AI Acceleration - Page 3

On June 09 2023 03:25 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On May 30 2023 16:16 Daut wrote: People who think AI will never be as smart or creative or well rounded as humans: you're not as smart as you think you are, and you're orders of magnitude less smart than true AI will be. Other than someone bioengineering unstoppable deadly viruses, this is the biggest threat to our existence as a species. If we're not as smart as we think we are, why do you trust your own judgment of what is the biggest threat to our existence? That's one hell of a leap to make. How would you even weigh the possible damage of intentional harm from bioengineering vs what could come unintentionally in our unnatural world? There is only one group of people who thinks AI is the biggest threat to our existence, and it's people working in tech. Those people are not the "smartest" people in the world. They have a specific kind of intelligence and view the world from a limited perspective. Usually these people are pretty well off financially, which tells you something. It amazes me that people can believe in this ideology when it has no obvious way to be an issue without us interfering to include it in our lives. AI can't be the biggest threat to our world simply because it is going to be in our hands at all times, unless it can become embodied, which, by the time it could, this planet will already be one big fireball. AI is dependent on architecture that receives inputs from us. It can always be turned off. It is a threat for other reasons than existential ones. What is even a good example of creativity from an AI? Has an AI ever produced something completely new and original? Has it been an overt influence on people's thinking? Does AI have ideas that philosophers work with in philosophy departments?

1 You haven't defined creativity so it's impossible to answer. You could write a program to randomly generate 0's and 1's 1000 times to get a sequence of 1's and 0's that no one's used before... but if that's creativity, it's a very limited, and restrictive form of it. Creativity needs to be more clearly defined to answer this. This is all that chatgpt can do. Actually, here are the technical details. When you ask it a question it turns your question into a high-dimensional vector or two and then looks up the closest vector in a database, and turns that vector into text. That's basically all it does. The location of each vector encodes "meaning". That meaning is found by counting how many times different words occur near each other. It is not really creating anything, it's retrieving some vectors that it calculated just over a year ago, and stringing them together, returning them, then turning them into text. Those vectors are stored on something like excel spreadsheet (lol).

2 I don't think you can call it completely new and original since it's all trained off human/bot made data.

3 Google search algorithm has been mostly powered by A.I. since 2020, using an al-gore-rythm called BERT. I'm not sure that I'd call it overt, but it's not a secret that A.I. is used intentionally to control people's thoughts with suppression of views that the tech industry doesn't like. Google's CEO bragged to Trump about suppressing left-wing websites in order to convince him that he didn't have a left-wing bias. Google also stopped recommending children's videos to pedos on youtube. That's controlling someones thoughts and habits in an overt way imo.

4 What's an idea? This can't be talked about rationally until you or someone defines what having an idea is. I'm giving the same answer that Turing gave to "can machines think?" If we want to do good science, then we will be practicing extreme levels of pedantry. Coming up with definitions is the highest form of genius when it comes to these debates. It is not possible to say something more intelligent than asking someone to define something here.

1. Look up literally any definition of creativity in a dictionary. It doesn't really suit what an AI does, or will ever do.

2. Yes. You can say it's new in terms of what other AI used to do, but the blurring of boundaries between human and bot and thinking the bot can transcend the human's meaningful creativity is completely different and quite silly. The idea that human beings are just another kind of limited machine and that our minds are like computers is part of a set of old technological beliefs that refuse to die in the popular imagination, but is not at all taken seriously in the cognitive sciences anymore.

3. It's not really overt since it's happening in the background. Most pedos have no idea about what is being restricted to them, and they are not forced to use Google for pedo videos, so it's not controlling their thoughts in any way. In that space they are simply imposed some limitations, like not finding a treasure trove of perfect videos for them very easily, but they can still find things. And it's not the AI, it's Google who made the decision after receiving push back from people. It's not another AI that solved the issue. This same AI initially recommended the videos and created the rabbit hole.

4. Thinking involves agency; it's the conscious weighing of possible decisions and their consequences. An AI does not think because an AI does not feel, and thinking is a tool to navigate the world for a feeling creature. Rationality itself cannot be disconnected from feelings. You can look up Antonio Damasio's experiments on gambling and his notion of the "somatic marker" for examples. In one of them it's easy to get a gambler who has frontal lobe damage to consistently go broke in a way that a normal person never would because they cannot rely on loss-aversion to steer them in the right direction, since they don't have fear as a motivation to become loss-averse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatic_marker_hypothesis

I'd basically agree with all of those 4 points, given those definitions.

For point 3 I didn't actually mean that the A.I. was making people think all by itself. All of these algorithms require outsiders to set parameters.

AI will probably take over the world at some point, or at least be a major part of it, so much so that humans won't be able to live without it. Hopefully that happens after my lifetime.

Nvidia stock went up $250 billion this year from the A.I. hype train, near $200 billion in one day (18 May) alone. JFC.

The new trolley problem just dropped boys...

How many people are we talking about here?

Are they Nazis?

-_-

Lol time magazine is f naming taylor swift over Sam

I just saw it today