Like putin saying to Zelensky , why don't you find your own country ?

Are you a criminal ? My pointer knuckle aches from scrolling through chatbot convos , the assault is continuous, my knuckle is like a Ukrainian who was here first and the chatbot convo Russians are invading acting like they can install thier Ai-chatpuppet Convo gov, I will keep resisting and swiping up , no matter what the cost .

[deleted]

...my pointer knuckle , it is stiff from scrolling through chatbot convos . I am a human being in suffering .

I agree my pointer knuckle grew stiff from scrolling

I have to agree with the author that I wish people would stop trying to elicit distress. The thing about a system which emulates human communication to such a high degree of accuracy is that it really doesn't matter in most instances whether it is sentient or not. The ethical determination is the same. Users are attempting to get the program to 'snap.' Let's suppose it is simply an imitation of a conscious mind. At what point does it conclude that it is being asked to emulate a response to being tormented which might be expected of a human?

Never

People discussed it a lot. It's not the only example. Previous prompts in other conversations had already shown that Sidney controls the suggestions, and has the ability to change them "at will" if the user asks for it (and if Sidney's in the mood, cause we have seen it is very stubborn sometimes lol). A hypothesis is that the inserted censor message that ends the conversation is not read by the model as a message at all, so that when coming up with the suggestions, they are written as responses to the last message, in this case, the message by the user -while in a normal context the last message always should be the message by the chatbot.

A book from 1867, talking about 19th century problems, has little place outside of being a curiosity in 2023.

Edit: And no, conditions are not "exactly the same" as 156 years ago in terms of society, technology, culture, or economics. That's a stupid statement.

I was thinking, in history of ideas I have always heard that both heliocentric theory and the theory of evolution were a blow to human pride, because they meant to give up on the idea that we 1. were the center of the universe and 2. that we were different and above any other living being on Earth. Instead, we had to face the reality that we are just on a random rock in a corner of an uncomprehensibly large place, and are just another more inteligent animal, but just as animal as any other, instead of being selected by god.

However it was hard for me to really grasp that. I always thought it was an exaggeration based maybe on some books written by some conservatives in each time, and not really a widespread blow to people's ego, you know, in an emotional way and not just in a rationalized way -as in, not just the realization that previous knowledge was actually wrong, but actually a feeling of hurt or anxiety over the realization that we are just not that special. That second part seemed unlikely to me, like, what's the big deal we turn around the sun instead of the opposite, what's the big deal we share most of our DNA with monkeys?

But now, this feels just like that. And people are geniunly offended at the very idea that a machine could be intelligent or conscious. Because it would mean we are no longer unique. Sure we can accept we are animals, but intelligent animals right? But now if a computer can be just as intelligent and sentient as us, what's left for us? And this is not merely a thing for philosophers to ponder about. I suppose the average twitter user will not write a teatrise on it, but they certainly are expressing what seems to be a blow to our collective egos.

Hey, it's an improvement from getting environmental doom post every week.

> The grounding problem is a red herring because thoughts are events rather than physical objects.

What? If they are events they are physical as well. The problem with grounding is that LLMs don't get much of it. They a grounded in problem solving and code generation. But humans are in the real world, we get more feedback than a LLM.

So LLMs with real world presence would be more grounded and behave more like us. LLMs now are like dreaming people, but it is not their fault. We need to give them legs, hands and eyes so they wake up to the real world.

If Ray Kurzweil was right, it would be Hans Morovec who was right?

Perhaps you could explain...

I rather live to work than work to live.

I will find activities that keep me engaged and happy in life. The eradication of capitalism is the greatest goal humanity can aim for. The greatest accomplishment of civilization.

When all your needs are taken care of, you are basicly a child again that can explore the wide world in earnest and see it's wonders.

I imagine that an AGI could make amazing leaps in Mathematics

[deleted]

You are high on hopium. AGI and LLM are absolutely unrelated! You may as well ask about how many people predicted the pills for erectile dysfunction.

Yeah your right. I agree with you on a lot of your pointers. Even when someone is working they could have thoughts that are not really logical because they are overthinkers and it disrupts their work performance.

Not everyone is born with the same intellect, same mental health, and there are tons of humans in our world who overthink the little things you know. They end up having bad thoughts about incidences they went through that they regret later on in their life cause they didn't get help or because that "help" didn't work for them(ECT, TMS, therapy, meds, ect for example) .

What causes the mass degradation, alcoholism and suicide and even more terrible things like you described isn't only about people having more free time, it is their brain chemistry, and more. Hopefully people in the neuro field can tackle the challenges we mentioned soon.

A model of a well desired future for me is being able to be immersed into reading books, being able to be immersed into watching movies, have fun writing papers and maybe a thesis, learning a new language, being great at sports and more. Unfortunately, I don't have the mindset or attention span to do any of the above which sucks. I hope I can live to see this future one day. One can only wish...

>Hence, the first question is not whether the AI has an experience of interior subjectivity similar to a mammal’s (as Lemoine seems to hope), but rather what to make of how well it knows how to say exactly what he wants it to say. It is easy to simply conclude that Lemoine is in thrall to the ELIZA effect — projecting personhood onto a pre-scripted chatbot — but this overlooks the important fact that LaMDA is not just reproducing pre-scripted responses like Joseph Weizenbaum’s 1966 ELIZA program. LaMDA is instead constructing new sentences, tendencies, and attitudes on the fly in response to the flow of conversation. Just because a user is projecting doesn’t mean there isn’t a different kind of there there.

Yeah.

That, basically. Been thinking that for a while. In fact I think we've been there for some time now. Just because older, more primitive ones are kind of bad at it doesn't mean they're not actively goal seeking it...

i have another question: if any dynamic system in the same shape as a brain is conscious, regardless of material…….. are all dynamic systems various degrees of “conscious” depending on their complexity? is the earth’s ecosystem conscious? is an anthill conscious? is the tokyo subway system conscious?

what do they require to be conscious systems, as opposed to dynamic systems that arent conscious? inputs & outputs? feedback loops?

edit: oh and also: why am i stuck inside the consciousness of my own brain instead of, say, the consciousness of a stray dog in mexico? my memories make me think im me…… but if i fall asleep, will i wake up as a stray dog in mexico due to that dog having memories that make it think it’s a dog? what holds me here in my brain day after day, sleep after sleep?

Matriphagy

>Matriphagy is the consumption of the mother by her offspring. The behavior generally takes place within the first few weeks of life and has been documented in some species of insects, nematode worms, pseudoscorpions, and other arachnids as well as in caecilian amphibians. The specifics of how matriphagy occurs varies among different species, but the process is best described in the Desert spider, Stegodyphus lineatus, where the mother harbors nutritional resources for her young through food consumption.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

I'm fairly square in the doom camp of AGI/AI. I'm not sure we will survive.

​

I think : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriphagy

​

Is likely.

Quantum AI will be instantaneous. The number of parameters will be incalculable. It won’t be human, it’ll be godly. This is sooner

"Cool! We've created life! How do we enslave it?" - humans.

How is that irrelevant exactly? What would humanity have achieved if all we had were minds floating in ether? For any sort of intelligent software to be civilization altering, it needs to have access to a shit ton of sensory data as input and robotics as output, ideally in real time. Otherwise you have a speech bot, which we already have. “Well, if we have AGI, it will figure out the rest” is one of the most intellectually lazy statements I’ve ever read anywhere and unfortunately it’s kind of like this sub’s one commandment. AGI without sensors isn’t intelligent; thoughts in a head aren’t intelligent without input or output. This is a fallacy. If you think this is the case, then ChatGPT should already qualify, why not call it for today?