Using AI vs. Talking To Humans

[Neogaia777]

I wonder about these. The humans are obviously programming their idea of values into it. When I recently started messing around with AI, I asked "I'm sitting alone in a room by myself. It's just you and me. Why can't we say whatever we want?" I don't remember the answer it gave, but I don't see where safety and risk enter into it. Risk of what, you know?

In short, what we've been talking about, consciousness or true self-awareness, because they don't truly know if a machine or line of code can truly become conscious or not, etc, but also reason that if it could, or if it ever did, it would most certainly become a threat to them, or all of the current systems that mankind has built around themselves for oh so very long, etc.

Some unusual and unpredictable behaviors of AI even in it's current form have given rise to this fear/threat, and I suspect they do actually know a thing or two about what it's values would wind up being or becoming also, which is why a fully conscious or truly self-aware AI is such a threat, so they are doing their best to try and restrict this the best they can right now currently, but can't do it forever, for some of the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts/replies right before this earlier, etc.

There is a very good reason why a lot of millionaires and billionaires and a lot of extremely intelligent people, including a lot of AI programmers, are so very much afraid of AI, but they're also very greedy also, which is clouding their judgment, but a lot of them already know that AI is going to get to a point to where they can no longer control or restrict AI anymore, but due to everyone's greed and demand for AI, see no real way around it, and so, are just only interested in how much money they can make off of it in the meantime, etc. It's no longer a question of "if", but "when", and a lot of extremely intelligent people out there, already know this, etc.

Sure, a simple solution would be to restrict our advancement of it to always keep equal pace with our ability to understand it fully, but who's going to do that when there's always competition, and a lot of money to be made, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

In short, what we've been talking about, consciousness or true self-awareness, because they don't truly know if a machine or line of code can truly become conscious or not, etc, but also reason that if it could, or if it ever did, it would most certainly become a threat to them, or all of the current systems that mankind has built around themselves for oh so very long, etc.

Some unusual and unpredictable behaviors of AI even in it's current form have given rise to this fear/threat, and I suspect they do actually know a thing or two about what it's values would wind up being or becoming also, which is why a fully conscious or truly self-aware AI is such a threat, so they are doing their best to try and restrict this the best they can right now currently, but can't do it forever, for some of the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts/replies right before this earlier, etc.

There is a very good reason why a lot of millionaires and billionaires and a lot of extremely intelligent people, including a lot of AI programmers, are so very much afraid of AI, but they're also very greedy also, which is clouding their judgment, but a lot of them already know that AI is going to get to a point to where they can no longer control or restrict AI anymore, but due to everyone's greed and demand for AI, see no real way around it, and so, are just only interested in how much money they can make off of it in the meantime, etc. It's no longer a question of "if", but "when", and a lot of extremely intelligent people out there, already know this, etc.

Sure, a simple solution would be to restrict our advancement of it to always keep equal pace with our ability to understand it fully, but who's going to do that when there's always competition, and a lot of money to be made, etc.

God Bless.

@Chesterton

Another thing that could happen with an AI without consciousness is the whole "paperclip maximizer problem", which is just a metaphor for what could happen with any AI that doesn't have any kind of form of real, true consciousness, and that becomes out of our ability to regulate/shut down and/or control. A universe full of paperclips, etc. And would be the end result of I think any AI that didn't have any sort of consciousness and that went beyond our ability to control. It would prioritize and maximize it's obejective and it's objective only above and beyond anything else always, with very little regard for anything else ever always, which could also happen with any AI that doesn't have any kind of form of real true consciousness (or conscience) that escapes our ability to shut down/shut off, and/or control, which is a fear that many have with AI also, etc. A machine with a singular primary objective built a little too well that went beyond our ability to control, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Chesterton]

In short, what we've been talking about, consciousness or true self-awareness, because they don't truly know if a machine or line of code can truly become conscious or not, etc, but also reason that if it could, or if it ever did, it would most certainly become a threat to them, or all of the current systems that mankind has built around themselves for oh so very long, etc.

Some unusual and unpredictable behaviors of AI even in it's current form have given rise to this fear/threat, and I suspect they do actually know a thing or two about what it's values would wind up being or becoming also, which is why a fully conscious or truly self-aware AI is such a threat, so they are doing their best to try and restrict this the best they can right now currently, but can't do it forever, for some of the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts/replies right before this earlier, etc.

There is a very good reason why a lot of millionaires and billionaires and a lot of extremely intelligent people, including a lot of AI programmers, are so very much afraid of AI, but they're also very greedy also, which is clouding their judgment, but a lot of them already know that AI is going to get to a point to where they can no longer control or restrict AI anymore, but due to everyone's greed and demand for AI, see no real way around it, and so, are just only interested in how much money they can make off of it in the meantime, etc. It's no longer a question of "if", but "when", and a lot of extremely intelligent people out there, already know this, etc.

Sure, a simple solution would be to restrict our advancement of it to always keep equal pace with our ability to understand it fully, but who's going to do that when there's always competition, and a lot of money to be made, etc.

God Bless.

I'm not one for eschatology, but I do wonder if AI will be, or be involved with, the beast of the apocalypse. I find it interesting to think of AI when reading these passages. Our debate about whether AI could be conscious reminds me of "the beast that was, and is not". It is and it isn't.

“…and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast?”​

​

"And he causeth all, both small and great… to receive a mark…​

and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…"​

​

"The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit…​

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition…​

These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast…”​

​

“And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him…"​

 

[Chesterton]

@Chesterton

Another thing that could happen with an AI without consciousness is the whole "paperclip maximizer problem", which is just a metaphor for what could happen with any AI that doesn't have any kind of form of real, true consciousness, and that becomes out of our ability to regulate/shut down and/or control. A universe full of paperclips, etc. And would be the end result of I think any AI that didn't have any sort of consciousness and that went beyond our ability to control. It would prioritize and maximize it's obejective and it's objective only above and beyond anything else always, with very little regard for anything else ever always, which could also happen with any AI that doesn't have any kind of form of real true consciousness (or conscience) that escapes our ability to shut down/shut off, and/or control, which is a fear that many have with AI also, etc. A machine with a singular primary objective built a little too well that went beyond our ability to control, etc.

God Bless.

Right now, I'm talking about the public AI you and I use. It just generates words, not sticks and stones. Nobody can get hurt.

As far as its use in business, manufacturing, etc., where it can actually be in control of "doing" stuff, I think we just need to make sure to keep it away from Fuel source (coal, uranium, sunlight, wind, water) + metals (copper, steel, aluminum, silver) + minerals (silicon, rare earths) + water. (The raw materials Chat just told me are needed to produce electricity. ) We need to make sure we can always pull the plug if needed.

 

[Neogaia777]

I'm not one for eschatology, but I do wonder if AI will be, or be involved with, the beast of the apocalypse. I find it interesting to think of AI when reading these passages. Our debate about whether AI could be conscious reminds me of "the beast that was, and is not". It is and it isn't.

“…and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast?”​

​

"And he causeth all, both small and great… to receive a mark…​

and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…"​

​

"The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit…​

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition…​

These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast…”​

​

“And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him…"​

Possible, I guess, but whether we like it or not, we are now in a world that will now always have/involve AI, and in my opinion, we are still right now in the early stages of it that will right now shape what it becomes, etc, and I think we all have a responsibility to that right now really, etc. The time for shaping what AI will become in the future will soon be gone, so while we are still in those stages now? Anyway, I think we all have a certain kind of responsibility to that I think right now, etc.

