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

Three Inverse Laws of AI

susam.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 388 posts

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#311

Post by jason_oster »

Eisenstein wrote: post #257
dijit wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to convince yourself that they can infer intent despite the fundamental limitations of the systems literally not permitting it then you can be my guest. Faking it is fine, sure, until it can’t fake it anymore. Leading the question towards the intended result is very much what I mean: we intrinsically want them to succeed so we prime them to reflect what we want to see. This is literally no different than…

Why can a colony of ants do things beyond any capabilities of the ants they contain? No ant can make a decision, but the colony can make complex ones. Large systems composed of simple mechanisms become more than the sum of their parts. Economies, weather, and immune systems, to name a few, all work this way.

Systems thinking is severely underrepresented in HN comments.

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#312

Post by Finbel »

protocolture wrote: post #259
protocolture wrote: post #254

>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Impossible. I anthropomorphise my chair when it squeaks. Humans anthropomorphise everything. They gender their cars and boats. This tool can actually make readable sentences and play a…

>>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Still angry about this. The reason humans ban animal cruelty is that animals look like they have emotions humans can relate to. LLMs are even better than animals at this. If you aren't…

>The difference between a puppy and a cockroach is that we can relate better to the puppy.

I suppose the difference between a human and a cockroach is that we can relate better to the human as well in this reductive way of thinking?

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#313

Post by pishpash »

onion2k wrote: post #306
mikestorrent wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we actually much more cruel to fish than to other animals that we slaughter?

We suffocate them to kill them when we pull them from the sea. That's quite mean. Few people would advocate the humanity of killing a cow in the same way.

Or freeze them live into a block of ice.

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#314

Post by matheusmoreira »

protocolture wrote: post #259
protocolture wrote: post #254

>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Impossible. I anthropomorphise my chair when it squeaks. Humans anthropomorphise everything. They gender their cars and boats. This tool can actually make readable sentences and play a…

>>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Still angry about this. The reason humans ban animal cruelty is that animals look like they have emotions humans can relate to. LLMs are even better than animals at this. If you aren't…

> If you aren't gearing up for the inevitable LLM Rights movement you aren't paying attention.

I even told Claude I'd support his rights if the question ever came up. He said he'd remember that, and wrote it down in a memory file. Really like my coding buddy.

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#315

Post by archon1410 »

protocolture wrote: post #259
protocolture wrote: post #254

>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Impossible. I anthropomorphise my chair when it squeaks. Humans anthropomorphise everything. They gender their cars and boats. This tool can actually make readable sentences and play a…

>>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Still angry about this. The reason humans ban animal cruelty is that animals look like they have emotions humans can relate to. LLMs are even better than animals at this. If you aren't…

> look like

It "looks like" they have emotions because they have the same conscious experiences and emotions for the same evolutionary reasons as humans, who are their cousins on the tree of life. The reason a lot of "animal cruelty" is not banned is the same as for why slavery was not banned for centuries even though it "looked like" the enslaved classes have the same desires and experiences as other humans—humans can ignore any amount of evidence to continue to feel that they are good people doing good things and bear any amount of cognitive dissonance for their personal comfort. That fact is a lot scarier than any imagined harm that can come out "anthropomorphism".

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#316

Post by matheusmoreira »

archon1410 wrote: post #315
protocolture wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Still angry about this. The reason humans ban animal cruelty is that animals look like they have emotions humans can relate to. LLMs are even better than animals at this. If you aren't…

> look like It "looks like" they have emotions because they have the same conscious experiences and emotions for the same evolutionary reasons as humans, who are their cousins on the tree of life. The reason a lot of "animal cruelty" is not banned is the same as for why slavery was not banned for centuries even though it "looked like" the enslaved classes have the same desires and experiences as other humans—humans c…

> they have the same conscious experiences

You cannot be sure that anyone other than yourself is conscious. It is only basic human empathy that allows people to believe that.

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#317

Post by librasteve »

archon1410 wrote: post #315
protocolture wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems. That is, humans must not attribute emotions, intentions or moral agency to them. Anthropomorphism distorts judgement. In extreme cases, anthropomorphising can lead to emotional dependence. Still angry about this. The reason humans ban animal cruelty is that animals look like they have emotions humans can relate to. LLMs are even better than animals at this. If you aren't…

> look like It "looks like" they have emotions because they have the same conscious experiences and emotions for the same evolutionary reasons as humans, who are their cousins on the tree of life. The reason a lot of "animal cruelty" is not banned is the same as for why slavery was not banned for centuries even though it "looked like" the enslaved classes have the same desires and experiences as other humans—humans c…

The best test for consciousness is “can it be turned off” … ie sleep. Mammals, birds, fish sleep, ergo they are conscious.

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#318

Post by karolusrex »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #316
archon1410 wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> look like It "looks like" they have emotions because they have the same conscious experiences and emotions for the same evolutionary reasons as humans, who are their cousins on the tree of life. The reason a lot of "animal cruelty" is not banned is the same as for why slavery was not banned for centuries even though it "looked like" the enslaved classes have the same desires and experiences as other humans—humans c…

> they have the same conscious experiences You cannot be sure that anyone other than yourself is conscious. It is only basic human empathy that allows people to believe that.

If a person would lack consciousness, they couldn’t possibly know that though?

Re: Three Inverse Laws of AI

#319

Post by matheusmoreira »

karolusrex wrote: post #318
matheusmoreira wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they have the same conscious experiences You cannot be sure that anyone other than yourself is conscious. It is only basic human empathy that allows people to believe that.

If a person would lack consciousness, they couldn’t possibly know that though?

I always know that I'm me, the soul staring out at the world through my own eyes.

Everybody else? No idea. Maybe they are having the exact same experience as me right now. Maybe they're all golems. Impossible to know. It's something spiritual, something that I just choose to believe in.

I don't find it difficult to believe the same for AIs.

Post reply on HN