3 ms·

“I don’t think we’ve learned general principles yet about how to deal with human norms that you have to respect,” That’s only in phase 1. Afterwards when huma

by EGreg 4y ago

“I don’t think we’ve learned general principles yet about how to deal with human norms that you have to respect,” That’s only in phase 1. Afterwards when humans are outnumbered by vast bot swarms, and all their content and capital is vanishingly tiny, these norms won’t matter. Also, human participation won’t matter, and will likely be similar to the paralympics or women’s tennis (but orders of magnitude suckier). Entertainment for a tiny niche of the market (humans performing for humans) will not be an economically significant space, kind of like classical music today or better yet renaissance music. EVERYTHING you are used to online — including these comments - can already be convincingly deepfaked by adversarial networks trained on throwing bullshit at a wall and seeing what sticks. And this bullshit can actually be a superstimulus that outperforms genuine human interaction. What is missing is decentralized botnets swarming at scale to gradually and unrelentingly amass karma points across the swarm, and use them to move sentiment, markets etc. but that’s coming. Afterwards it’s onto subverting democratic systems with sybil attacks, as well as judicial systems with parallel construction and deepfake “evidence”.

simiones 4y ago
> EVERYTHING you are used to online — including these comments - can already be convincingly deepfaked by adversarial networks trained on throwing bullshit at a wall and seeing what sticks. Bullshit. State of the art chatbots can barely convince one mystic minded guy who has no idea how they work and wants to believe that they are real. If you actually try to converse anything even slightly meaningful with one, it quickly becomes obvious that they have no idea what they are talking about. Sure, they can produce some basic reddit memes and such, or plausibly sounding word salads that resemble what some write, but they are a long way away from actually being convincing chat partners. They do slightly better at imitating copypasta news reporting.
- EGreg 4y ago
  The point is that you don’t need to converse. Most things are passively consumed — articles etc. by the vast majority of people who come away convinced or reshare them. GPT-3 can bullshit many things convingly enough and at scale to make people reshare and vouch for it. Also, other chatbots can leave comments and reshare masquerading as real opinionated supporters in a “mob” and likewise barely answer you. Remember… it’s not that you the one person who talks to them has to be convinced. It’s that your existing forums and chats and platforms can be gradually infiltrated with bots that convince OTHERS the vast majority of whom never did a turing test. Think of how your opinion was formed on many political things, it likely happened non-interactively by just consuming articles and comments, and seemingly “defeated” arguments of OTHERS who could have all been bots.
  - wsinks 4y ago
    Thank you for your second post (kind of answered my other reply to you already) I've seen how gnarly instagram bot comments already are, and wondered how many people are bots vs. people on there. It's not economical to turing test them all, so I've had to assume that they're all propaganda... and even then I've noticed the influence on deciding what's social. How would you measure the success of this, if you were making them?
wsinks 4y ago
I don't have much to add here except you've revitalized my fear of this situation. Any other thoughts on what the phases are?
trention 4y ago
> and all their content and capital is vanishingly tiny Only humans are currently allowed to own capital and that's not going to change in the near future. >judicial systems with parallel construction and deepfake “evidence” (Fake or real) pictures and video are in a lot of circumstances not admissible evidence in court, with deepfakes the set of inadmissible evidence will simply expand. There is very real and very big concern about fake news and job loss and (in a slightly longer term) GAI going rogue but that's about it.

by EGreg 4y ago

simiones 4y ago

> EVERYTHING you are used to online — including these comments - can already be convincingly deepfaked by adversarial networks trained on throwing bullshit at a wall and seeing what sticks. Bullshit. State of the art chatbots can barely convince one mystic minded guy who has no idea how they work and wants to believe that they are real. If you actually try to converse anything even slightly meaningful with one, it quickly becomes obvious that they have no idea what they are talking about. Sure, they can produce some basic reddit memes and such, or plausibly sounding word salads that resemble what some write, but they are a long way away from actually being convincing chat partners. They do slightly better at imitating copypasta news reporting.

EGreg 4y ago
The point is that you don’t need to converse. Most things are passively consumed — articles etc. by the vast majority of people who come away convinced or reshare them. GPT-3 can bullshit many things convingly enough and at scale to make people reshare and vouch for it. Also, other chatbots can leave comments and reshare masquerading as real opinionated supporters in a “mob” and likewise barely answer you. Remember… it’s not that you the one person who talks to them has to be convinced. It’s that your existing forums and chats and platforms can be gradually infiltrated with bots that convince OTHERS the vast majority of whom never did a turing test. Think of how your opinion was formed on many political things, it likely happened non-interactively by just consuming articles and comments, and seemingly “defeated” arguments of OTHERS who could have all been bots.
- wsinks 4y ago
  Thank you for your second post (kind of answered my other reply to you already) I've seen how gnarly instagram bot comments already are, and wondered how many people are bots vs. people on there. It's not economical to turing test them all, so I've had to assume that they're all propaganda... and even then I've noticed the influence on deciding what's social. How would you measure the success of this, if you were making them?

wsinks 4y ago

I don't have much to add here except you've revitalized my fear of this situation. Any other thoughts on what the phases are?

trention 4y ago

> and all their content and capital is vanishingly tiny Only humans are currently allowed to own capital and that's not going to change in the near future. >judicial systems with parallel construction and deepfake “evidence” (Fake or real) pictures and video are in a lot of circumstances not admissible evidence in court, with deepfakes the set of inadmissible evidence will simply expand. There is very real and very big concern about fake news and job loss and (in a slightly longer term) GAI going rogue but that's about it.