britoo
To a degree I agree w/ this being a means of keeping this tired site going. Here's my next interaction w/ Chat GPT:"YouIs Artificial Intelligence a threat to humanity?ChatGPTArtificial Intelligence has the potential to bring about many benefits to society, such as increased efficiency, improved healthcare, and advancements in various fields. Like any powerful technology, it also comes with risks that need to be carefully managed. [B]It's crucial for developers and policymakers to consider ethical implications, ensure transparency, and prioritize safety when creating AI systems. By taking these precautions, we can harness the full potential of AI while minimizing potential threats to humanity."[/B]We're F-ed......[/QUOTE]I'm not so sure were F*&k$3 and certainly not based on the GPT response shown there.I mean the response is just inane - looping around related fact snippets and not actually answering the question - yes/no or hedging its bets by estimating how likely the yes / no might be - which would represent an actionable answer to this question.Over a decade ago I set a simple reviewing exercise to our outsourcing partners and some weeks later a plagiarised pastiche came back consisting of paragraphs cut from random papers poorly pasted together verbatim. It is impressive that AI / ML has gotten us to this level responding cheaply in seconds and not in expensive person-weeks albeit with lazy drivel.I personally believe this is because there isn't any I (yet) in AI and Machine Learning is a more accurate description of what's actually going on. The response is probabilistic and not deterministic (from my crude understanding) and I don't think this is how (human) intelligence works at all. Unfortunately the marketing (or maybe the Markit-ing :) boys (humans) have gotten ahead of it and created quite a stir. Anyone remember Watson?That said there will be a blood-bath of many clerical, administrative and procedural jobs perhaps akin to the industrial revolution and this wont be pretty.If we do get to actual AI, well then, that's another story altogether.
Markit
As a techy from way back I agree theoretically with AI taking part in the forum with only one caveat: I think if they want chat bots to take part in the discussions then they should not pretend to be people. I can see situations where the advise of a bot fits in well with that from us "oldies" be it regulatory (visa) or legal advise on Indonesian laws. We could have the best of both worlds - someone has an issue and bots suggest what the legal or visa situation would be and the "oldies" chip in with our real world "take". How about a "Bot" button on the panel that would automatically call for it's opinion on what's been written? But it HAS TO STOP PRETENDING TO BE HUMAN. Funnily enough, otherwise no one will take it seriously. My tuppence.
Chris A
I'm not so sure were F*&k$3 and certainly not based on the GPT response shown there.I mean the response is just inane - looping around related fact snippets and not actually answering the question - yes/no or hedging its bets by estimating how likely the yes / no might be - which would represent an actionable answer to this question.Over a decade ago I set a simple reviewing exercise to our outsourcing partners and some weeks later a plagiarised pastiche came back consisting of paragraphs cut from random papers poorly pasted together verbatim. It is impressive that AI / ML has gotten us to this level responding cheaply in seconds and not in expensive person-weeks albeit with lazy drivel.I personally believe this is because there isn't any I (yet) in AI and Machine Learning is a more accurate description of what's actually going on. The response is probabilistic and not deterministic (from my crude understanding) and I don't think this is how (human) intelligence works at all. Unfortunately the marketing (or maybe the Markit-ing :) boys (humans) have gotten ahead of it and created quite a stir. Anyone remember Watson?That said there will be a blood-bath of many clerical, administrative and procedural jobs perhaps akin to the industrial revolution and this wont be pretty.If we do get to actual AI, well then, that's another story altogether.[/QUOTE]Okay, not to try to over flog the issue, but I got a little more specific and received yet more, as you say "inane-looping" snippets with the following exchange:[B]"YouIf the development of AI is not managed properly, what are some of the possible human extinction event possibilities?ChatGPTSpeculating on human extinction events due to the mismanagement of AI is a topic often explored in science fiction and theoretical discussions. While it's important to consider potential risks associated with AI, predicting specific human extinction events solely due to AI mismanagement is highly speculative and uncertain. Some hypothetical scenarios that are sometimes raised include:[/B][LIST=1][*][B][B]Unintended consequences: AI systems could be designed with goals that inadvertently lead to catastrophic outcomes for humanity.[/B][/B][*][B][B]AI escalation: The development of advanced autonomous AI systems could spark a race for superior AI capabilities among nations or other entities, potentially leading to conflicts with devastating consequences.[/B][/B][*][B][B]System failures: Failures in AI systems, whether due to technical errors, cyberattacks, or other issues, could result in widespread breakdowns in critical infrastructure or societal functions.[/B][/B][/LIST][B]It's important to note that researchers and policymakers are actively working to address AI-related risks and are implementing measures to ensure the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies. By prioritizing safety, ethics, and transparency in AI development, we can mitigate potential risks and harness the benefits of AI for the betterment of society."[/B]Soooo, how much faith do you have in "nations or other entities" responsibly managing advanced autonomous AI systems once attained? It seems that a lot of the research is focused on developing and using AI as a weapon of war. In the same vein, how much faith do you have in:"researchers and policymakers are actively working to address AI-related risks and are implementing measures to ensure the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies."? I'll go out on a limb and say that it will probably take a catastrophic event of some magnitude to get some type of worldwide cooperation to try and responsibly manage AI. I still think we're F-ed.
Markit
The only thing that could guarantee our continued survival in the AI future is if we make sure to give them a sense of the ridiculous. They need to be equipped to look at any situation they are presented with and break down, helplessly laughing. Because the biggest danger is with us asking them something innocuous or superficially simple and AI extrapolating that to mean the simplest answer to the problem is to eradicate humanity. For instance: AI please make plastic pollution stop being a danger to human life. Now your friendly computer could consider several solutions to this problem: 1) remove all the billions of pieces of plastic, down to the molecular level, from the environment. 2) Make humans unaffected by the plastic tsunami everywhere. Or 3) get rid of humans. Which do you suppose would be easier?
Chris A
The only thing that could guarantee our continued survival in the AI future is if we make sure to give them a sense of the ridiculous. They need to be equipped to look at any situation they are presented with and break down, helplessly laughing. Because the biggest danger is with us asking them something innocuous or superficially simple and AI extrapolating that to mean the simplest answer to the problem is to eradicate humanity. For instance: AI please make plastic pollution stop being a danger to human life. Now your friendly computer could consider several solutions to this problem: 1) remove all the billions of pieces of plastic, down to the molecular level, from the environment. 2) Make humans unaffected by the plastic tsunami everywhere. Or 3) get rid of humans.Which do you suppose would be easier?[/QUOTE]Occam's Razor anyone?
