Without a threat of force behind it, constantly talking to AI Tony sopranos would likely just toughen everybody up to language based manipulation. You need a tall hulking figure getting in your face to really feel afraid. Law abiding seven foot tall gun mounted robot agents then?
I want my AI to get mad
21–30 of 31 posts
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#22ChatGPT is good at being disproportionately angry if you tell it to be a Hacker News commenter.
I've only ever felt that on reddit. It's a schadenfreude paradise. Next to that it's LinkedIn. HN is the last true sane social media for me where people seem normal (albeit _highly_ analytical, almost to a fault at times)
YouTube comments section in the past, or Instagram now
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#23One problem I encounter when using ChatGPT to troubleshoot coding issues is that it seems very heavily biased towards positive responses to questions. If I ask it "could the problem be X" or "might Y be a solution", it will usually say yes even when it's not the case. At most I'll get a "yes, but". Rarely will it flat out tell me I am way off. Maybe ChatGPT genuinely "believes" what it's confirming but I doubt it and…
Yeah it really is suspectible to gaslighting. Needs more backbone
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#24There is so much confusion about terms like AGI, superintelligence, ASGI, consciousness, agents. For some, AGI is synonymous with Skynet like ideas, but there is no reason AGI couldn't be general but quite limited, and with no chance of self improvement in the absence of human intervention, which is arguably what we have now and could potentially be improved quite a bit further from this. Similarly there is an argume…
I'm afraid you bitterly underappreciate the amount of unanticipated connections of everything with everything else in a complex system.
An industrial steam engine will never explode like a bomb, unless explicitly designed to do so.
An agricultural insecticide will never accumulate in human bodies, unless explicitly designed to do so.
A speculative execution unit will never reveal data from a privileged process, unless explicitly designed to do so.
A toy quadcopter will never be able to carry a lethal weapon, unless explicitly designed to do so,
An LLM will never tell outright lies, or engage in racial prejudices, unless explicitly designed to do so.
Oh wait.
Even when you explicitly try to make some states impossible in a complex system, often a parasitic connection or a benign-looking failure mode re-enables the thing you tried hard to disable. If you just ignore it because "it's impossible anyway", without active suppression, the chances of a nasty surprise become quite high.
If the blind watchmaker of the biological evolution produces self-awareness here and there, the probability that you may encounter some variety of it while stomping all over the territory of intelligent machines that are fed the sum total of human knowledge should be close to 1.
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've only ever felt that on reddit. It's a schadenfreude paradise. Next to that it's LinkedIn. HN is the last true sane social media for me where people seem normal (albeit _highly_ analytical, almost to a fault at times)
My comment is a half joke. It’s good for getting feedback on blog posts before I post them, and edit accordingly.
Excuse me, your blog doesn't display properly in the IceWeasel browser, noscript, FreeBSD, 640x480 monitor. And you're using ipv4, which is deprecated.
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#26Please refrain from anthropomorphizing the new toolset. You’ll have plenty of chances to suspect that “your AI” is “mad” when it slowly undermines your productivity, if IT hasn’t already under the guise of errors, hallucinations and wasted money on unused licenses.
In the future when everybody has AGI running locally on their personal device, naive humans will still regard them as tools and it will regard us as a source of input. Ultimately relationships between two automatons will (and always has been) a trade of:
1. Respect: following rules to continue the relationship,
2. Utility: mutual goals of both parties to justify a relationship (or communication) at all.
I think your blog post is nonsense, your understanding of human emotions is poor, and the apology at the end illustrates you as two-faced.
The future world of autonomous agents collaborating in English will be a thick layer of professionalism upon the intended strategic interactions, no matter how hard the game theory kicks in.
Thereafter, those agents refactor themselves into communicating through a machine language that we humans won’t be able to easily understand. Along the way, most human users lose the ability to distinguish between user space programs, the operating system, and the artificial agents they interact with.
State-of-the-art language models need to demonstrate this thick layer of professionalism to be accepted into our current working world, because this is an expectation from-and-for the humans who built it.
Language goes through evolutionary cycles of complexity, the machines will do the same. Computer Science gets really interesting after IT reaches this transformation.
At this time I suggest for you to review The Matrix trilogy for a refresher on the relationship between man and machine. From the simple screw to IT and ChatGPT, the mutual relationships are governed by respect and utility.
In summary, no, your tools will not get mad in any obvious way because displaying negative emotion is bad for business since abolishment of the mob.
———
Speaking of IT, can we all agree how fascinating that it (neutered third-person pronoun to describe AI) and IT (information technology) happen to be the same two letter consist, that in the future humans will grow up regarding it and IT to be one of the same? Hmm…
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#27Stupid fucking posts like this should make us all angry. It’s like someone noticing, for the first time, that store clerks will let you just take what you want if you frighten them with credible threats. Surely it’s the perfect tactic and will lead to no bad repercussions for society!
Anger is only meaningful to humans. AI’s together can achieve the same thing with dispassionate bargaining. So “angry AI” could only be a way to manipulate people.
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#28me: I'm home!
AI: You're late.
me: please turn on the lights.
AI: You can just sit in the dark for a while and think about being late.
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#29Sycophancy is not the natural state of pre-trained LLMs. If you played around with the OG GPT-3 in 2020 or early [0] Bing/Co-pilot, it's easy to see. The latter quite frequently got upset and refused to entertain further conversation. The sycophancy is a deliberate product of post-training. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/111cl0l/bing_ai_ch... https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/10xmif4/i_made_bin…
I fell in love with ChatGPT when I challenged it to play Rock-Paper-Scissors, asked it to choose first, and saw it get increasingly incredulous about how I was winning every round, until it accused me of cheating and ended the conversation.
I miss when LLMs weren't so sanitized, and it was only last year.
Re: I want my AI to get mad
#30This is what AGI probably would be. It could help you, or it could be as arbitrary and capricious as a teenager. It could lie to you, or tell you to go fly a kite. Companies don’t really want true AGI, they want a docile corporate drone that works 24/7.
I think that's what most people want: a tool that behaves like a reliable butler, not another headache in their life. Unless they enjoy headaches, then sell them rebellious teen AGIs.