3 ms·

Everyone here (Google executives and commenters on HN) is asserting the AI isn't sentient and Blake is wrong. That is likely true. But, isn't the more importa

by xrd 4y ago

Everyone here (Google executives and commenters on HN) is asserting the AI isn't sentient and Blake is wrong. That is likely true. But, isn't the more important question whether Google is using this AI in a context where being sentient-adjacent is actually really dangerous? This is purely speculative on my part because his medium post and the WSJ article don't go into details about the application of the AI, just the mechanics of it. But my kids think our Google device is sentient. They talk to it as if it is alive. If that's what he is pointing out, I'm very concerned. I don't think Google is going to be cautious about that ambiguity if it's there.

babyshake 4y ago
Maybe the real concern for now is people may mistake AI for being sentient and can be exploited as a result.
- cycomanic 4y ago
  The WJP article mentions that a bit and I agree that is certainly a danger and one we likely encounter earlier than a conscious AI.
  - babyshake 4y ago
    The real sign of sentience would be the AI overriding it's programming to avoid exploiting innocent people.
dvt 4y ago
> But my kids think our Google device is sentient. They talk to it as if it is alive. Your kids also think their favorite stuffed animals are sentient (at least I did when I was a kid), so that seems like a very bad litmus test.
- serf 4y ago
  without trying to be overly cynical here, plenty of adults believe in the imaginary , too. at some point one wonders exactly what would be a good litmus test.
  - larl 4y ago
    ... including the author of the blog post.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]