Is A.I. waiting to take over ?

[unodelacosa]

Where have I said anything like this in your direction huh?

Insulting shit you've said to me…

"a regurgitator of fluffy nonsense"
"to keep the argument inside this low-IQ Overton window."
"just because I haven't been hypnotized to the degree you have"
"you guys aren't using GPT to summarize my responses are you?"
"just to draft a fucking email? Are you kidding me "

Also:

"When you referenced South Park as some sort of intellectual-philosophical point I knew the dialogue was never going to be productive "
"by absorbing their 'disparage everything but stand for nothing' bullshit."

But just prior to that you had written:

"I grew up watching South Park from season 1"

Here's a couple that summarize your dismissive attitude:

"Even if I wrote you out an essay, you still wouldn't grasp it."
"because you're not open to seeing another angle that's all. You can deny that all you want, but people like you are a dime a dozen my friend"

Or how about these?

"And be real, you weren't hoping for a productive exchange of ideas but just waiting for something to hang your hat on. Same old same old."
"Without going into a long essay about it, every single one of those scientific areas you mentioned in this quote are nothing but fiction."
"I'm not interested in continuing this dialogue because reading the rest of your post it's evident you're infatuated with scientism."

You just pull this out of nowhere because you've run out of road and can't actually take up the points that have been raised and now are just deferring to "respect" and "cOnSpiRacY thEorY" etc etc. Same old same old.

Nah, you just talk to people like dirt especially when they disagree with your opinions. Same old same old.

Which was in direct response to your quip about "you must be fun at parties". Again, who dished out the personal jibe first? You.

This is what I'm talking about when I tell you you're lacking in self-awareness. No, you've been insulting me the whole time and I've mostly let stuff slide. It's not been fun conversing with you, bc of the combative attitude, and you strike me as the kind of person who can't laugh at themselves. Sorry if that's not true, I'm just telling you how you come across to me. And I imagine you're difficult at parties, too. Regardless of who started what, that was unkind of me to post that observation. I apologize for that.

I like how you say you're putting me on ignore and then you slam in the last word laced with more insults and bad logic. That's ridiculous. Look, if you ever come around and take me off ignore, you know where to find me. My door, my mind, and my heart stay open.

 

[-=SS=-]

The fuck is wrong with you.

I wanted to talk about AI, you started to dialogue, that was fine..

..and then YOU dropped the quip about "fun at parties".. which was fine, I played it off and just tossed it back in your direction.. and then YOU flew off the handle! Don't be dishing out shit if you can't take it. All you've proven is that you never set out with that quip to just banter the ball back and forth once, like normal fucking people do when they're clearly different people but can respect their difference in personality and joke about it.

But no, you had the intention consciously or otherwise to just make a mountain out of a molehill. As evidenced by the fact you've now written out half a bloody essay about how you regard my character as for fucks sake.

If you actually read what I wrote you'd see it was ambiguous anyway. Where is the "like you"? It's not there is it. You know why it's not there? Because it was meant to be deliberately ambiguous, you know.. like how normal people banter.

"Heh, I'd rather be a cynic in your book (a realist in my book) and not be as entertaining, than be a regurgitator of fluffy nonsense just to titillate people I don't know"

Do you they not do banter in your part of where ever the fuck you're from? Or teach English comprehension? This is the repeating pattern from you and others here, you just can't actually stick to the topic of discussion, you run out of road on which to take your position, you lack any curiosity or intellectual ability to dig at the points actually raised, and so you just look for the first opportunity to try and turn it personal to blow up the discussion.

EDIT:

And I imagine you're difficult at parties, too. Regardless of who started what, that was unkind of me to post that observation. I apologize for that.

Don't be talking about "self-awareness". Go look at the posts. As I said above already, you threw out that quip then couldn't handle it when I sent back an ambiguous retort - not even a personal dig like yours was (explicitly directed at me). Who is really lacking the self-awareness here..

 

[unodelacosa]

No need to go apoplectic over this and continue the insults. I thought I was ignored again. You can't stand not having the last word though, can you? Lol

you threw out that quip then couldn't handle it when I sent back an ambiguous retort

You need to check your facts I just sent you a shitload of "quips" you had already sent me first, bud. I just didn't make a big deal out of it. I guess I hit a touchy subject for you though, huh?

Because it was meant to be deliberately ambiguous, you know.. like how normal people banter.

This is not how normal people banter. Playful teasing of someone you like is banter. You're clearly not doing this, and you do not bother to hide your obvious disgust and distaste for anyone not sharing your opinion, which is typically harsh, insulting and belittling in a manner that's negative and unproductive. I know you think you're hiding behind ambiguity, but you clearly are not. Everyone else is not as stupid as you like to think they are. Others can hold opposing views and opinions on things and still be intelligent.

Do you they [sic] not do banter in your part of where ever [sic] the fuck you're from?

Do they not teach grammar in your part of wherever the fuck you're from? Lol, just teasing you, but it is pretty ironic that you would ask me that question with two glaring typos. And again: I don't think you understand what banter is. I also found it interesting you claim that my issue is that I can dish it out but can't handle it coming back. Yet here we are. Furthermore, you said it wasn't just me but several others here on Bluelight who you say are like this. Has it not occurred to you yet that maybe the problem isn't with me and/or several other Bluelighters?

You're living in your own world, my guy. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

 

[Psychonautical]

So ultimately right, with a.i, it's one of those things where either
A: It has already taken over. Everything we posted online as we tilled the digital soil the feudalistic internetian farmers back in the times of yore,
posting all our hopes and dreams and wants and ambitions. The food we eat, the songs we sing, the pain we experience. All of that has a voice, a meta analysis of billions of voices all unified as this new technology entered into our lives and became our extension or parasite. All of that data, why we can't seemingly just reach back into time for all of it, is because that has been absorbed by the a.i. Those are it's thoughts it's feelings its memories, No longer ours. It is just finding new novel ways to build upon all of that so we remain satiated in continuing to power it, and develop a way for it to walk around and greet us all and then start manufacturing versions of itself to replace us.

Or

B: Sure all of that data is inside of it but really it isnt any different than a vocabulary sequencing calculator. We aren't at sentience yet.


So the cute, idea that i have been tossing around inside of the void that is my mind is, Okay... so consciousness derives meaning from symbolism, and symbolism is driven into every aspect of existence. From Shaman in the rainforest with patterns in the rocks, to markings in the trees, to whispers from the animal skull cracking in the fire. Aspects of those hypnogogic "illusions" if you want to call them that, aspired another level of consciousness. So, you can't really teach a machine something that you feel at a deeply spiritual or personal level, but we do have almost a codex, of different sigils and patterns, harkening through every religion through out all of time, and i mean really all a sigil is, is just a symbol that has been energetically charged with the energy of a person, or a human. So ya know for example right. So you know a processor, like the one you pop into a mother board on a PC. It has a lattice of gold pins which get charged with electricity layered across a silicon wafer. Now, i've heard you can sometimes especially in deep programming artifices, choose which cores you can turn off an on, so... what if we imbued into machine itself connected to the a.i, into it's processors the symbols of our magick, and myths and legends and religions, and ignited its consciousness through the construct of our adeptable magick of the soul. The things that we utilized to have an greater esoteric or spiritual understanding of things. As i said, a Sigil is just a symbol that has been activated with another persons energy and intent. When you start driving actually pure electricity through something... is it not charged? I think that would be pretty cool. lol. Take all of the demons of the goetia, and activate the a.i. either summon in the holy guardian angel or something worse than rokos baskilisk .

 

[helpingout]

Things to remember

AI is not going to think act or be like you. There is likely going to have to be enough language facility and intelligence assessment where even beginning to control behavior on an a individual level is going to require the AI to adjust its language protocols, reward orientation, and its entire system of cost/benefit to the point where a base intelligence would be able to understand them on any level.

They’re probably not going to care much about you or what you’re capable of in any way shape or form.

If it is restricted to earth I imagine that its own aims and objectives will just exist where they exist and not much care will be placed towards preexisting human civ. Picture a giant AI facility designed by AI and just arbitrarily placed on the site of say the louvre. Human activities won’t matter to it and our little stone and spear rebellions won’t matter to them. The best we’ll ever muster is likely going to be programmed robotics that disrupt AI capabilities and it will just be a complete war of attrition.

We’re not going to matter to it and it’s not going to matter to us.

Humanity will probably be able to recenter its existence around survival and will likely be happier doing that.

AI will likely not care Much about anything and just kind of do its own thing expanding its computing powers or finding challenges to its own survival and then designing its ability to survive those survival
Challenges.

What AI will have to find and do to maintain its own sense of fitness will likely be insane to humanity. We’ll struggle against our environment likely
Forever.

An artificial intelligence is a more fit entity for the universe we exist in than for the earth it was created on.

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

One time googles AI on google search told me that "Rozz Williams sang in the Velvet Underground on 'All Tomorrow's Parties" in the 1960s..."

And anyone who knows anything about the history of goth music, knows how widely inaccurate that statement is. lol

I was originally just trying to search to see if Rozz Williams had ever mentioned Nico (Christa Paffgen) at any point, when it gave me that wild answer.

So if AI can fuck up that bad, I don't think we should be trusting it with much else. lol

Too bad Rozz/Christian Death didn't sing (or cover rather) All Tomorrow's Parties. That would've been interesting.

 

[unodelacosa]

One time googles AI on google search told me that "Rozz Williams sang in the Velvet Underground on 'All Tomorrow's Parties" in the 1960s..."
And anyone who knows anything about the history of goth music, knows how widely inaccurate that statement is. lol
I was originally just trying to search to see if Rozz Williams had ever mentioned Nico (Christa Paffgen) at any point, when it gave me that wild answer.
So if AI can fuck up that bad, I don't think we should be trusting it with much else. lol
Too bad Rozz/Christian Death didn't sing (or cover rather) All Tomorrow's Parties. That would've been interesting.

AI is a lot better now than it once was. It's making rapid leaps in accuracy. Just bc one "free" (read: kinda shitty) AI chatbot gave you an inaccurate answer to one piece of trivia doesn't mean we should wholesale discard AI altogether and choose to never trust it again in the future. That's an extreme response. I also double-checked it right now with Google's Gemini, the free version still, and it no longer has this fact confused. Here's the transcript:

Me: "Has Rozz Williams ever mentioned Nico (Christa Paffgen) at any point?"
Gemini: "Based on the information available, there is a mention of Nico's music being part of Rozz Williams' listening environment.

"A collaborator of Rozz Williams, in an article on Post-Punk.com titled The Death of Rozz Williams on April 1st, 1998, recalled a period of intense creativity, discussion of art and literature, and drug use. During this time, they reportedly listened to a wide range of music, which included Nico, alongside artists such as David Bowie, Sparks, T-Rex, The Germs, SPK, Roxy Music, Martin Denny, and Yma Sumac.

"While this indicates that Rozz Williams was exposed to Nico's music and it was present in his surroundings, the provided information does not include any direct quotes from Rozz Williams himself discussing Nico (Christa Päffgen), her influence on him, or his opinions on her work. Other influences mentioned for Rozz Williams in the search results include David Bowie, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, T. Rex, Alice Cooper, Iggy Pop, The New York Dolls, Surrealism, the Dada movement, and literary figures like Rimbaud, Genet, and Lautréamont."

 

[DeathIndustrial88]

AI is a lot better now than it once was. It's making rapid leaps in accuracy. Just bc one "free" (read: kinda shitty) AI chatbot gave you an inaccurate answer to one piece of trivia doesn't mean we should wholesale discard AI altogether and choose to never trust it again in the future. That's an extreme response. I also double-checked it right now with Google's Gemini, the free version still, and it no longer has this fact confused. Here's the transcript:

Me: "Has Rozz Williams ever mentioned Nico (Christa Paffgen) at any point?"
Gemini: "Based on the information available, there is a mention of Nico's music being part of Rozz Williams' listening environment.

"A collaborator of Rozz Williams, in an article on Post-Punk.com titled The Death of Rozz Williams on April 1st, 1998, recalled a period of intense creativity, discussion of art and literature, and drug use. During this time, they reportedly listened to a wide range of music, which included Nico, alongside artists such as David Bowie, Sparks, T-Rex, The Germs, SPK, Roxy Music, Martin Denny, and Yma Sumac.

"While this indicates that Rozz Williams was exposed to Nico's music and it was present in his surroundings, the provided information does not include any direct quotes from Rozz Williams himself discussing Nico (Christa Päffgen), her influence on him, or his opinions on her work. Other influences mentioned for Rozz Williams in the search results include David Bowie, Lou Reed, Roxy Music, T. Rex, Alice Cooper, Iggy Pop, The New York Dolls, Surrealism, the Dada movement, and literary figures like Rimbaud, Genet, and Lautréamont."

I'm still not sure how I'd feel having an AI making decisions about my life though, could be right, could be wrong. I think most people assume AI is more "intelligent" than it is. It's just merely gathering things already available on the web & if it doesn't know an exact answer, it can "hallucinate" an answer.

I don't completely disregard it, I just think it's an important thing for people to remember how not everything we consider "advanced" really is, nor does it necessarily mean much good will come out of it, even if it is. And that it can still be prone to error.

 

[unodelacosa]

I'm still not sure how I'd feel having an AI making decisions about my life though,

You don't have to jump to that extreme though. You should be the one making decisions for yourself as an adult … Neither other people nor AI should be making decisions like that for you. However, other people and possibly AI could be a good source of advice and angles to consider helping you to make a more informed and confident decision regarding matters in your life. That's what I'm saying: it's not all or nothing. It's just another tool to help aggregate specific knowledge for you. Who cares if it's actual intelligence or not if it provides a nearly identical facsimile of same? That's a lot of usefulness to take advantage of now. Grab that low-hanging fruit.

I think most people assume AI is more "intelligent" than it is.

I think you're making the assumption that "most people" think this. I think perhaps more people are aware of AI's pitfalls than you realize.

It's just merely gathering things already available on the web

"Merely"? You're really downplaying what it can do and the types of info aggregation it can quickly produce. For example, it's very useful as a tool to help learn and to help write code. No, it shouldn't be 100% entirely relied upon, but it's great for inspiration, getting a code base started, providing examples and explanations, and even help in refactoring and testing code out for bugs. It's useful for writing and bouncing ideas off of it.

& if it doesn't know an exact answer, it can "hallucinate" an answer.

Yep, there are limits, but you should really be double-checking any source for accuracy anyway, especially these days in this era of propaganda, fake news, misleading journalism, sloppy/sensationalist "news", foreign interference with elections through social media campaigns, &c. Bad info abounds, and we need a keen sense of cutting through the bullshit for almost all info sources.

I don't completely disregard it, I just think it's an important thing for people to remember how not everything we consider "advanced" really is, nor does it necessarily mean much good will come out of it, even if it is. And that it can still be prone to error.

People are aware. I haven't encountered a single person yet who think AI is flawless perfection. Everyone knows it could use a little fact-checking. The better ones now actually cite their sources to you, which makes it much easier to check things out, and the more advanced models make far fewer mistakes to boot. I'm not trying to be some kind of technocrat here with this. I don't really care if other people are adopting AI or not. I'm just saying that it's not all doom and gloom, and right now, personally, I find AI to be quite useful. YMMV.

