61–70 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the Orphan Crushing Machine is just a machine you don’t need to worry about it being put on wheels.
Hopefully we never do something silly like making a lead pushing machine that operates at high velocity, then mass produce it, what a terrible precedence that would set.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think these incidents and our learnings from them are fascinating. We're figuring out in real time where the rough edges are and how to make this all work. History books (well, not books) will write about this stuff. It's even more interesting in the context that this is all just a preview of humanity's reaction when the machines can think for themselves.
How in the world can a bunch of bipeds that for thousands of years has been failing to figure that a hammer is there to drive nails into inanimate matter instead of their heads, have this much hubris to pretend they can build something smarter than themselves, is competely beyond me. "Oh it's such a fascinating lesson that we've learned today, we could've learned from history of course, but this direct experience is…
An utter mis-understanding and incompetence in running AI agents can lead to starting results that then being blamed on some "God of AI" instead on the fact that the user allowed some blackmail to come in on the data feed and did not check it earlier. I'm actually fear some will start praying "AI Gods" to "Give a good output" or something in 5-10 years.
> an AI tried to blackmail This did not happen. A human set up a software system allowing spicy autocomplete to make blog posts if the appropriate keyword appears in its output. People are crossing the line every day because AI investors, salesmen, hangers-on and even political leaders tell any rubes who'll listen that it's OK to do this and they should, because those people are looking for big fat profits, screw any…
> allowing spicy autocomplete If it's just autocomplete, then there is no need to worry about it. Especially from an ethical standpoint.
It's not just an ethical problem.
Since we are talking about accountability and transparency... who wrote this article? The article doesn't credit an author. The "about" page just says: > Sigma Zero is a weekly, independent publication on technology, AI, and cloud. Each issue delivers a precise briefing on the week’s most important developments, followed by a deep dive on one high-impact topic. The best defense against both AI slop and human-written…
AI is a mirror of humanity and seeing it act like us shouldn't be surprising.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think these incidents and our learnings from them are fascinating. We're figuring out in real time where the rough edges are and how to make this all work. History books (well, not books) will write about this stuff. It's even more interesting in the context that this is all just a preview of humanity's reaction when the machines can think for themselves.
> We're figuring out in real time where the rough edges are This is a frustrating thing to see someone write because this is the kind of stuff that people have been warning about for years. If you needed this incident to figure out that something like this could happen, it suggests you're living in a bubble and not paying attention enough to think about the issue critically.
We humans do not respond to long term risks or rewards very well. Do you live outside the bubble securing enough food in your home to survive an apocalypse, did you and your parents save enough for a car wreck tomorrow, do you wear a mask everywhere you go, do you test everyone you contact for known diseases. Add list infininum.
The question!!!
I'm just wondering how in US works if an autonomously car kill someone: I guess the insurance pay, but the penal responsibilities?