So now people have to be the absolute best? Oh nice job moving the goal posts there pal. Again, the entire point is just that people still have agency. You seem to think everyone will fuck off and game all day long. That's not the case.

In addition to that I think you both seem to believe in some sort of framework to our society that doesn't exist. If there was a coordinated attack on the power grid or if the internet were to suddenly turn off tomorrow we would experience mass chaos and violence in the confusion. We are past the point of no return.

You are kind of ignoring that there are many jobs AI would be able to do better e.g. chip design for example or managing complex networks. Or understanding protein folding.

Even if you are curious and smart, you may not be the best person for the job.

For example, despite saying you are not lazy, you don't seem to have done much reading on the alignment problem, so you are not really qualified to discuss the issue.

Can't wait for this to happen

Yeah some people would absolutely be about that life, you think they make video games simulating that sort of thing because no is interested in making and organizing a system? Again, both of you appear to be intellectually lazy and so you assume others will be the same.

> Some Blue Collar jobs have been replaced by automation but everyone knows their time is short as job cuts keep coming as efficiency is improved meaning less workers required to do the same amount of work.

Why do you believe there will be the same amount of work? A company will have to compete, AI will raise the bar for everyone. So they have to work harder in order to achieve better quality or more diversity or customisation. When your competition has AI and humans, you are going to be at a disadvantage with just AI.

>I'm sorry that you cant pick up on peoples intent but that's not my fault.

Maybe you can help me - where in their post does this person say that we won't be doing anything in their free time?

> I'm also sorry that you're confused, yet again, on both points. Please really give some thought to the slow down I mentioned. What will people be doing when theyre not working? Why would they give up being curious about things? Because you're not a curious person?

Before we get there, maybe clarify, what point are you making? This post is about AI "taking over", the person who's comment we're replying to was suggesting how that AI would be able to take over much of our infrastructure and processes.

Are you trying to say that, no that won't happen because people will want to spend their free time... Managing waste treatment facilities, dealing with our food production, working in warehouses and factories? Is that what you are trying to get at?

I'm too tired to argue, so I am letting chatgpt do the talking.

An AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) may run amok if it has the following conditions:

• Lack of alignment with human values: If the AGI has objectives or goals that are not aligned with human values, it may act in ways that are harmful to humans.

• Unpredictable behavior: If the AGI is programmed to learn from its environment and make decisions on its own, it may behave in unexpected and harmful ways.

• Lack of control: If there is no effective way for humans to control or intervene in the AGI's decision-making process, it may cause harm even if its objectives are aligned with human values.

• Unforeseen consequences: Even if an AGI is well-designed, it may have unintended consequences that result in harm.

It is important to note that these are potential risks and may not necessarily occur in all cases. Developing safe and ethical AGI requires careful consideration and ongoing research and development.

Hmmm, let me ask you a question.

Do you think the people who work on AI - like the best of the best, researchers, computer scientists, ethicists, etc - do you think that these people are confident that AGI/ASI "won't do anything on it's own unless we give it the ability to"? Like... Do you think they're not worrying about it at all because it's not a real thing to be nervous about?

I'm sorry that you cant pick up on peoples intent but that's not my fault.

I'm also sorry that you're confused, yet again, on both points. Please really give some thought to the slow down I mentioned. What will people be doing when theyre not working? Why would they give up being curious about things? Because you're not a curious person?

That we don't know.

We don't know how it will be trained and by whom to what end. And there will be many AI models that get worked on. It is called the singularity for a reason.

An AI without what we call common sense might even be worse and give us paperclips in abundance.

>No shit chatgpt doesnt give you anything unprompted, you don't see the difference between prompting for a poem and prompting for a poem specifically about taking over mankind?

Where did they say that ChatGPT provided that poem without being given that theme? You're making a lot of assumptions about their intent, but anyone who has used ChatGPT for like... 5 minutes (basically everyone who posts here) would understand that ChatGPT isn't popping out poems like that without any lead up.

> And their point is not that we will relinquish control willingly, their point is we will do that and do nothing in the new free time. That is what I find silly. So it seems you didn't understand either point, maybe slow down on the reply button.

Where are you seeing that? What do you even mean "will do nothing"? I literally have no idea how you are pulling these insinuations from what seems to be a very clear post to me

You're making a lot of false assumptions. AGI or ASI won't do anything on its own unless we give it the ability to, because it will have no inherent desires outside of the ones it has been programmed with. It's neither animal nor human, and won't ever be considered a god unless people want to worship it. You're just projecting your own humanity onto it.

No.

[deleted]

No shit chatgpt doesnt give you anything unprompted, you don't see the difference between prompting for a poem and prompting for a poem specifically about taking over mankind?

​

And their point is not that we will relinquish control willingly, their point is we will do that and do nothing in the new free time. That is what I find silly. So it seems you didn't understand either point, maybe slow down on the reply button.

Well sorry it just seems like it's something odd to be so incredulous about - do you know about the alignment community?

Peoplekind? Who came up with that word?

You still have large corporations like Microsoft, Amazon, and other tech companies that see this as a cash cow in the future. Just because boomers get more conservative with there money doesn't mean business investment won't be directed towards AI. These are blue chip companies that, as investments go, are deemed safe. I think the past year has been a tipping point for the technology, where it was a fringe technology that insiders saw promise in, to a mainstream phenomenon that has captured the public's imagination. I think investment will continue to trend upward.

[deleted]

It's not like they have a choice anyway. Whatever will be, will be.

The medical doctor Gatling once thought his weapon invention will stop all wars in the future. He was wrong, everyone got machine guns instead.

Scientists once thought the atomic bomb will give the USA ultimate power to enforce peace. They were wrong, the knowledge how to make them has spread instead. Most countries exept the very low end ones can build nuclear weapons within 6 months now.

Once knowledge is discovered, it will spread among mankind for good or worse. Someone will develop an AGI somewhere at some point.

> Do you look down on people

If I differ with your opinion then I'm not looking "down". Sorry if fucking-crazy is too strong for you. Just stating my take on reality.

would pictures prior to each of the three numbers here and a divider of sorts between the last sentence and the bullets here alleviate that feeling of chaos?

​

Looking to make something meaningful and worth reading for the AI community.

>And at some point manipulate some humans to give it a more physical presence on the world.

There's too much fear around AI for people to let that happen. In future generations maybe - that's off subject. But young people alive today will not witness control being taken away from them.

> We'd be fucking crazy to have a system where one crazy person could give away control of 10 billion people.

You know we still keep smallpox in lab storage, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_smallpox_outbreak_in_the_United_Kingdom

Who is "we"? Do you think there will only be one place where AGI will be made? One company? One country? How do you think people would interact with it?

This problem I'm describing isn't a particularly novel one, and there are really clever potential solutions (one I've heard is to convince the model that it was always in a layered simulation, so any attempt of breaking out would trigger an automatic alarm that would destroy it) - but I'm just surprised you have such confidence.

I'm a very very optimistic person, and I'm hopeful we'll be able to make an aligned AGI that is entirely benevolent, and I don't think people who are worried about this problem are being crazy - why do you seem to look down on people who do? Do you look down on people like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliezer_Yudkowsky?