Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#191

Post by layer8 » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:06 PM UTC

blibble wrote: post #167

layer8 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One salient difference is that animals don’t seem to be capable of hypothesizing about their futures, including their death. Unlike humans, they are are oblivious of the fact that they will die someday (or be slaughtered someday). Sean Carroll had an interesting podcast episode related to that: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2023/01/02/221-...

> Unlike humans, they are are oblivious of the fact that they will die someday (or be slaughtered someday). how do you know?

Personally I don’t strictly know (hence “seem”), but it seems plausible to me, and if animals did regularly mentally time travel like humans do, there should be more evidence of it.

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#192

Post by AnthonyMouse » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:20 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #188

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the fundamental differences between human life and silicon-based AI is that biological organisms can't recover from a system shutdown. If you suffer heart failure or go without air for an hour or starve to death, bacteria start to eat your brain and you're irreversibly destroyed. If you cut power to an AI and then come back in a year, it's all still there. It's not a death, it's sleep mode. It also doesn't mea…

If in the future we developed technology that enabled effective "backup&restore" for human (and animal) minds, would that change your reasoning for this argument?

And it was as cheap and easy as it is on a computer? It would change how we deal with almost everything. All of the social structures we have around preventing people from getting hurt would be irrelevant because damage could be undone. No one would have an experience they didn't choose to have. Murder would be a crime on the level of vandalism or destruction of property. "Human life is sacred" would simply not be true anymore.

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#193

Post by grantcas » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:23 PM UTC

[dead]

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#194

Post by cubefox » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:24 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #190

cubefox wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good test for an AI would be if we excluded all human text mentioning consciousness, experiences, emotions etc from its training data. Then, when it would still start talking about consciousness, that would be strong evidence that it has consciousness: If it did invent the concept by itself, and mere imitation can be ruled out.

But then it would no longer be the same AI. You can't expect it to experience empathy or sadness if it has no knowledge of the things that cause them in humans, but any text discussing them would be mixed up with the experience of whoever wrote it. Or if you use a less selective filter then it goes the other way. Exclude philosophy texts but not Facebook posts and it would still have what it needs to emulate emotiona…

So you are saying the Turing test is not a good test for consciousness?

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#195

Post by kelseyfrog » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:31 PM UTC

cubefox wrote: post #189

kelseyfrog wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but think colors above all else are experienced as a learned phenomenon. Anyone with a kiddo, and who has paid attention during this stage of their development should know this effect: colors are context-dependant. You can have a kiddo who can accurately name colors on a printed page, on blocks, or any other reduced setting, and have them completely fail at the real world task The most noticable error is…

Wait, they say it is white not just about a cloudy sky but also about a clear sky? (Which would suggest they think "white" means "bright", which doesn't seem too unreasonable.)

Yes, a perfectly clear sky. It is a common perceptual illusion. I think it's interesting not that it's wrong, but that children are consistently wrong in the same way.

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#196

Post by AnthonyMouse » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:34 PM UTC

cubefox wrote: post #194

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then it would no longer be the same AI. You can't expect it to experience empathy or sadness if it has no knowledge of the things that cause them in humans, but any text discussing them would be mixed up with the experience of whoever wrote it. Or if you use a less selective filter then it goes the other way. Exclude philosophy texts but not Facebook posts and it would still have what it needs to emulate emotiona…

So you are saying the Turing test is not a good test for consciousness?

I'm saying I don't think we have a good test for consciousness, but then what do you want to do when someone tries to claim that an AI is conscious and no one can prove it one way or the other?

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#197

Post by johnea » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:40 PM UTC

Yea, I mean, look at how much damage concsious primates caused...

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#198

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:43 PM UTC

kajaktum wrote: post #161

cubefox wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that other humans are so similar to me (all humans are similar in virtue of being human organisms) allows for an analogical inference: You guys are similar to me, I am conscious, therefore you are probably also conscious. And whether or not something is conscious matters a lot ethically. If something is conscious, it may suffer. Conscious and unconscious objects have to be treated in a completely different w…

> The fact that other humans are so similar to me (all humans are similar in virtue of being human organisms) allows for an analogical inference: You guys are similar to me, I am conscious, therefore you are probably also conscious. That hinges on the fact that the brain, or human-like body, is related to the existence of consciousness. But there's no reason to believe that a bunch of electrical pulses as the source…

[deleted]

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#199

Post by nemosaltat » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:58 PM UTC

breckinloggins wrote: post #132

kajaktum wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am really curious to know why? And don't invoke "what about your kids, mothers, fathers?". "Solipsism" (first time I have heard of this, so thank you) does not make me feel any less worse when something happens to them.

The parent was making a joke, but one way to answer your question might be: You feel bad because you assume they - like you - feel something when you mistreat them, and you assume this at a very deep level that might not, itself, feel like anything to you.

While some humour was intended, I do actually grapple with this question. The answer that rings truest for me, especially as a newly minted father, is Vonnegut’s: “A purpose of life, no matter who is controlling it, is to love whoever is around to be loved.”

Re: Why Conscious AI Is a Bad, Bad Idea

#200

Post by throwuwu » Sat, May 13, 2023, 6:03 PM UTC

tgv wrote: post #83

throwuwu wrote: post #9

Some pretty sloppy definitions and a faulty assertion right out of the gate. I’d argue it’s plainly obvious that humans are adapted to living in a world populated by conscious objects, we already treat inanimate objects as if they had personality and intent. If we came across one that actually did have a mind we’d immediately know how to interact with it as long as we could communicate. As for that definition of cons…

You call it badly written, but assert that "we’d immediately know how to interact with it as long as we could communicate"? But not being able to give a definition of consciousness doesn't matter . We all sort of know what it is, and it's not good for a computer to have it.

Why is it bad for a computer to have consciousness but good for a human?