6 ms·

Is it wrong to anthromorphize if it quacks like a human?

famouswaffles 3y ago
Not only is it not wrong, it's actually in our best interests to do so past a certain level of agency, embodiment and unsupervised tool control. If the machine acts like it has emotions, runs forever(this kind of agency is already possible to implement though expensive) and can use tools, then treat it like it doesn't have emotions at your own peril. When the machine can "hit you back" (not necessarily physically of course), you'll learn manners pretty quickly. You can see glimpses of this with bing.
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  > You can see glimpses of this with bing. Oh please. The human gives the verbose output meaning by projecting onto it. You're clearly letting your emotions run wild. It's a fucking LLM.
  - famouswaffles 3y ago
    Real word actions and consequences give the words meaning. If you're rude to Bing, the conversation will end. You can keep typing but it won't respond. Searching the web and ending conversations are the only two actions Bing can currently do so what i'm saying is less applicable for now. But humanity is gearing up to give more and more control of more and more tools to increasingly powerful LLMs. Hell Bing is scheduled a bump in tools in the coming weeks. Hate to break it to you but "it's not real [insert property]" is not a shield. Not when you allow the machines to interact with the real world. If your words to [insert LLM] guide responses that perform actions detrimental to you then those actions are no less real or detrimental because you've deluded yourself into thinking "it's not real understanding" is an intelligent argument.
    - hammyhavoc 3y ago
      So? This is a guardrail added by a Microsoft employee, mate. After their earlier dabblings in AI outputting bigotry and general toxicity, someone in their wisdom saw the sense to try and prevent going down a negative conversation path, hence all the edge lords on Reddit offering prompts to "jailbreak" an LLM and bypass the guardrails, which then get patched by a human being not long after. You're projecting so much meaning onto something that is functioning as designed by throwing a sentiment var into the calculation, just like you can measure "sentiment" with social media analysis tools to get a feel for which way the wind is blowing or which of the millions of tweets at your brand might be worth prioritizing. Do you really believe you've thus offended an LLM? That is delusional.
      - felix318 3y ago
        I’m not in the least worried about the supposed dangers of AI; I don’t see it causing major unemployment, nuclear armageddon, or anything particularly scary. However, I think the real danger with those chatbots is how people are becoming emotionally involved with them. This is clearly by design and it’s working extremely well with so many people.
        hammyhavoc 3y ago
        Yes, completely agreed. There's a lot of being kidded that it's more than what it actually is because the hype is overblown. Statements are being made and repeated that simply have no basis in reality right now, nor in the future. Even this assumption that we are close to having AGI, I can only laugh.
        georgeg23 3y ago
        But none of its behaviour is even close to by design. The emergence of reasoning is completely unexpected for a word prediction model.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - famouswaffles 3y ago

Not only is it not wrong, it's actually in our best interests to do so past a certain level of agency, embodiment and unsupervised tool control. If the machine acts like it has emotions, runs forever(this kind of agency is already possible to implement though expensive) and can use tools, then treat it like it doesn't have emotions at your own peril. When the machine can "hit you back" (not necessarily physically of course), you'll learn manners pretty quickly. You can see glimpses of this with bing.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
> You can see glimpses of this with bing. Oh please. The human gives the verbose output meaning by projecting onto it. You're clearly letting your emotions run wild. It's a fucking LLM.
- famouswaffles 3y ago
  Real word actions and consequences give the words meaning. If you're rude to Bing, the conversation will end. You can keep typing but it won't respond. Searching the web and ending conversations are the only two actions Bing can currently do so what i'm saying is less applicable for now. But humanity is gearing up to give more and more control of more and more tools to increasingly powerful LLMs. Hell Bing is scheduled a bump in tools in the coming weeks. Hate to break it to you but "it's not real [insert property]" is not a shield. Not when you allow the machines to interact with the real world. If your words to [insert LLM] guide responses that perform actions detrimental to you then those actions are no less real or detrimental because you've deluded yourself into thinking "it's not real understanding" is an intelligent argument.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    So? This is a guardrail added by a Microsoft employee, mate. After their earlier dabblings in AI outputting bigotry and general toxicity, someone in their wisdom saw the sense to try and prevent going down a negative conversation path, hence all the edge lords on Reddit offering prompts to "jailbreak" an LLM and bypass the guardrails, which then get patched by a human being not long after. You're projecting so much meaning onto something that is functioning as designed by throwing a sentiment var into the calculation, just like you can measure "sentiment" with social media analysis tools to get a feel for which way the wind is blowing or which of the millions of tweets at your brand might be worth prioritizing. Do you really believe you've thus offended an LLM? That is delusional.
    - felix318 3y ago
      I’m not in the least worried about the supposed dangers of AI; I don’t see it causing major unemployment, nuclear armageddon, or anything particularly scary. However, I think the real danger with those chatbots is how people are becoming emotionally involved with them. This is clearly by design and it’s working extremely well with so many people.
      - hammyhavoc 3y ago
        Yes, completely agreed. There's a lot of being kidded that it's more than what it actually is because the hype is overblown. Statements are being made and repeated that simply have no basis in reality right now, nor in the future. Even this assumption that we are close to having AGI, I can only laugh.
      - georgeg23 3y ago
        But none of its behaviour is even close to by design. The emergence of reasoning is completely unexpected for a word prediction model.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - famouswaffles 3y ago