There is no A.I.
newyorker.com
There is no A.I.
1–10 of 523 posts
Re: There is no A.I.
#2[flagged]
Re: There is no A.I.
#3[flagged]
This is correct. Expect 10000x more articles like this over the next couple years.
Re: There is no A.I.
#4For those who don’t know about the author, he is most well known a founder of the field of virtual reality. As a full time philosopher in the CTO’s office at MSFT, and the originator of concepts like data dignity, he’s uniquely qualified to write this kind of piece.
Re: There is no A.I.
#5[deleted]
Re: There is no A.I.
#6Re: There is no A.I.
#7It is possible that AI can perfectly replicate human intelligence. But because it is purely digital, I cannot kill it - I can delete it, copy it, recreate it, and so on but never kill it. Only biological organisms can die.
Therefore no matter what happens, there is a distinction between human intelligence and AI. I can destroy an AI creature and the only penalty should be property damage (if relevant).
Re: There is no A.I.
#8This article initially seems to be arguing over semantics, saying that AI isn't AGI, which most people would agree with. Then talks about data dignity, which is interesting but a bit of a tangent.
My understanding of the concern over AGI, or even an all-powerful "AI" isn't that it's not truly self-aware, but rather that it's motives are not in line with humanity's motives.
It doesn't matter if it trains on data by humans if it still doesn't have the moral compass of a human. Not really sure what data dignity will provide if we truly do have a misaligned "AGI"
Re: There is no A.I.
#9It is possible that AI can perfectly replicate human intelligence. But because it is purely digital, I cannot kill it - I can delete it, copy it, recreate it, and so on but never kill it. Only biological organisms can die. Therefore no matter what happens, there is a distinction between human intelligence and AI. I can destroy an AI creature and the only penalty should be property damage (if relevant).
If an AI has mutable memory, and could be convinced to damage its memory in such a way that it no longer acts usefully (or does so by accident), is that functionally different from "death"?
This doesn't really apply to GPT, where the core functionality is immutable.
Re: There is no A.I.
#10It is possible that AI can perfectly replicate human intelligence. But because it is purely digital, I cannot kill it - I can delete it, copy it, recreate it, and so on but never kill it. Only biological organisms can die. Therefore no matter what happens, there is a distinction between human intelligence and AI. I can destroy an AI creature and the only penalty should be property damage (if relevant).
This seems like a reach, like you started from your conclusion.