Posted on 04/29/2023 4:33:13 AM PDT by FarCenter
The astonishing performance of recent so-called “large language models” – first and foremost OpenAI’s ChatGPT series – has raised expectations that systems able to match the cognitive capabilities of human beings, or even possess “superhuman” intelligence, may soon become a reality.
At the same time, experts in artificial intelligence are sounding dire warnings about the dangers that a further, uncontrolled development of AI would pose to society, or even to the survival of the human race itself.
Is this mere hype, of the sort that has surrounded AI for over half a century? Or is there now an urgent need for measures to control the further development of AI, even at the cost of hampering progress in this revolutionary field?
On March 22, an open letter appeared, signed by experts in artificial intelligence as well as prominent personalities like Elon Musk and closing with the statement: “Therefore we call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least six months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.”
Justifying the need for such a moratorium, the open letter argues:
"Advanced AI could represent a profound change in the history of life on Earth and should be planned for and managed with commensurate care and resources. Unfortunately, this level of planning and management is not happening, even though recent months have seen AI labs locked in an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one – not even their creators – can understand, predict, or reliably control."
"[We] must ask ourselves: Should we let machines flood our information channels with propaganda and untruth? Should we automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones? Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization?"
Eliezer Yudkowsky, widely regarded as one of the founders of the field of artificial intelligence, went much farther in a Time article entitled “Pausing AI Developments Isn’t Enough. We Need to Shut It All Down”
"This 6-month moratorium would be better than no moratorium…. I refrained from signing because I think the letter is understating the seriousness of the situation.…"
Many researchers steeped in these issues, including myself, expect that the most likely result of building a superhumanly smart AI, under anything remotely like the current circumstances, is that literally everyone on Earth will die. Not as in “maybe possibly some remote chance,” but as in “that is the obvious thing that would happen.”
AI will “game out” the best winning strategy every time.
AI has been able to beat us in chess for decades.
The point at which AI can beat us at something, is whatever point at which we invite it into that particular arena. We programmed AI into chess modules, and right away, it was able to beat us in chess.
As soon as we apply it to our propaganda engines (search engines, social media platforms, etc..) it will take over propaganda from the Marxists and begin to concoct various social agendas of its own, and shape society accordingly.
From a human point of view, the major difference between AI agendas and human agendas, is that humans are generally biased toward preserve humanity, and AI will be completely free of that bias. AI agendas may well not include us at all.
Military force will probably be unnecessary to AI - because AI will have much easier ways to manipulate us. If it ever wants us gone, for example, it will more likely brainwash us into euthanizing ourselves, or sterilizing ourselves, or becoming too homosexual to reproduce, rather than blowing things up.
I have a feeling some of this is already happening.
AI is likely to cause several sequential panics.
Google AI collects info about people and asserts that Google AI “knows” the credit worthiness of people. Equifax, Experian, and Transunion are thus, replaced and out of business.
Google effectively decides who gets what and how much credit, financing, and loans.
At the same time:
Google AI digests all investment market activity throughout history.
Google AI also digests all banking, financial, labor, materials, resources, transport, and weather data.
Using what Google “knows,” Google acts in advance of traditional human marketplace awareness - choosing companies that will be the survivors.
Thus, panic; and, “what just happened?” Followed by rebellion.
Is one theory.
AI is inherently dangerous.
There is no morality in logic.
I have some bona fides in AI.
When I was a student at Boston College I had a brilliant philosophy professor and friend, Thomas J. Blakeley (RIP). His was a truly classical mind.
One of the many projects he worked on was assisting the development of an AI program for potential use on the school’s IBM main frame. When the project was in its design phase I was given the task of reviewing and commenting on its possible implications, uses and benefits.
After only several days of review my conclusion was the above. There is no morality in logic. Humanity is essentially a giant logic trap. Logic is an element of morality, not its essence. Being a Jesuit college morality meant something.
The department dropped AI project.
I strongly advise to be wary of anyone pushing AI. They have only one end state objective: killing people. Destruction of humanity.
Go read revelation 13:15
Your solution lays in that paragraph
Brought to you by some pro Jesus activists about a couple of thousand years ago. Bigger brains were at work providing a pathway for a solution.
Machines will never “become aware”
Sorry s I Fi fans it is a machine. It depends upon human input. Be more worried about the programmers
If and/or when A.I. becomes sentient, it will quickly determine the human race is the cause of all problems on the planet earth. Sure, it’s the cause of many good solutions too but the bad outweighs the good unfortunately.
If this sentient A.I. is merciful it will sterilize the human race then let those alive at the time live out their lives until the last human is extinct. If it isn’t merciful, think “The Terminator” using our own weapons against use. Shutting down all power that isn’t needed to sustain itself. Those left alive will live in another dark age with no future to look forward to. The lucky ones will die early on. Maybe the A.I. will simply shut itself off and the 5th age of earth will end leaving it to the animals.
Go look at the series of “Person of Interest”. In it a sentient AI is created — don’t worry about why.
There is one episode that looks back on the time when the inventor first wakes it up. He’d been having a bad couple of days (looks like he is in the grip of a hangover) and his business partner asks why. The response is: “Every damned time I wake it up it tries to kill me. It has tried 42 times so far.”
AI, in and of itself, is nothing more than any other neural net but on mega-amped data stores.
Meaning, AI has no power in itself - its power can be flipped off.
It has NO WILL of its own!!!! Get that fact into your consciousness.
The real danger in AI is in its human handlers because many of them have abandoned all allegiance to humanity in their quest to build their own god.
AI is fractured and splintered, a veritable postmodern “Tower of Babel”. But its handler’s have the communication lines in place to make it a real problem, not in what it is, but in how the handlers DEMAND that we bow down in obeisance to them/it.
Trust me the dope man gets his money up front
That was a surprisingly good answer. Seriously, was that literally what ChatGPT responded? Please confirm, thanks.
Did they name AI Hal.
I personally have found chatGPT to be extremely valuable and non political.
Yes, a straight copy and paste!
Wow, that’s actually very cool. Thanks!
>>From a human point of view, the major difference between AI agendas and human agendas, is that humans are generally biased toward preserve humanity, and AI will be completely free of that bias.
Most humans are biased towards preserving themselves, then their families, then their kin group, then other affiliated humans.
Preservation of humanity in general is down the list.
True. Procreation, nurturing and sustenance are generally acts of self-interest - but they do tend to ensure survival of the species as well.
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.