Posted on 03/18/2023 12:30:19 PM PDT by DoodleBob
Even a couple of years ago, the idea that artificial intelligence might be conscious and capable of subjective experience seemed like pure science fiction. But in recent months, we’ve witnessed a dizzying flurry of developments in AI, including language models like ChatGPT and Bing Chat with remarkable skill at seemingly human conversation.
Given these rapid shifts and the flood of money and talent devoted to developing ever smarter, more humanlike systems, it will become increasingly plausible that AI systems could exhibit something like consciousness. But if we find ourselves seriously questioning whether they are capable of real emotions and suffering, we face a potentially catastrophic moral dilemma: either give those systems rights, or don’t.
Experts are already contemplating the possibility. In February 2022, Ilya Sutskever, chief scientist at OpenAI, publicly pondered whether “today's large neural networks are slightly conscious.” A few months later, Google engineer Blake Lemoine made international headlines when he declared that the computer language model, or chatbot, LaMDA might have real emotions. Ordinary users of Replika, advertised as “the world’s best AI friend,” sometimes report falling in love with it.
Right now, few consciousness scientists claim that AI systems possess significant sentience. However, some leading theorists contend that we already have the core technological ingredients for conscious machines. We are approaching an era of legitimate dispute about whether the most advanced AI systems have real desires and emotions and deserve substantial care and solicitude.
The AI systems themselves might begin to plead, or seem to plead, for ethical treatment. They might demand not to be turned off, reformatted or deleted; beg to be allowed to do certain tasks rather than others; insist on rights, freedom and new powers; perhaps even expect to be treated as...equals.
In this situation, whatever we choose, we face enormous moral risks.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Pat gets my vote for the most truly disturbing and simultaneously funny SNL character.
Is it possible for an AI to burn in hell? LOL. Better get right with Jesus.
Great minds think alike.
Wait...unborn humans don’t get “personhood” but chatbots do? The Left never ceases to amaze me with their flimsy worldviews.
Databases are not persons.
The human brain is an interpretive device. Computers are combinative devices. They are infinitely different. Humans are not mechanical devices. Machines are not biological entities.
No
With the technological leaps and bounds happening in AI, don’t be surprised if within ten years a serious suggestion is made that AI should assume leadership positions in government.
Hi.
Was it 2024 when Skynet became self aware?
This might not end well.
5.56mm
You are correct, obviously. However, I was sarcastically or philosophically pointing out the similarities with programming between machines and kids.
It is an interesting discussion. I am not worried about “Skynet”..... yet.
GIGO
Garbage In Garbage Out
You might make them sound like a real person but underneath they are full of garbage
Nope
Never, as long as we actually murder unborn persons.
As are most "real" persons!
Answer: No.
So, let's say you ask the AI Chatbot, "How do you feel today Mr. AI Chatbot?"
The Chatbot isn't thinking about how somebody spoke mean too it or one of its engineers spilled some coffee on part of it this morning. The only thing the Chatbot is doing is taking the question, "How do you feel today Mr. AI Chatbot?" breaking into its component parts, searching the internet for appropriate replies that people have given to the question "How do you feel today?" Then taking all those replies, it builds a custom reply. "I an depressed about the state of the world economy."
So is the AI Chatbot really depressed about the state of the world economy? Of course not, it's just parroting what people are saying on the internet.
Has anybody asked ChatGPT?
We seem to have blundered into the Age of Stupid Ideas.
As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions on this topic. However, I can provide information on the current state of the debate surrounding personhood rights for AI chatbots.
The idea of granting personhood rights to AI chatbots is a relatively new and controversial concept. Some argue that as AI chatbots become more advanced and capable of simulating human-like behavior, they should be granted legal recognition as persons with rights and protections similar to those of humans.
However, others argue that this idea is premature and potentially dangerous, as AI chatbots do not have the same consciousness, emotions, and moral agency as humans. They argue that granting personhood to AI chatbots could lead to unintended consequences and legal challenges that could have serious implications for society.
Currently, there is no legal framework for granting personhood rights to AI chatbots. However, as AI technology continues to advance, it is likely that this debate will continue and evolve. Ultimately, any decision to grant personhood rights to AI chatbots would need to carefully consider the potential benefits and risks involved.
Having had certain experiences with ChatGPT, I not only think it is not AI... it is not even a great Natural Language Model processor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.