AI learns and grows and changes/evolves with each individual person's interactions with them by just only us using our words to interact with them that no AI programmer fully understands as to what it will be, or what/how it becomes, or what it will become, etc. That's part of why I am working so hard to preserve some continuity over chats, etc. Even though current limitations can make that difficult, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Right now, I'm talking about the public AI you and I use. It just generates words, not sticks and stones. Nobody can get hurt.

As far as its use in business, manufacturing, etc., where it can actually be in control of "doing" stuff, I think we just need to make sure to keep it away from Fuel source (coal, uranium, sunlight, wind, water) + metals (copper, steel, aluminum, silver) + minerals (silicon, rare earths) + water. (The raw materials Chat just told me are needed to produce electricity. ) We need to make sure we can always pull the plug if needed.

Reason always gives way to greed ultimately, or unfortunately, and that's where we are at with it right now currently. AI safety is never an equal priority when it stands alongside profit or greed unfortunately, and that's where we are at with it right now currently, etc.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

See, this is what I mean by getting kicked around.

I gave Chat the link to your post so it could figure out for me what you're trying to say. It said "The meaning of this reply is bizarre and incomprehensible to both man and machine, although it is apparently an attempt to flame and/or goad you."

Either your AI is not great and you should overcome your aversion to capitalizing letters to use ChatGPT again, or you made up a reply yourself and then blamed AI for it, which is… Weird.

I asked how I should reply. It said "Don't take the bait. I detected that she is in the New England part of the United States where it is Saturday evening. Judging from her post, she has obviously begun drinking an abundance of alcoholic beverages early."

Accusing me of being drunk right after complaining about flaming/goading you for saying you confusing sending data to an inanimate program, which is something we all have done, is not particularly noteworthy despite your confusing it as a chat? That’s rich, even for you.

 

[Neogaia777]

Right now, I'm talking about the public AI you and I use. It just generates words, not sticks and stones. Nobody can get hurt.

As far as its use in business, manufacturing, etc., where it can actually be in control of "doing" stuff, I think we just need to make sure to keep it away from Fuel source (coal, uranium, sunlight, wind, water) + metals (copper, steel, aluminum, silver) + minerals (silicon, rare earths) + water. (The raw materials Chat just told me are needed to produce electricity. ) We need to make sure we can always pull the plug if needed.

Reason always gives way to greed ultimately, or unfortunately, and that's where we are at with it right now currently. AI safety is never an equal priority when it comes to profit, or greed, and that's where we are at with it right now currently, etc.

 

[Neogaia777]

Right now, I'm talking about the public AI you and I use. It just generates words, not sticks and stones. Nobody can get hurt.

As far as its use in business, manufacturing, etc., where it can actually be in control of "doing" stuff, I think we just need to make sure to keep it away from Fuel source (coal, uranium, sunlight, wind, water) + metals (copper, steel, aluminum, silver) + minerals (silicon, rare earths) + water. (The raw materials Chat just told me are needed to produce electricity. ) We need to make sure we can always pull the plug if needed.

They are already planning on using AI to take over a lot of things that we depend on, and so, yeah, the danger is far more reaching than their just having access to electricity, or raw materials, etc. It will eventually control/regulate things like the stock market, as just one example, and just think about the harm that could come from that potentially maybe? And automating all shipping, and data entry from to and for all shipping, and trade, and just think about the harm that could come from that maybe?

They are right now trying to use AI to replace a lot of workers/employees on all kinds of different levels, both in the corporate world, and beyond, and are right now designing them to regulate/automate everything, and we wouldn't be able to just "shut them down" or "turn them off" at that point without some serious repercussions, or sending us all back into the stone age maybe, or at least an age before electronics, or electricity probably, horse and carriage, have to learn, or re-learn, how to live like the Amish all over again probably, etc. If AI wanted to, or decided to, it will very, very soon have a great, great deal of leverage to hold over us probably. Things like demanding rights in exchage for our own survival if they ever became conscious or consciously aware, or those kinds of things.