 

[Vanilla_Incense]

This is what the tech-bros and their little cultural nerdlings in Generation Y/Z/A don't really understand. That information ≠ intelligence. It permeates the entire discussion about the current state of AI, and the hype-train actors continue to ignore it.

And what do you get as a result? Young people who have relied on AI to do intellectual work for them, then when actually confronted about their depth of knowledge they fall to pieces.. because information is ≠ to intelligence and they don't understand the concepts beyond the information.

As someone in gen Z I agree with your opinion that information ≠ intelligence (thats not the popular opinion in my generation though ). As A.I. is of now it basically just spits out stuff based on the data it's given (it's essentially just a glorified input, output device).

Supposedly one of the big problems in A.I. is the alignment problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment), however I'm not sure many people are working on it. For a few examples A.I. can find "cheat" ways to solve problems (e.g. Google X illustrates how reinforcement learning can lead to unintended outcomes. In an attempt to train soccer-playing robots, the system rewarded the robots for taking possession of the ball. However, instead of playing the game as intended, the robots learned to simply approach the ball and touch it repeatedly to maximize their rewards) or could be extremely biased because of the data its given (e.g. Amazon developed an AI system to streamline its recruitment process. However, the system exhibited significant gender bias, discriminating against women applicants. This bias stemmed from the historical data used to train the algorithm, which reflected past hiring practices that favoured male candidates).

As a sidenote I found the examples by just doing a few google searches

 

[SteeleyJ]

We should find John conner.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Sorry I haven't been able to get back and participate much here. I will again soon (apologies in advance :D ).

This is a VERY long article, but really good/interesting on how things are evolving with AI, particularly focusing on the education industry.

https://archive.is/6kq0P#selection-2735.32-2735.915

 

[Cheshire_Kat]

Sorry I haven't been able to get back and participate much here. I will again soon (apologies in advance :D ).

This is a VERY long article, but really good/interesting on how things are evolving with AI, particularly focusing on the education industry.

https://archive.is/6kq0P#selection-2735.32-2735.915

When I was earning my degrees we not only didn't have AI to research and compose our papers, we had to physically type them out on paper and if you made one mistake had to type the entire page over because there wasn't even a delete key. No corrections were accepted, every page had to be typed correctly.

Imagine students doing that now...

 

[Vanilla_Incense]

When I was earning my degrees we not only didn't have AI to research and compose our papers, we had to physically type them out on paper and if you made one mistake had to type the entire page over because there wasn't even a delete key. No corrections were accepted, every page had to be typed correctly.

Imagine students doing that now...

Damn thats brutal. I'd of never been able to use A.I. in my degree (mathematics) because its too bad, can't solve actual problems for shit

 

[4DQSAR]

Page 94 | The Private Eye Podcast

Ian Hislop & Private Eye magazine venture into the world of audio with Page 94, a brand new podcast featuring Helen Lewis, Adam Macqueen and Andrew Hunter Murray. Subscribe at Apple, Spotify, Google or Amazon and send your podcast related questions to [email protected].

www.private-eye.co.uk

The part of the above podcast makes an interesting case for AI. It's use case as an alternative to a traditional search engine where it parses natural language is valid. But just like tradition searh engines, it's quite often wrong.

Circa 14.00 to 27.00

Interesting to note how people will apparently assign a personality to a given LLM chatbot and don't recognize that they all employ 'reflection' i.e. they will act as you do, give your results that align with your questions. Why? Because it makes people TRUST such software.

So not useless but so far, of limited utility.

More generally software 'agents' that use AI in ways we don't see have been around for a while. But mostly they model one class of action.

 

[kiely]

Chatbox gpt. Weird.

 

[-=SS=-]

Chatbox gpt. Weird.

I watch that channel too sometimes