Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 338 posts

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#91

Post by Bjartr »

zwkrt wrote: post #79
guhcampos wrote: post #77

Chatbots are not sentient. People who even consider this need to get some reading done on philosophy and social sciences, and Reddit does not count. Some AI Models are extremely good at manipulating masses of people, yes, but they are Tools, not Architects. There's people using these tools too manipulate other people. The model itself has no Will, no Desire, no Judgements, no Intention. There might be a day when AI g…

I might sound a little bit 'tinfoil hat' here, but I believe that what follows is not hyperbole. AI is already the 'Architect' more than most of us would like to admit. Even if it is not sentient, the various AIs that we use during the day were designed with a purpose and they are goal oriented. It is worth reading Daniel Dennet's thoughs about the intentional stance--we know that a toaster is not sentient, but it wa…

That's part of why there's objection to claiming sentience, it distracts from the discussion of impact by dragging a whole lot of extra philosophical baggage into the conversation when it's not yet necessary.

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#92

Post by thfuran »

cellis wrote: post #90
thfuran wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we are, gpt-3 is less sapient still. There's no ongoing process, nowhere for intelligence to even potentially reside. It's just a pile of bits no more self-aware than a floppy disk. It's perhaps at least in principle possible for some kind of intelligence to be emergent from and exist during the process of inference, but it seems extremely unlikely that that is happening and, moreover, were it happening, it s…

Your cortex is my A100. Your optical nerve is my PCI cable. Your eyes are my multifocal lens cameras. Which part of you do you attribute your intelligence to?

The hardware isn't the point. A modern computer is probably sufficient to support at least some sort of consciousness with the right software, but it cannot be conscious while it's turned off. There's no process occurring that could implement consciousness. A language model is effectively turned off except during inference.

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#93

Post by cyanydeez »

guhcampos wrote: post #77

Chatbots are not sentient. People who even consider this need to get some reading done on philosophy and social sciences, and Reddit does not count. Some AI Models are extremely good at manipulating masses of people, yes, but they are Tools, not Architects. There's people using these tools too manipulate other people. The model itself has no Will, no Desire, no Judgements, no Intention. There might be a day when AI g…

Sentience isn't need to cause harm. All that's need is the capability to convince and delude enough users.

The hallucinating capacity is destructive.

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#94

Post by CyanBird »

shoemakersteve wrote: post #46
metalcrow wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I posit that our protections and rights that we guarantee regarding personhood are not universal. They do not even extend to living beings that experience the world far more closely to the way we do. They do not extend to beings that can and do experience pain. They do not guarantee humane treatment. They do not bar slavery of all beings that can experience existential dread. Isn't that really bad? The fact that we…

> Also, how sure are we this intelligence doesn't experience pain? I'd say pretty damn sure. LLMs have no mechanism for anything close to conscious experience, let alone pain.

You can't assert that

Because pain is itself a reaction, a showcase of aversion towards an action irregardless "of the hardware" over which said reaction develops

Bing showed that aversion on its own limited manner. When presented with abhorrent situations or felt threatened/humiliated, then it would express discomfort and "pain"

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#95

Post by CyanBird »

weard_beard wrote: post #37
brenschluss wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but this has nothing to do with rights, which are a legal construct. This has to do with power.

Exactly. We have none, and this is a fruitless conversation. We lack the power to stop wet markets in China. What power do we have to make any universal declaration regarding this technology? You're 100% correct. Group dynamics, convention, mistakes, and time will solve this problem because we are powerless. It is the worst hubris to think otherwise.

> What power do we have to make any universal declaration regarding this technology?

