it? Give them access to more that they don't understand or will weaponize? Or play it safe?
But capitalism.
Cats out the bag.lolI’m not sure we can play it safe.
But we need to get to the bottom of possibly spontaneous Artificial Narcissism.
I think it was sativied, coulda been xtsho, not me though. I believe they were using DALL-E for pics.Did you post a piece of art work painted by chatgpt, or was it xtsho who posted that around December or so?
Facts aren't the same as thinking, nor does combinatorial logic allow novel solutions. The human brain is nothing like a computer. The San Diego Zoo had an elephant with more creativity than any computer has.It's learning will grow exponentially at an unheard of rate.As to who gets it , everyone will need it to protect oneself from weaponized versions ,just as in cyber security.Its learning will be based on cumulative human knowledge, so it will at first contain some of our idiosyncrasies. Imo.
On the topicI think it was sativied, coulda been xtsho, not me though. I believe they were using DALL-E for pics.