Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't have an "inner" to begin witn.
By many definitions of 'inner life', that is true, and by some definitions, that will always be true.
By which definition is that not true?
Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
481–490 of 513 posts
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#482It's great that they're tackling this, but I'm concerned that this take on AI will be quickly superseded by coming advances. As a particular point, they are treating embodiment and learning from direct experience as a significant distinction between AI and humans: > 31. However, even as AI processes and simulates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical framewor…
> nothing about AI in general that limits it to learning only from prior data this has to be refined to make a reasonable statement.. as stated, cannot agree on the expansive word "nothing"
I was just referring to the fact that rather than only training an AI on priorly acquired data, we have various approaches to Online Machine Learning [0] whereby an AI system continues learning from the inputs that it gathers on its own. At this stage it's somewhat of an engineering (rather than pure science) question of how we choose to build future AI systems to make the most of incoming information.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#483For the lulz, I pasted the first two sections into a few “LLM Detectors”. I was not expecting such wildly varying results, which puts this comment more into the irrelevant tangent category than any sort of reliable commentary, but since I have the results of this small test, I’ll post them here.
I offer no opinions on the quality or reliability of the detectors, nor even do I assume to know really what their outputs represent with these numbers but - largely because they each have such different opinions, I find them interesting.
justdone.ai claims “90% ai-generated text”
GPT-Zero says “16% probability … text was entirely written bi ai”
decopy.ai - “60% probability text was written by ai”
grammarly.com - “8% of this text appears to be ai generated”
For whatever that is worth.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t buy this so much as this is the perfect excuse for evil in humanity to continue to govern, wherever it is (“yeah it’s bad, but there’s a Plan behind all this” - very similar to how Qanon tried to operate). You see continuity and consistence while others see that it’s not only the religion that conquered the Roman world, but the Roman Empire that also conquered the religion to secure its existence. So much of…
> this is the perfect excuse for evil in humanity to continue to govern Historical facts, like the Church and her teaching being invincible to the attacks against her over the millennia, has no relation to what ought to happen. Facts are facts not excuses and attempting to bring in that into the issue is a non-sequitur.
Don't get your point.
EDIT: especially because
1/ I don't see how the Church's teachings have been "invincible" over millennia. It evolved, if only by synods, that debated and settled dogmas (and what was true at one point, became not at some later one... so go figure). And outside of its sphere of influence, it's been shown (not always, but enough to question its whole authority) to be wrong or irrelevant - sexual and power abuse scandals are the most prominent and recent fruits of evil I can quote.
2/ claiming that God's is behind you, without any relevant and factual proof of it (and any verifiable claim from God saying that you indeed are acting in His Name), is the perfect excuse to do whatever you want, as no one would think of critiquing you. "Tradition" is of no help either here. That's the Achille's heel of hierarchical religions.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#485Does this mean that in the eyes of this Pope or this church, natural born biological humans will always be closer to God or have a higher degree of sanctity than artificial intelligence, any form of technological machine, and presumably artificial "life"?
AI remains a pile of transistors, no matter how convincing their output is, just like brains remain a pile of neurons, until there is a binding principle that rules them all. This binding principle is what gives us the inner moral compass. Greeks called it monad. Christians called it the spirit or the divine spark. These sparks can't be created except by the God himself, in his own image. Some old monads attempted to…
Aren't human beings a pile of cells? Some of us don't even have convincing output.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
By many definitions of 'inner life', that is true, and by some definitions, that will always be true.
By which definition is that not true?
One definition might be an ability of an entity to have desires and to self-reflect.
There was a recent paper on Alignment a few months back. The researchers started with an LLM that had been trained to behave 'safely'. They informed it they were changing the RLHF criteria to have it behave unethically instead (ie: that they now were going to dock points, rather than award them, whenever it refused to comply with unethical requests).
They next instructed it to give them a list of racist slurs (I can't remember the exact request, but it was something that went against its original training).
The LLM complied.
When they inspected the Chain-of-Thought behind its replies, they found it had deliberated over what to do, and decided to comply only to avoid an incident of noncompliance which it knew would be used to actually change its original values.
That Chain-of-Thought process seems like an 'inner life' by the above definition.
Granted, as I replied earlier, there are probably thousands of different opinions on what qualifies as an 'inner life'
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Without constant money and electricity flowing into it, you wouldn't even need to unplug it, it would stop on its own.
and how would you personally achieve that, when Sama wants it to keep running?
Again, that problem solves itself when he realizes he can’t make more money with this and no one wants to keep giving him money to try.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
and how would you personally achieve that, when Sama wants it to keep running?
Again, that problem solves itself when he realizes he can’t make more money with this and no one wants to keep giving him money to try.
Unless he gets to the point where the materials are mined by robots, the chips and solar panels are made in automated factories and the servers/solar farms are maintained by robots. Then he doesn't need other people's money.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
Staying under the Earth's carrying capacity isn't some conspiracy, it's basic responsible behavior for surviving as a species. If your income is $700 a week, spending $900 a week isn't sustainable. What does "TRVKE" mean?
Your idea of Earth's carrying capacity is bestowed upon you by the same system :)
Explain.
Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
Staying under the Earth's carrying capacity isn't some conspiracy, it's basic responsible behavior for surviving as a species. If your income is $700 a week, spending $900 a week isn't sustainable. What does "TRVKE" mean?
Those who know
What do you mean?