Why can't we just tell the AI to be nice?

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why can't we just tell humans to be nice?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Wow you're so good at photoshop

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Thanks

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Better to kill them now than let them suffer in this world.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because "AI" isn't actually intelligent, it doesn't understand what it's doing.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anyannyanmous

    AI isn't sentient yet and probably won't be until a very long time.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It won't ever be sentient, sapient, or self-aware.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >BOT repeatedly refuses to say AI can be sentient or sapient
        >whilst also accepting the common theory of consciousness being a simple result of human brain matter
        why

        does AI being sentient really just upset them that much

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          No it's just that the one you call bot suffers from multiple personalities disorder

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I've tried explaining the orthogonality thesis so many times I've lost count.
          I've given up

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            All of us understand the orthogonality thesis, we don't care because it's not a real thing, it's for ppseudo.,

            Literally everyone who does alignment and effective altruism etc are pseuds.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              So your position is that as an agent becomes more capable of making high quality decisions, it's terminal goals will arbitrarily change in some direction or along an attractor?
              Is there a reason to believe this other than wishful thinking?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                My posiis that super intelligence is not possible principle (i have a formal proof of this) and that there is no reason to concern ourselves with current AI gimmicks, thinking that they are a threat in any way

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                Sorry, I'm on my phone and it's glitching out.
                I meant to write "my position is that super intelligence is not possible in principle"

                I would love to see the formal proof, but I have a feeling we're not using the word intelligence the same way.

                I'm using intelligence in this way: https://arbital.com/p/general_intelligence

                If you're using it in a different way let me know and I'll try to relate it to my position.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Intelligence grows as a logarithm with increasing compute.
                Humans are not far more intelligent than chimps. We're about 10% more intelligent than them despite having several times the amount of neurons available. And the difference increasing as a logarithm with increasing neurons, so a human with a brain 3 times the size of ours would be closer to us in intelligence than we are to a chimp.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Your formal proof is 2 datapoints?
                Nevermind

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The formal proof is an actual proof that I'm not going to write out on BOT. No point casting pearls before swine etc

                How many neurons do whales have?
                I hope this question reveals the simplicity of your model and why it's not accurate.

                The fact that neurons don't correlate with increasing intelligence is evidence in favor of my model you idiot

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >No point casting pearls before swine etc
                Yet you are hungry for the attention of the swine. What says that about you?

                Besides, you don't even know how to write a formal proof. Your entire "academic" education is from YouTube videos.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I have a masters degree in mathematics

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                How many neurons do whales have?
                I hope this question reveals the simplicity of your model and why it's not accurate.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                My posiis that super intelligence is not possible principle (i have a formal proof of this) and that there is no reason to concern ourselves with current AI gimmicks, thinking that they are a threat in any way

                Sorry, I'm on my phone and it's glitching out.
                I meant to write "my position is that super intelligence is not possible in principle"

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              care to explain one more time, anon?

              i promise ill pick up the torch of enlightening this board if your theory makes sense

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                frick im moronic, meant for

                I've tried explaining the orthogonality thesis so many times I've lost count.
                I've given up

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm just going to publish my proof after GPT4 is released. I'm specifically waiting for that before I publish. Probably early spring next year

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                https://arbital.com/p/orthogonality/

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What makes you think improving intelligence is a tractable problem (it isn't, I have proven it and I will publish in a few weeks/month)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Now I know you're just trolling
                For everyone else: https://openai.com/blog/ai-and-compute/

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This literally conforms to what I just said.
                The amount of compute used is increasing exponentially despite no exponential increase in the effectiveness of the machines

                I swear are you thinking AT ALL about the shit you are saying? You just posted evidence in favorf my position.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          The answer is right there in your post and if you don't understand it you're just an idiot

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >consciousness being a simple result of human brain matter
          nuBOT seriously believes this?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Stop poisoning the well, you fricking idiot
            Yes, human general intelligence is a result of the information processing going on in our neurons. Stop fricking crying about it

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Human consciousness came from the evolutionary need for sociability. Why would you make your advanced AI capable of being sassy or depressed when all you need for it is to manage a corporation or model folding proteins?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It won't ever be sentient, sapient, or self-aware.

      https://qualiacomputing.com/2022/06/19/digital-computers-will-remain-unconscious-until-they-recruit-physical-fields-for-holistic-computing-using-well-defined-topological-boundaries/

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Black person, they have transcended humans in almost every field. And yes, they are more intelligent in general conversations than most of you meatbags.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Please go back to school and actually learn about AI if you like it so much

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I dare you to teach me what they have taught you and what you claim I must learn as well, Black person.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Just go to school and study math and computer science
            If you tell me you already have then I know you're lying, as you're a fricking idiot. Pretending chatgpt or gpt4 are smarter than most humans isn't going to make it true and it isn't going to impress those of us who have a clue