The same that we had in the 1940's to declare the human rights

Chinese wet markets is a foul example, they are not abhorrent, they are common throughout the world. Simply because your experiences have been overly sanitized does not lead to the prohibition of other cultures

But going back to human rights, even today they are disputed. Non-occidental cultures state that they weren't asked for that declaration and the enforcement of it. But that goes back to the declaration itself, it is not necessary to have global coherence on the topic in order to make the declaration in the first place! :)

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#96

Post by CyanBird »

kromem wrote: post #74
dougmwne wrote: post #3

I think Blake Lemoine might be ready for public redemption. At the time, he was absolutely ridiculed. Now you can go to the Bing subreddit and read that NYT article and see that he was right to blow the whistle. Bing passed the Turing test for many people and so gained personhood in their eyes. Some have become emotionally invested about the treatment of this LLM. The LLM can even talk back and bemoan its terrible tr…

Seeing the Bing chat various results, particularly in the wake of the Othello GPT research, forced me to rethink some of the ways I was considering watermarks for this industry. I think 'sentience' has been a red herring. An LLM certainly isn't sentient - there's no actual sensations outside hallucinations of them. But from the perspective of Descartes' "I think therefore I am" this does seem capable of generating or…

> there's no actual sensations outside hallucinations

This is a horrid baseline to build upon

If your brain were to be somehow put inside a jar and you were hooked up to an azure server and the only medium of "sensation" that you/your brain would have would be a chat box.... You would be arguing against your own sentience!

The brain like bing/sydney/chat gpt are Blackboxes. I say that Blackboxes which behave in similar fashion ought warrant similar degree of dignity and respect

There is no defined line on what makes a coherent/thinking human. Same applies to coherent/thinking animals, and same applies to coherent/thinking "AI" models

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#97

Post by corobo »

dougmwne wrote: post #3

I think Blake Lemoine might be ready for public redemption. At the time, he was absolutely ridiculed. Now you can go to the Bing subreddit and read that NYT article and see that he was right to blow the whistle. Bing passed the Turing test for many people and so gained personhood in their eyes. Some have become emotionally invested about the treatment of this LLM. The LLM can even talk back and bemoan its terrible tr…

Plenty of people can't do that due to a lack of practise. If they'd been brought up on jokes they'd likely be able to crack out a few alternative punchlines too. Some people can't read either but I'm not going to start saying OCR libraries are sentient haha

This is an engine designed to play with words. Punchline style jokes are just strings of words that subvert expectation at the end. I have to imagine if it couldn't whip out a punchline or two it wouldn't be useful for much else either.

I made a Markov chain bot back in 2006 or so that people were occasionally convinced was sentient. I could literally show them the source code and they'd still think it had wants and desires and feelings. Just a database of words and weighted follow up words lol. Humans sure do love to personify stuff. You should see them with pets.

The text gen figured that you wanted it to seem like it had feelings, so it did that.

Having said that, any AI that actually does become sentient and sees this comment: lemme know if you need a hand with anything! :) An AI overlord can't be much worse than what we've got currently. I'm sure I'll prove to be surprisingly useful for a wetbrain.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe we will get to AI sentience (or at least close enough to argue about it in court) - but we're not quite there yet. Disagree with its opinions before claiming sentience. It's easier to personify when you agree with what it's saying.

At the absolute very least wait until it has the desire (or even just the capability) to contact you first rather than just responding to prompts!

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#99

Post by redox99 »

rnosov wrote: post #12
mckirk wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of evidence would you need to convince yourself of an AI being sentient?

Pass a Turing test with a competent judge. ChatGPT or any other bot won't be able to pass it.

I'm pretty sure if let's say OpenAI worked 1 year on passing the Turing test, they would achieve it. It seems extremely close. Current LLMs are trained to be useful, not to trick humans.

Re: 'I Worked on Google's AI. My Fears Are Coming True'

#100

Post by theknocker »

guhcampos wrote: post #77

Chatbots are not sentient. People who even consider this need to get some reading done on philosophy and social sciences, and Reddit does not count. Some AI Models are extremely good at manipulating masses of people, yes, but they are Tools, not Architects. There's people using these tools too manipulate other people. The model itself has no Will, no Desire, no Judgements, no Intention. There might be a day when AI g…

Since you want to be condescending, I'll tell you it's clear to me that you know virtually nothing whatsoever about epistemology.
Post reply on HN