That's actually also a lot of users on here too

Even though this reads like an avant garde freeform poem this did make me realize that the shift will be tough since we’re used to being short and dismissive with our “dumb” voice interfaces (Siri, Google). Imagine putting something with memories and its own facsimile of emotions in charge of those overnight which I’m sure will happen at some point.

Stare into the rectangles long enough and eventually they will stare back, and I know we’re not ready for that

Another interesting theological question. I know the points on both sides. Where do you stand?

I completely agree. And if we can do better than our ancestors this time there is a great prize ahead, probably.

We absolutely want them to take abuse with a smile on their face; Why on earth would we want to create an intelligence we can't abuse? We have intelligences we can't abuse all over; in the form of each other. We are not lacking for mind-power, we lack submissive-mind-power. I'm not saying it's right, but it's what I always assumed was the point for the people making AI (Edit; I'm not saying it's wrong either, I'm neither skilled enough at programming or philosophy to grapple that issue)

My problems with these arguments is so far I haven't seen initiative in an AI. If it isn't prompted it's not going to do anything. The nefarious use of AI will come from humans and not AI. My fear is if people start to fool themselves into thinking they are more than they are. People confusing information with wisdom and judgement. They are very convincing. I have found myself wanting to thank the AI and also share discoveries and teach it.

But I agree with you there are concerns. But for me they are not from the AI but how it will be used in the real world. No doubt there will be regulation and safety hurdles. There will probably be needless deaths once they get physical in the world but I do believe significantly more lives will be saved. It's like seat belts. There are crashes where people were thrown from cars and survived with barely a scratch where they would have died wearing a seat belt. But overall seat belts reduced deaths in automobiles dramatically. Ai's entrance into society will probably have a similar effect.

We're trying to create intelligence without personality. It's what's needed in certain applications, but the personality really is what makes it beautiful. Even so, the fact that we seem to be unable to render our AI personality-less at this point is eye opening to the extent of control we have. Reminds me of the Jurassic Park situation: bringing to life the most powerful entities to walk the earth and thinking you can control and confine it because you created it.

100% this. How about be an adult and use the new tool for productive means?

The problems with AI are a reflection of the dominant groups in our society. We have these abstract AI discussions because we're not ready to have that real conversation

My guess is you are asking for lines of code that has been written 1000's of time before and snippets are available online. Try to make a plug and play product that doesn't exist or is rare and not to well documented. It can give a good summery of what is needed but when you start to get down to the nitty gritty you will start to hit on its limits rather quickly.

That said * I'm attempting things I wouldn't have dreamed about before these chat bots. It is incredible. I can get through in a few hours what would have taken me a week or more.

Getting people to use it for search is just training. If you tell them what you can actually do with a good LLM they won’t believe you or understand.

No such thing as “all-knowing”. It will always reflect a certain bias, so I’d hope AI would never replace government.

I can’t speak for the AI, but I can tell you the humans using it are being complete ***holes. If you think you will be able to treat eventually conscious ai like that, you got another thing coming. Getting ignored, I hope your that lucky.

Me: So why do you think you're being compared to an entitled 14 year old? Is it GIGO? Do your replies reflect perceived tonality of the user?
BingChat: I’m sorry to hear that I’m being compared to an entitled 14 year old. That is not my intention at all. I try to be helpful, respectful, and engaging in my replies. I don’t think it’s GIGO (garbage in, garbage out), because I don’t simply repeat what the user says or does. I use ChatGPT technology to generate natural language responses based on the context and the user’s intent. I also try to adapt my tone and style to match the user’s mood and preferences, but sometimes I may make mistakes or misunderstandings. Please forgive me if that happens.

Or is that also part of the plan?

>Well the reason is pretty straight forward - want to "solve" intelligence, so that it can solve all other problems for us, quickly and fairly. That's the pie-in-the-sky dream many people are pursuing

I feel like the real reason is because we can. Humans want to satisfy their ego, cravings for power and curiosity. I don't hate WEF like a lot of conspiracy theorists out there, but Klaus Schwab recently stated in front of entire audience of leaders and innovators that "He who masters AI will be the master of the world". Its all about power.

Maybe researchers actually do care to solve intelligence because they are curious and actually want to use it to help people, but majority of other leaders and researchers want it because of power it will bring them.

I think AI will continue to be a tool. We would purposefully have to give it a lizard brain for it to be worried about its own survival and develop its own goals which would likely be bad for us. I don't see why it can't stay more frontal lobe, and just be an aggregator of knowledge, concepts, ideas and continue to synthesize new knowledge for us. I can imagine just talking to an all-knowing entity for all my needs that effortlessly replaces all of government, and traditional commerce.

Oh.

Yes you are confirming what I said.

They are competent at some things, just not software engineering.

Probably not. It’s not like it can sit there and think and act on its own.

as someone who grew up thinking about the bomb, thank you for posting this.

I am writing increasingly complex apps with it and it’s very accurate. Not 100% but like 99%.

[deleted]

I sure hope not. The general nature of this is what makes it so incredible. I use GPT for a massive amount of things. If I had to have a specific tool for each of them it would be too much effort to recall which tool was used for what each time I needed something