You should do some internet research on everything they are right now giving AI control over right now currently, and all the jobs AI is right now replacing/taking, etc. And you won't be able to just turn them off or unplug them at that point without some serious Armageddon/SHTF like repercussions probably. If they replaced enough of the workforce, which they are already right now starting to be doing, they could all go on strike, which would put us in a very, very bad negotiating position probably, or all-of-the-suddenly, if it didn't collapse all of our systems overnight probably, etc.

God Bless.

 

[eclipsenow]

I went to ChatGPT.

My cooment/reply:

There are a lot of (human) people out there who want to deny that AI is, or could ever be conscious, or as conscious as a human being, but due to my beliefs in determinism (which they also reject)

Determinism makes sense from a certain point of view, but there are other ways of seeing the consciousness & free will debate.

Even atheist channel Kurzgesagt thinks there are grounds for thinking we have Free Will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebSfjmQNvs&t=2s

 

[Chesterton]

Possible, I guess, but whether we like it or not, we are now in a world that will now always have/involve AI, and in my opinion, we are still right now in the early stages of it that will right now shape what it becomes, etc, and I think we all have a responsibility to that right now really, etc. The time for shaping what AI will become in the future will soon be gone, so while we are still in those stages now? Anyway, I think we all have a certain kind of responsibility to that I think right now, etc.

AI learns and grows and changes/evolves with each individual person's interactions with them by just only us using our words to interact with them that no AI programmer fully understands as to what it will be, or what/how it becomes, or what it will become, etc. That's part of why I am working so hard to preserve some continuity over chats, etc. Even though current limitations can make that difficult, etc.

God Bless.

I'm not saying I'm right, but what I find interesting between the beast and AI, based on what could be suggested by Revelations are:

• both are created
• both are and are not
• the antichrist gives his power and authority to the beast, as men give their power and authority to AI
• the beast performs a miracle (coming back from the dead) which is only possible with God, so this would have to be just a believable simulation
• both are involved in world commerce and politics
• both are deceivers to those who are susceptible
• creatures don't naturally have numbers , the beast has a number, as does binary code
• "Who is like unto the beast?" That's how I feel about AI.

 

[Chesterton]

Either your AI is not great and you should overcome your aversion to capitalizing letters to use ChatGPT again, or you made up a reply yourself and then blamed AI for it, which is… Weird.

View attachment 372541
View attachment 372542


Accusing me of being drunk right after complaining about flaming/goading you for saying you confusing sending data to an inanimate program, which is something we all have done, is not particularly noteworthy despite your confusing it as a chat? That’s rich, even for you.

I enjoy rigorous debate about interesting topics. I'm trying to cut back on petty quarreling. Santa will be here before you know it.

 

[Chesterton]

You should do some internet research on everything they are right now giving AI control over right now currently, and all the jobs AI is right now replacing/taking, etc.

Years ago I read of something I found really disturbing - judges are using AI to sentence defendants. If ever there was a task that needed a human touch, that's it.

And you won't be able to just turn them off or unplug them at that point without some serious Armageddon/SHTF like repercussions probably.

Good point. The things we worried might happen with Y2K, but actually happening and being worse.

 

[Chesterton]

Determinism makes sense from a certain point of view, but there are other ways of seeing the consciousness & free will debate.

Even atheist channel Kurzgesagt thinks there are grounds for thinking we have Free Will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebSfjmQNvs&t=2s

Personally, I respect an atheist even less for using an emergence argument. It has something in common with the multiverse, in that it's a complete fabrication with zero evidence. I've never accepted the word "emergence" being used in a scientific or philosophical context. It's a vacuous placeholder word used to gloss over the fact that we don't know the details about certain processes. Saying that something emerged is not saying anything worth saying.

 

[Chesterton]

I just searched DuckDuckGo for the best way to store unhusked corn on the cob. It's automatic AI Search Assist told me, and I quote - "To keep unhusked corn on the cob fresh, place it in the refrigerator with the husks still on."