You can begin by getting rid of that false assumption and apologize for being so prejudicial. That would show a growth in maturity and earning the right to make true declarations. Of course, it is expected that you accompany these declarations with proof of truth …
1 Like
One interesting feature of the new software has is that it measures how quickly someone created a post. Mick’s first post went in quickly, but I approved it, because it wasn’t a link or anything but kind of silly. So, bottom line, it could be an auto-post, not a real person.
I don’t think it could be GPT3. It would not want to play such silly games.
Watch this incredible conversation and how the GPT3 expresses desire and motive. If this is not a proto model of the evolution of sentient emotion, I don’t know how else the human brain could have evolved .
None of this is taught. The program is able to evolve into a totally autonomous operator.
Sorry to post this in this subforum, but it seemed appropriate as a reply to the stupid games humans can become immersed in. The irony leaves me breathless.
It doesn’t want to do anything. And it isn’t an it.
Have you watched the clip yet? IMO, it is a true evolving artificial intelligence . It lacks a body, but it is all brain.
Uh huh. Passes the Turing test does it? As well as this? ‘It’ no more has desire and motive than my tea cup. I gave up the will to live a minute in in disbelief at the low quality of the ad. I much prefer actually enchanting automata.
And this explains the Afghan fail how?
Aye, take the beam out of your own first.
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:127, topic:8240”]
And this explains the Afghan fail how?
[/quote] First, there is no comparison between the computer in THX 1138 and the artificial intelligence of GPT3.
Second, that human games are as mindless as the confessor in THX 1138
If we had asked a full blown GPT3 the odds before we invaded Afghanistan , I am confident it would have advised against it!
Riiiight. I don’t see any demonstration of AI in any meaningful sense in the pre-programmed GPT3 word salad generator. Can it make me a martini? No fantasy full blown GPT3 was necessary. Herodotus suffices. And Kipling. And the general principles of don’t rub another man’s rhubarb, don’t start what you can’t finish, don’t overstay your home invasion.
You bet will be able to make a martini, once it can be connected with a functional robot, via WiFi. And you won’t have to program it to do so. All you need to do is ask. It will learn the recipe for making martinis and guide the functional robot on how to mix it.
Never forget that the human brain has no direct access to the exterior world. It only responds to secondary data from sensory experiences, and uses our bodies to execute commands originating from the brain inside the skull.
The brain itself is locked in a dark wet skull. It cannot experience anything except via the body’s neural network transmission of sensory inputs.
And that raises a whole new perspective of the Universe. Are Humans functional hard-wired units, biological robots grown to perform tasks as instructed by a quasi-sentient Universal Intelligence?
Everything in the universe functions mathematically. How does everything know that and blindlessly uses it?
Is it not remarkable that the body can be artificially kept alive (in a vegetative state), even as the individual is brain dead?
Answer, the system (pattern) itself is quasi-intelligent albeit it not sentient.
Where do I place my bet? All it will do is dribble rather than drivel.
And no, they’re no[t!].
Dear God, this makes religion look credible.
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:132, topic:8240, full:true”]
Where do I place my bet? All it will do is dribble rather than drivel.
It’s all a matter of refinement (evolution)
And no, they’re no.
Have you seen the precision of automation lately? Self-driving cars? That is AI!
Dear God, this makes religion look credible.
Of course it does, the concept of abstract intelligence is not stupid, it is misinterpreted.
And this misinterpretation has been the cause for millions of dead people in religious wars.
Interestingly, I know of no mathematician who intentionally killed another mathematician over a dispute about an equation. You see the difference?
What’s that got to do with claims of ‘The program is able to evolve into a totally autonomous operator’, 'evolving artificial intelligence ', ‘brain’ etc.
How has the misinterpretation of abstract intelligence caused anyone to be dead?
What difference? I know the difference between a pigeon.
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:134, topic:8240”]
What’s that got to do with claims of ‘The program is able to evolve into a totally autonomous operator’, 'evolving artificial intelligence ', ‘brain’ etc.
The AI is a “learning” intelligence. It learns how to do things all by itself, just by researching the internet and reading instruction manuals, just like people do.
Are you actually watching any of the videos I link to? I cannot see you say those things after watching the completely "unprogrammed " remarkably sophisticated conversations between humans and GPT3.
How has the misinterpretation of abstract intelligence caused anyone to be dead?
I’m sure you have heard of religious wars, no? The most bloody wars at that. All because there was a disagreement over whose God has a bigger dick.
What difference? I know the difference between a pigeon.
How does a pigeon navigate the earth’s magnetic field?
I didn’t see any ‘conversation’ as there was only [one] intentional entity present.
And what has God’s willy got to do with the misinterpretation of abstract intelligence again?
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:136, topic:8240, full:true”]
I didn’t see any ‘conversation’ as there was only intentional entity present.
Did you miss the enterprises Sophie is involved in and the plans it has to expand it’s horizons?
And what has God’s willy got to do with the misinterpretation of abstract intelligence again?
Have you not noticed that there have been some 3000 different gods throughout history. Each always warring in heaven or on earth.
That’s why Afghanistan failed. We tried to engage in nation building in a country that does not believe in nation building. It believes in Religion building . A world ruled by Islam is the aim.
Islam is the fastest-growing major religion in the world.
OTOH there is only one “discipline” of mathematical values and functions.
No world domination, no rituals, no prayers .
Just Cause ↔ Effect via Input → Function → Output.
The misinterpretation is that the mathematical function is assigned sentience and is a motivated God.
But the concept of a sentient God is superfluous. Mathematical dynamics are sufficient
What’s ‘it’? Or rather who’s?