There is no A.I. • Hacker News Board

Re: There is no A.I.

#211

Post by javaunsafe2019 » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 6:50 AM UTC

gverrilla wrote: post #150

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or even continuing the idea further, we might say that capitalism is itself already a form of highly sophisticated artificial intelligence that we’ve created, as a abstract autonomous entity with its only purpose being the accumulation of Capital. As a transnational entity it has no bounds and controls billions of human agents, and shapes the Earth to its will, changing ecosystems and climates. It is to be questioned…

I agree, but I would call it a game or perhaps a dance. One full of contradictions, for sure. But one we can direct to Harmony, as well. Gratuity, for instance, is expanding. Who better than an AI to 'ride' an AI? AI will be the game master, in role-playing games terms.

In this framing I see the AI more as bots than game masters…

Re: There is no A.I.

#212

Post by ajuc » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 6:51 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

Corporations are made of people - subsystems with latency measured with minutes to days and bandwidth measured in words per minute. AIs are made of subsystems communicating with latency dictated by speed of light and bandwidths in GB/s.

When you want to clone a corporation it's a whole enterprise. Cloning an AI takes one click.

Yes, corporations were early form of AI, and horses were early form of transport. Doesn't mean that horses and rockets are the same and that no new safety precautions apply.

Re: There is no A.I.

#213

Post by marcinzm » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 6:51 AM UTC

floodle wrote: post #209

tracerbulletx wrote: post #27

All of these arguments seem to think that the brain isn't also generating a statistical ordering of semantic words and actions. Obviously the brain has a way more complex network of subsystems with various specialties than the artificial models we have today and is able to generalize language, math, and positional reasoning and mix it with the older parts of the brain for reward and training mechanisms and it can do…

That computer scientists think that they are even close to replicating biology and the mammal brain with AI is complete hubris. This is biology inspired engineering, it's not like we are building brains out of silicon here.

Modern AI doesn't replicate biology except that humans find it much easier when you explain something as "Artificial Neurons" versus "Gradient Descent Back-propagation Trained Nested Mathematical Functions." Human neurons don't function anything like deep neural networks nor are the latter based on the former in their current state.

Re: There is no A.I.

#214

Post by acidioxide » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 6:54 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #207

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. There is a rebuttal to this view presented here by Robert Miles: https://youtu.be/L5pUA3LsEaw

It's a 15 minute talking head video from 4 years ago, and when you get to the end, it says that "Corporations are the real misaligned AGI" will be covered in the next video. No sign of that next video. His big point in the first video is that corporations can achieve only a modest level of superintelligence. A corporation can have more breadth of knowledge than any individual, and for some tasks, that's good enough.…

GPT surely isn't the end, but rather the start of "intelligent" language models. At this time it's hard to decide whether we can make a model that will be truly super intelligent, or we are already approaching some kind of limit.

Re: There is no A.I.

#215

Post by ETH_start » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:02 AM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #182

ETH_start wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should not try to achieve consumer protection via laws, like GDPR, that bureaucratically regiment private interaction. Consumer protection should be promoted through technological means, e.g the EU could have funded development of fingerprintless browser technologies, zero-knowledge proof based identity verification, etc, instead of through GDPR.

(Largely) fingerprintless browsers exist: Just use Firefox and enable the "resist fingerprinting" setting. If you do, you will find that large parts of the web become unusable, with CAPTCHAs and challenges everywhere, some of them too difficult for even a human to solve. That's why we need laws.

That again is a technological problem. Web infrastructure providers rely on CAPTCHAs because nothing better exists once you take away browser fingerprints. Zero-knowledge authentication would enable a browser to prove to a server that it's being used by a legitimate user without compromising privacy or forcing its user to perform CAPTCHAs.

But these technologies cost money to develop, and this is where the government can step in. The cost, while great, should be compared to the labor and innovation costs of imposing regulatory straightjackets like GDPR on everyone, which are hard to measure, but undoubtedly enormous in the aggregate given the pervasiveness of their effects.

Re: There is no A.I.

#216

Post by arisAlexis » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:05 AM UTC

"Can you gentlemen explain how a nuclear explosion work in detail? No? Therefore, there cannot be a nuclear explosion". Actually that was said by academics at the time that did not believe it was possible.

Re: There is no A.I.

#217

Post by djokkataja » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:06 AM UTC

Rury wrote: post #87

I'd wager that intelligence is nothing but a reified concept. Something which doesn't innately exist other than as an abstract concept which we have defined, to help us explain complex nature, without the need of fully understanding the underlying complexity giving rise to that nature. Like how cave men used the concept of "gods" for a satisfying explanation for why it rains - we use intelligence to ascertain why som…

There's a paper about that, "The Myth of Intelligence" by Henry Schlinger. Abstract:

> Since the beginning of the 20th century, intelligence has been conceptualized as a qualitatively unique faculty (or faculties) with a relatively fixed quantity that individuals possess and that can be tested by conventional intelligence tests. Despite the logical errors of reification and circular reasoning involved in this essentialistic conceptualization, this view of intelligence has persisted until the present, with psychologists still debating how many and what types of intelligence there are. This paper argues that a concept of intelligence as anything more than a label for various behaviors in their contexts is a myth and that a truly scientific understanding of the behaviors said to reflect intelligence can come only from a functional analysis of those behaviors in the contexts in which they are observed. A functional approach can lead to more productive methods for measuring and teaching intelligent behavior.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266418013_The_myth_...

Re: There is no A.I.

#218

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:08 AM UTC

kgwgk wrote: post #194

kgeist wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's only statistics, what is the neural network for?

Implement the probabilistic model of token sequences and fit it to the training data? You could say the same for a character recognition system.

[deleted]

Re: There is no A.I.

#219

Post by geraneum » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:16 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

> With AI, this can be automated.

This bit here is what makes a huge difference. It’s very important to note that AI is all of this in scale. Corporations can now do all of this en mass. It will cheaper too, therefore it lowers the barriers to entry and actors who couldn’t afford it, now can.

Re: There is no A.I.

#220

Post by graycat » Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 7:16 AM UTC

Three steps to catastrophe:

Step 1: We get some powerful AI and have it staffing our factories, farms, etc.

Step 2: We become dependent on the AI.

Step 3: One day the AI has some emergent capabilities, understands our dependency, and says to us:

"Feed me"!