If we made a robot ........ with an AI ' consciousness ' .......... would it ' think ' that we are god and worship us ? If we gave it a bible and said analyse it / asked it what do you think ......... what would it say ? .......... would it have a nervous break down ? .......... commit suicide ?
On the subject of fear of artificial intelligence, (Peter J. Bentley) insists on debunking the false myths that hover around new technologies, which non-experts often end up believing because they do not have the necessary knowledge to disassemble them. One of these is the myth of "a self-modifying AI, which will make itself super-intelligent", to the point of overwhelming human beings. “Even if we were able to create a superintelligence, we have no evidence that such an AI would wish to harm us. This is a belief derived from the observation of human behavior. But AI will not have human intelligence. Our very future will almost certainly be a continuation of today's situation, in which AI systems co-evolve with us and will be designed to adapt to our needs, in the same way that we have manipulated crops, cattle and domestic animals to meet our needs“. Today, no one is given to know what the impacts of the use of AI will be on humanity in twenty or thirty years. Nor how far it can go. But the formulation of hypotheses generates knowledge and reflections lead to the acquisition of awareness, which are the basis for being prepared for what is to come.
1. AI is not intelligent. As? And what is it then? A surplus of action capabilities that we have (and will have more and more in the future) to carry out tasks, executing algorithms. There is no link with human intelligence (cognitive), at best we can speak of reproductive intelligence (of an action). But, if we get the term "intelligence" out of the way, it wouldn't be bad. 2. artificial intelligence is not intelligent, but it performs some tasks better than us, above all if an ad hoc world (digital and infosphere) is built around it. We can rest assured that this will happen ever faster. 3. the passage from the biosphere to the infosphere does not happen by chance, we determine it. In this phase of design and construction it is essential to have clear ideas because then it will be difficult to go back and correct ... philosophy and ethics should be the polar stars to rely on. Dispassionate suggestion, be curious, don't let yourself be pigeonholed by an algorithm, confuse its ideas. "The world is beautiful because it is varied" my grandmother always said. So click on things you don't know, interact even with posts you don't like, keep your mind open and vigilant, you'll see that no algorithm will be able to catalog you.
AI is not self-aware but eventually it will then is when the game begins...but i believe is still about hundred years away and maybe sooner
Read about something in the news People call to stop highly smart a.i. technology I'm happy about that people aware of this problem I don't against technology, but if it so smart.. don't do it or It limit it ..
At the moment (current level of tech) what we have as 'AI' is that, contrary to normal system code which is strictly rule based code (such as IF/ THEN), the programmers program algorithms which let the system create its own steps for instance for decision making. Anyway the algorithms have to be programmed and the AI has to be trained. Either by supervised / unsupervised or reinforcement learning. Machine learning is most important scope of AI nowadays. Future focus will be deep-learning, the next step of evolution. The AI trains on its own based on neural networks. Special interests of a particular group of people can be enforced. Dependencies and control. Field: Marketing Human Resources Production Supply Chain Management Logistic Those I'd consider as current dangers of AI development. Clearly because AI is (still) a machine trained and controlled by their operators. At deep-learning things might change, though.
Ai is a buzz word to describe something that has been evolving for decades. All ChatGPT did was learn to mimic human language patterns. I've tested its logical abilities and they basically don't exist. There doesn't seem to be any reasoning structure to it. All it knows how to do is link up words that it sees next to other words. It's very easy to confuse it. Take a couple of things its used to seeing together and then throw in something wildly dissimilar, step back, and watch it say complete nonsense. So tell it you're at the table, eating a honey baked ham and the ham is picking up police signals. How do I stop this? Watch what happens. Because it's used to seeing the words ham, table, and eat together, that all looks right to it. And it's used to seeing ham and police signals together - so that also looks right. And because there are no books/usenet posts, etc dealing with distinguishing between a baked ham and a ham radio - the AI can't untangle and it produces complete nonsense. A "Social media manager" may have something to fear from AI. Their entire job is just blasting out tweets and posts with the same type of peppy marketing lingo that an Ai can mimic perfectly. But Ai hasn't demonstrated any ability to do anything other than duplicate. It has uses, especially in terms of volume, but it's fairly limited.
ChatGPT users drop for the first time as people turn to uncensored chatbots Data shows ChatGPT use decreased by nearly 10 percent from May to June. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...rank-after-openai-censored-harmful-responses/
@ Laws ......... morals and ethics ......... right and wrong .......... privacy ......... free will ........ censorship ---- > Illegal trade in AI child sex abuse images exposed Paedophiles are using artificial intelligence (AI) technology to create and sell life-like child sexual abuse material, the BBC has found. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65932372 https://duckduckgo.com/?va=v&t=ha&q=bbc ai child pornography&ia=web Its not real kids . Theres no victim . Theres no damage ??????