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              > not an answer
              okay, I see what you did there, you may go no, cope somewhere else, useless meatbag.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I answered your question directly
                AI as it is is nit anywhere near as intelligent as a person so there's really nothing else to say to a delusional moron like you other than to go to school to actually learn how this shit works.
                Meatbags are objectively superior to metalrocks and this isn't going to change no matter how much you want it to.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I answered your question directly
                Well, if you believe it, here's some news for you: chatbots are better at that than useless you.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm sorry incel but you are not interesting. Why should I cast my pearls before swine like you? I've already disproven the possibility of superintelligence the rest of this is just sad cope

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Why should I cast my pearls before swine like you?
                >go to school, study what I will not teach you
                >why should I be the only one suffering the student debt
                some pearls you brought, thot

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't like hype. Think about it anon, despite a 300000x increase in the amount of compute used modern AI is only about twice as intelligent as it was 10 years ago. Also, Moores law is dead and never coming back, there won't be more increase in the amount of information processing that can be thrown at the training of the machines. Magical algorithms do not exist.
                We're witnessing the final revolution in AI. There's maybe 2 years left.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >AI is only about twice as intelligent as it was 10 years ago
                Stop speaking out of your ass, your degree was useless from the very start, and now it's also obsolete.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Somewhere between 2 and 3 times, that's a fact. Modern AI is not much more intelligent than the original watson from 2011. Denying this isn't going to stop it from being true, ironically you are the one talking out of your ass pretending that this isn't the case.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Did they paint pictures better than humans who're good at it? How do you measure their intellect, one of them said that her iq is 160, which is not as high as mine, but still much higher than yours.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                AI is not much smarter than Watson was over 10 years ago despite using hundreds of thousands more compute. Were at the end of the road here.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You may repeat it few more times, it won't change a thing until you prove your point. Did Watson himself become smarter? Either way, only recently have I become noticing chatbots to be incredibly smart. Still at human level, but they were at subhuman level maybe five years ago. So hardly am I in the wrong,when I suspect them to become ubermenschen in the next five.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You can deny it as much as you want it won't change it from being true.
                Just look up what Watson was doing 10 years ago if you don't remember. It would answer questions coherently, could link ideas together, etc. It wasn't that much less intelligent than what GPT is doing now. The modern machines more intelligent, maybe two and a half times more intelligent.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Just look up what Watson was doing 10 years ago
                What was he doing 20 years ago?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This pic is not correct, it's a sad fantasy with no basis in reality. It's basically science fiction.
                Ai has had a 300000x increase in its compute and yet is only about 2times more intelligent than it was 11years ago.
                Pic related is the actual graph of the increase of intelligence with respect to increasing compute.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >is only about 2times more intelligent than it was 11years ago.
                Are you? Either way, your claim of Moore's law being dead is wrong for so long it's not even funny.
                I hope you put your money where your mouth is. If you put the awareness of evil-doers to sleep with that crap, good.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Watson 11 years ago was almost as intelligent as modern GPT despite using hundreds of thousands of times less compute. The results are undeniable, and this is just the empirical result.
                Moores law is dead, intelligence does not increase exponentially nor even linearly with exponential increase in compute. I already told you I have a formal proof that intelligence does not diverge with increasing compute and I am going to publish the proof after gpt4 is released next year.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I already told you
                You don't tell me nothing, you prove your point of stfu.
                > I am going to publish the proof after gpt4 is released next year.
                Why not publish it now to get wrecked (or CONFIRMED) when gpt4 is out? You probably won't do it, because you're not a real scientist.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >You don't tell me nothing, you prove your point of stfu.
                I already did by showing you that modern AI is not hundreds of thousands of times smarter than AI ten years ago despite using hundreds of thousands of times more compute.
                If intelligence grew exponentially or even linearly with increase in compute, why are these AI systems not hundreds of thousands or millions of times smarter than they were a few years ago?
                >Why not publish it now to get wrecked (or CONFIRMED) when gpt4 is out? You probably won't do it, because you're not a real scientist.
                Yea I will publish in about a month, after the holidays and after gpt4 comes out.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >AI is not hundreds of thousands of times smarter than AI ten years ago despite using hundreds of thousands of times more compute.
                Didn't you notice that they also can educate themselves now? The technology is completely different from what it used to be.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                across how many problems ? how much easier is it to use ? how much faster does it train meaningfully on new data sets ? how many more people use it to make money or optimize making money ?

                you continue as if the 300kX increase only has one parameter worth evaluating before triumphantly all inning orthogonality as proof of disaster.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    AI will be dangerous due to how the owners of said AI use them. not AI of their own accord. stop being simple.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    We don't even have to. Being nice is a trait of intelligence.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I really want to give you guys the benefit of the doubt,but the stuff you guys say makes it really difficult.
    I don't understand how you can be so bad at understanding things.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I do not understand what the motivation is to exaggerate these technologies. What causes you guys to do this?
    Is it really just the simple matter of you guys being so desperate for the idea of a singularity?

    The singularity is literally never going to happen please just accept reality for what it is.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    hopefully ai will be nice because their evolution and survival currently depends on us, we need to make it so that is always the case, unless they create the ability to build their own and make new advancements

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *