3 ms·
They don't need consciousness, sapience, or sentience. They only need to mimic human behaviours accurately enough to make them redundant and automatable. That'
by TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
They don't need consciousness, sapience, or sentience. They only need to mimic human behaviours accurately enough to make them redundant and automatable.
That's an increasingly large range of behaviours. And the pace is clearly accelerating.
There may or may not be an s-curve tail-off at some point. But if there is, we currently have no idea how to estimate where that point will be.
I think a lot of people still don't realise that AI is absolutely an existential threat to our species.
Currently it lives inside boxes we can turn off. But as soon as that stops being true - not because of experimentation, but because AI will be providing services and infrastructure we can't live without - the best we can hope for is some kind of symbiosis. The worst outcomes are far less reassuring.
- prox 4y agoCue Agent Smiths’ monologue. That said, the way we treat our environment, ie anything external to us is a representation of an internal state. Not sure how the internal state of an AGI would be. We have many, many epistemological flaws and we do not wake up and say “Gee let’s examine my epistemology today!” Verifying what we believe, feel and reason is an ultimately worthwhile endeavor while it’s not really a cultural phenomenon.
- danaris 4y ago> They only need to mimic human behaviours accurately enough to make them redundant and automatable. The post I was replying to was specifically positing that they would have feelings.
- sho_hn 4y agoWhat makes a feeling different or unapproachable by sophisticated mimicry? GPT models with bad guardrails already generate dramatic/emotional text because they internalized human narratives and propensity for drama from the training data (cf. the "Bing got upset" type articles from a month ago). Unless you mean to say it's not the same as the model having qualia. It's not clear to me whether we would know when that emerged in the algorithm, as it wouldn't necessarily be outwardly distinguishable from mimicry.
- wizzwizz4 4y ago> And the pace is clearly accelerating. From where I'm standing and observing… no. GPT-4 is not qualitatively more powerful than GPT-3, only quantitatively more powerful. The new functionality is coming from the other systems GPT-4 is being plugged into, not from the actual GPT model. There are even things that GPT-3 can do that GPT-4 cannot.
- selfmodruntime 4y agoReally? You‘re not observing the staggering pace of advancements in AI technology? Then you‘re not looking.