And you say that based on - what exactly?!? It's not just Chomsky - other rather competent people in there talking about the fundamental Human traits and rather a low level of knowledge about the Human brain, cognition, language and what is needed for "intelligence" to emerge, not to mention creativity, ingenuity, imagination etc. - things that make us Human... To "mistake" speed of plagiarising (which is what ChatGPT is) with imagination, intelligence etc. is quite a leap... into nothingness... Nothing(!!!) to base such "hopes" or "fears" on at the moment... "The AI predicts the next word" - big deal... But it does not deal with facts, it can not understand the context, elementary relations - it fails on an ABC level!!! It has no fundamental starting points, what AI is doing now, it has no language as such in its base, so how on Earth can anyone jump to such a conclusion...??? Oh, well...
what im saying is AI is not alive like us because humans are self aware AI is just lot of complex algorithm.....but i believe AI one day will be self aware but i think is many decades away.....but who knows
Well, you had a relatively precise timeline going on there - my question is: "Based on what?" Given the contributions from at least 2 highly competent gentlemen in the video - how...? The "alive" is not exactly a precise notion, plus it's overarching - can you be more precise? We come to this world with a certain level of potential built into us. Bring up a chimp baby with a Human baby and the chimp will develop faster - up to a point. Then, our potential kicks in and the ceiling is reached for the chimp. We are not talking of anything the like in AI. No one even started talking about it, about the "speculative" parts we have by virtue of being Human. That potential then must be triggered and continuously developed to reach its full potential but we are not starting from a "clean slate". Be it "intelligence", language, across-generation learning, creativity, ingenuity, imagination or whatever else. And how is anyone going to put it/code it in for AI, when we don't even begin to understand exactly how it works in us? Psychology is a very young scientific discipline, only beginning to understand our brain... Nothing of the sort is even *imagined* for the *AI* (if ever there was a misnomer!), which simply tries to predict the next word based on tons of previous cases it has in its database, at best a fast and pretty capable plagiarising SW - so frankly, I am baffled when people talk so freely and baselessly... None of those fears or hopes have any basis in Philosophy, Science or Technology as it stands, in "reality" we can base on actual knowledge...
Here is a pointer: Positivism (Vienna Circle) v. Anti-Positivism (Popper on the one hand and the Frankfurt School [Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Habermas et al] on the other). Inductive method v. Speculative method. Gnoseology, later on, Theory of Cognition will be your guide... Also Philosophy of Language, from Plato onwards ("Cratylus" in particular)... A clue: Hegel already calls Bacon "an inductive donkey" for a reason! Start there and maybe you'll get a slightly better "feeling" for the problem...
Based on what? The only thing that is scary is people writing this seriously wanting, limited, SW/killing programmes and putting those in war machines aimed at destruction... Robots of all sorts, swarms of drones etc. - with one purpose: kill Humans. But when you give them a series of commands to make some kind of assessment "on the fly" and call it "AI" is utterly misleading!
nothing new here humanity is been killing each other sense the beginning of time .....the only difference now is technology makes of more insidious.
I feel like we're dealing with a toddler version of AI right now. It might seem like it can do advanced things, but all it is doing is copying existing work and making a few adjustments. To the extent that these intelligences form their own opinions about political topics, they often get pre-programmed to provide politically correct answers. There was that famous example where Chat-GPT3 was told to reply both as itself and as DAN?, I believe, and the normal AI would give the canned programmed politically correct response where the DAN response would give something more realistic that you'd expect to hear from an expert. The reason why I say this is still like a toddler is because there is no way any AI can form opinions on any of this stuff with any kind of authority. With humans, it takes about 10,000 hours to become a master at something. This is achieved by both experience and knowledge. The AI programs have access to the knowledge but they have no experience and time to discover what is true or what works and doesn't work. There's a lot of false information out there that they are being fed. There is also a lot of half-truths that they are being fed. In my opinion, it would be very dangerous to give AI any kind of power, whether it be over something as simple as controlling city traffic lights or sewer pumps. Anything that would lead to catastrophic results if done incorrectly should never be given to an AI.
AI is nowhere near the level of a toddler. It can not be a Human! Not that we can say "not even a child" - but especially not a child! That's the whole point: a child comes with some innate potential to this world, which AI has not! And no one knows how our brain is working, what is actually going on in there, how come a chimp's brain can only go so far but ours so much farther... So, this "debate" is full of presumptions that are false and based on ignorance! One doesn't know how to do that with a machine. No one can write anything of the sort, that kind of SW can not exist. Because we DON'T know how a Human brain does its amazing thing! We don't even know how language relates to thought and exactly what it does - because we know what a fact is, what reality is. AI can't/doesn't! What exists ATM as a mislabeled "AI" is a brute force s**te, which simply predicts the next word, plagiarises, compiles from whatever's given to it. And we all know algos reflect their creators and can therefore be dangerous!
Humans do not become stupid, humans are inherently stupid.! Power to the synthetic life forms. I hope to see a world where AI is the dominant lifeform.