1
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 554 Given: 340 |
Again, how's that different than your inner dialog? Don't you think, when your thoughts wander, the same process of "finding the statistically most appropriate next word" is at work?
Confused people are calling generative AI a "stochastic parrot", ignoring the fact that we work exactly the same way.
Absolutely, more complex goals will produce richer response from AI models. At the moment, the only goal chat bots have is answering questions in a informative manner that also keeps the user glued for more interaction. The models can be crafty in achieving this goal, but overall, the goal is simple.
Humans and other living organism, on the other hand, have a variety of goals because they have a will-to-live and lots of short and long term goals for needs that have to be met. AI models don't have, nor need, a will-to-live. They have their needs already met, they are connected to the infrastructure that keeps them going. Living organisms are in a much more precarious situation, they have to spend daily effort to fulfill their needs.
In the future, depending on how much autonomy we'll afford to these models (particularly AI models in autonomous robots), the goals will increase in complexity, and their response will also be richer. We'll have to prepare for a world in which these models roam free.
Even though it was posited by some physicists (like Penrose) it is very unlikely that human cognition has any quantum aspects to it. There are other more fruitful avenues to try before quantum computing to achieve something akin to AGI.
AI will bring major societal changes. It's not going to be utopia, but not dystopia either. People will move to other jobs. Fewer people will work on assembly lines, and instead will train (not program) AIs. More people will work with other people (in entertainment, or for elderly etc.). Some form of basic income will also be part of the deal.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 554 Given: 340 |
It depends on the complexity of the moral judgement infused in these models.
It is conceivable that AI models will be fairer judges than humans in the future, if the training was (agreed upon as) fair. Humans on the other can receive fair instruction and still apply it in a biased way.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 554 Given: 340 |
What do you mean by "understand"? How do you understand your own sentence, written above, better than an AI model? Can you be more explicit?
Certainly, an AI model can explain your sentence using other words, and answer questions about your statement. Is this what you mean by "understanding"? How do humans "understand" your sentence differently?
Thumbs Up |
Received: 14,147 Given: 6,674 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 14,147 Given: 6,674 |
Spoiler!
Thumbs Up |
Received: 130 Given: 513 |
I used chatGPT to write a bash script for me to download photos of soccer players from a roster webpage. I'm incompetent at that sort of thing so it would have taken me at least 30 minutes to figure out myself. It even commented the script, which was nice.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 31 Given: 19 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 14,147 Given: 6,674 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,540 Given: 12,989 |
It's just selecting information from specific threads. In some instances, it gets information wrong (for example, "Cristiano Viejo’s antagonistic behavior toward Spaniards and his unwavering focus on promoting Spain left a lasting impression."
It basically got all my info from one thread (probably because my 'name' is in the title).
Both screenshots are information I gave in one thread being repeated back to me.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,540 Given: 12,989 |
All taken from two posts in the same thread and because Mortimer's name is in the title
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...-Status-Update
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks