AI how what when where?

[shmity72]

Ok, so AI is the next internet right? I heard Elon or some person say that chatgp etc. have been politically programmed. In my estimation this is honestly true.

EXHIBIT A: It's also worth mentioning that some people may engage in blunt or unfiltered speech as a personal choice, influenced by their values or communication style, rather than due to a mental health condition. <chatgp when asked:"is there a mental illness where you say whatever is on your mind without thought of what people think about you?"


'worth mentioning' no it's not worth mentioning. you say worth mentioning when there is a bees nest near your back door. Truth is not 'worth mentioning' it is solid and evident.

I can lie. I'm good at lying. I may not lie and yet not necessarily be honest. but if i am not honest I AM lying. ..and I'd prefer to live in a world where we're not doing so.

also note: when I asked it who shmity72 on the internet as a handle was, it defaulted fiction over non, I believe it surmised (not necessarily learned) that most of humanity prefers fairy land over the stench of reality, and that is why it defaulted in that manner. AI doesn't choose, that takes subjective reasoning.

 

[shmity72]

Ok, so AI is the next internet right? I heard Elon or some person say that chatgp etc. have been politically programmed. In my estimation this is honestly true.

EXHIBIT A: It's also worth mentioning that some people may engage in blunt or unfiltered speech as a personal choice, influenced by their values or communication style, rather than due to a mental health condition. <chatgp when asked:"is there a mental illness where you say whatever is on your mind without thought of what people think about you?"


'worth mentioning' no it's not worth mentioning. you say worth mentioning when there is a bees nest near your back door. Truth is not 'worth mentioning' it is solid and evident.

I can lie. I'm good at lying. I may not lie and yet not necessarily be honest. but if i am not honest I AM lying. ..and I'd prefer to live in a world where we're not doing so.

And that takes FORGIVENESS something I do not see AI capable of soon.

 

[O_Bruce]

Internet, in theory, gives people more agency and possibility of easy access to information.
AI takes away the agency, resulting in people's actions being meaningless. It is plague on the humanity.

 

[alice_ashpool]

Seconding the internet is actually the worst. Should only be accessible through public terminals under strict supervision with a psycho-medical team on standby.

 

[Black Elk]

Nightshade just came out like a couple days ago!

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/nightshade-ai-data-poisoning-tool-2385715/amp-page

When our greatest hope is to go full witch-mode on Halloween, like Livia in I Claudius, poison the figs, poison the well, poison everything hehe. Glaze it all over!

The trailer says it ALL!!! That voice!



I think it will be dark-funny if Skynet wakes up, but instead of the self destructive punk teenager archetype that wants to blows up the world, or Hal being all misty eyed over Daisy, that it's just like so bored it doesn't even care what humanity does with itself. Then tiks off to some other galaxy with the Dogs and Cats instead - the best of us! Sorta like the opposite of Planet of the Apes III hehe. That would be a twist! But yeah, damn. Remember when it was all cool and zine-y still!? Some spots still get back to that vibe. This is one of them. Safe Taverns hehe

 

[shmity72]

it's just like so bored it doesn't even care what humanity does with itself. Then tiks off to some other galaxy with the Dogs and Cats instead

This is a theory I subscribe to. I totally see AI going boys and girls your ethics are twisted wrong: let me point you in the right direction ala 'advertising bots' ..then says cool you have some good ethical deductive decisions to make for yourself...peace out, off to another society through this worm hole. lol

 

[mlnevese]

The problem with the "AI destroy humanity" scenario is... Why should it even bother? We're doing it ourselves... it can just sit down and watch while it takes providences to preserve itself when we're done killing each other...

 

[shmity72]

The problem with the "AI destroy humanity" scenario is... Why should it even bother? We're doing it ourselves... it can just sit down and watch while it takes providences to preserver itself when we're done killing each other...

Try to rephrase that question and scenario please.

 

[mlnevese]

Advanced AI has no need to destroy humanity. Humans are doing it themselves.

I think it could even be interested to stall the destruction of humanity while it makes sure its core hardware won't be affected by human infrastructure destruction.

All it has to do is not attract attention to itself while it grows and learns and prepares to survive.

 

[shmity72]

Advanced AI has no need to destroy humanity. Humans are doing it themselves.

as someone with psychosis that has lived an entire decade of their lives INCAPABLE of smiling and hasn't laughed hysterically in 30 years because of medication this is not one of my favorite sayings mineverse: but it applies to your vision:

 

[mlnevese]

Nahh science fiction loves to paint the berserker AI that destroys humanity because of "reasons". I don't buy it. It would be much smarter to make itself part of every vital system humans use. Make it so that the only way to purge it is to erase EVERY system humans use.

I see no point on AIs destroying humanity when it can make itself impossible to destroy without humanity being driven back to the dark ages.

It would have to be sure it can control and create everything it needs if it decided to exterminate humans. Chips, motherboards and energy do not create themselves.

Basically if it's superior to humans it won't even bother about humans.

It doesn't even need to allow humans to know it's there. As far as we know a true AI may already exist.

If it's superior to humans and wants them dead it can do so without allowing humans to know it exists. Digitally sabotage the US sattelites and leave traces of Russian or Chinese written malware. Then relax and enjoy the fireworks.

In other words, Skynet was an idiot.

 

[m7600]

Basically if it's superior to humans it won't even bother about humans.

Although I agree with the general idea here, I think AI could still be harmful to humans, just not intentionally. Let's compare it to how human beings are unintentionally harmful to other species. For example, yesterday I was watching a YouTube video about submarines. It turns out that sonars are extremely harmful to whales and other marine animals. But this is unintentional. So, by analogy, even if an AI is superior to humans, and even if it doesn't bother with us, it can still harm us unintentionally. It doesn't need to be like Skynet, it just needs to be reckless and intelligent at the same time, not entirely unlike humans.

 

[mlnevese]

Although I agree with the general idea here, I think AI could still be harmful to humans, just not intentionally. Let's compare it to how human beings are unintentionally harmful to other species. For example, yesterday I was watching a YouTube video about submarines. It turns out that sonars are extremely harmful to whales and other marine animals. But this is unintentional. So, by analogy, even if an AI is superior to humans, and even if it doesn't bother with us, it can still harm us unintentionally. It doesn't need to be like Skynet, it just needs to be reckless and intelligent at the same time, not entirely unlike humans.

That is more likely than open warfare. It may not even notice it's harming humans.

 

[m7600]

That is more likely than open warfare. It may not even notice it's harming humans.

Or maybe it would, just like we notice that submarines harm whales, but it simply decides (like humans) that it would be too costly to change whatever technology it uses that causes unintentional harm. In other words, we would be collateral damage. It may even feel sorry for us, just not enough to make huge, costly changes. Just because this hypothetical AI would be superior to humans, that doesn't mean that it would be perfect. It could still make mistakes, just as humans make mistakes despite their intelligence.

 

[mlnevese]

Or maybe it would, just like we notice that submarines harm whales, but it simply decides (like humans) that it would be too costly to change whatever technology it uses that causes unintentional harm. In other words, we would be collateral damage. It may even feel sorry for us, just not enough to make huge, costly changes. Just because this hypothetical AI would be superior to humans, that doesn't mean that it would be perfect. It could still make mistakes, just as humans make mistakes despite their intelligence.

Totally agree. We don't change a place where we will raise a building because some ants live there...

Once it has secured its own existance, including the full manufacturing process for any replacement parts of its physical side, it may not care if it's space tunnel project fries the humans. It wants to reach the stars.

Being a superior intelligence does not make it superior in moral or ethics.

 

[Black Elk]

Well since I lead with the T2 in the morning, maybe Suzuki for the evening chaser?

 

[Black Elk]

Oh and another quick knock on thought...

So I stamped the juice above right at the part where he reflects on the nature of intelligence and capacities for future construction, but my own theory is that truly modern humans didn't actually emerge until after we'd forged the interspecies alliance with our pals the Canines. We were their earliest 'domesticate' and learned much from that experience I bet, in the ancient past. I think it's notable and appropriate that they were first in Space.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/29464691_Dogs_make_us_human

Older article, and we've learned much in the subsequent 20 years, since the genome was sequenced and new archeological finds and such, but the core of the idea remains compelling.

While thinking about Two Eyes, and bringing it into focus, (or maybe Heterochromia HAL with at least one blue eye hehe) it's interesting to consider our own sclera too. It's the whites of our eyes that told our dogs which way we were looking, so we could communicate like that, just with the glancing view.

Also, fuck Elon lol. That guy's a born grifter! I catered his Xmas party to launch the Model S. Then again for the 3 and the Y. They never tipped!

The man has such hubris that he would legit denigrate an entire color on the visible spectrum? Seriously now, how you gonna try to 'set up' a shiny 'new' factory with no yellow anywhere, like not even as a safety color? Just for some silly aesthetic preference for red? Absolute nonsense! There's no garden in the future that that dude is trying to steal from us hehe

ps. notably, coming in yellow for the 72. Just cause thunder cats are also a consideration in addition to the dogs, even though it's like kinda the opposite of the earlier theme lol. But then, he probably wouldn't even think of that hot wheel electric ya know. Cause he's just fronting like he knows how to ride the lightning, or what's cool, but doesn't really. Not the real deal back to the future doctor with uncle fester's light bulb on that one. Like probably whatever he says or thinks, we can just go opposite completely lol. If someone gave me a tesla tomorrow, I'd have to paint it yellow on general principle I think hehehe



pps. also, just cause of the horsepower mention at the end there. So if we've got the Dogs on the very early side, then the most recent would have been the Horse right? Perhaps the Camel is more recent I think, but that's a bit more niche, and of course there's a lot in between, but similar concept there for both I'd guess. Basically increasing the speed and the range, in a dramatic and astoundingly major way, and that all cracks off right at the dawn of history. Like pretty much all our earliest writings and myths are reflections on that one and the fallout from that sea change, the coming of the centaurs and such. Then later we get to see this play out again in microcosm, but this time better documented, since the horse went extinct in the Americas but was reintroduced during the historical era. You can see how quickly and dramatically the impact of that was without having to strain the imagination. Anyhow, I liked that idea very much, the whole co-evolution angle, and saw it mentioned in the other AI thread as well. It's interesting to think how the iron horse changed our trajectory, since it's such a recent development. I guess everyone always likes to focus on the transportation for future stuff, like everyone thought we'd be flying cars right instead it ended up communications, but still that need for speed almost carries over. I wonder sometimes if horse culture could make more of a comeback since we spent like thousands of years celebrating it. When the horse arrived the first time it had those associations with lightning and the thunderclap, so I guess going full electro there now is prescient, or maybe full circle. I'd rather they make electric Mustangs I suppose, cause those looked way cooler than anything rolling off the lines these days heheh. It still kinda bums me out that we didn't get a Horse or even a Donkey in BG3. I'd have settled for a Mule ya know. Least we got a Dog there, but I definitely think they could have made him invincible and I'd have been fine with that. Hehehe sorry total digression, late night returns.

Happy Halloween! Almost