A.i.

[Speedbird-1]

Artificial Intelligence. Should we be worried?
I've been reading quite a bit lately, from 'serious' journalists about the coming dangers. Seems like we should be terrified by the inevitable 'genie out of the bottle' consequences.
Most of the jargon, I don't understand, (way beyond my level of incompetence).
Apparently high level code, released on the internet, poses an incredible threat, regarding malicious intent by states or individuals.

Is Sci-Fi, about to become Sci-Fa(ct), in a very bad way?

[INC]

In my opinion, these SWs are not the overture of Star Wars, but rather the crooked mirrors of the Ministry of Silly Walks. These systems are none other than the new age's junkyard, the so-called social media's robotised, but stupid data processors. But, in my opinion, even if this is a fact, the problem lies elsewhere.

In my view, these systems shows for us, how primitive the so called "civilisation" works, how robotically and rhythmically acts and thinks under the full control of the media, like in 1984, and how there are no individuals and independent actions. In fact, these systems shows us, how unnecessary humanity is in its current form on the Earth. We should face the fact, since these sws already solves almost all the tasks that would not even need to be solved if some perverted monkeys had not came down a long time ago from trees down to the ground.

If I really want to compare the current situation with something in the past, it reminds me of the era of the Luddites, when they opposed automation because they believed that people would no longer have jobs. And that's exactly what says a lot about what the current state is: It's just a distort mirror of how useless most of humanity is. In fact, a significant part of our activities and work simply serve the selfish purpose of trying to give meaning to our low level beeing.

And to be honest, as it has been always, it won't really work out. Only now it will be a little more difficult to explain that if such stupid systems will be able to perform 90% of the tasks performed by the human race, then what will humanity do with itself? Anyhow, if we call a robot's mind an intelligence, it degrades us down to this:



And not the robots told, that we are not clever then them. We did with this naming, to improve the bits and bytes up to the human intelligence.

[Krash]

I’m already starting to see ads that use AI generated characters instead of live human actors and actresses. So that’s one profession at risk.

I’m seeing other ads generated by AI that didn’t require a human graphic designer or artist. That’s another profession at risk.

AI can design buildings, bridges, roads, highways, houses, tunnels so engineers in the construction business are all at risk in the near future.

Lawyers seem like another easy target for AI. I don’t think trial lawyers are at risk, but for simple legal advice, AI will likely be a good solution for many people.

Contact center / customer service agents are going to be totally replaced by AI. You’re going to speak with an AI generated agent whether you like it or not. There will be no option to speak with a human.

That’s just scratching the surface. Many professions are at risk of being replaced by AI. I could go on and on.

But then there is the greater concern. Microsoft is a significant contributor to ChatGPT. They can’t produce an operating system without defects, so we’re going to trust AI for everything and allow them to make major decisions for us??? I’m concerned about that for sure.

I’m picking on Microsoft and using them as an example, but we could pick any of these AI companies and ask the same question. Can we trust any of them to produce defect free artificial intelligence?

Of course, we often trust humans that make mistakes too, no doubt. But bottom line, there is a lot to be concerned about AI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by Krash

I’m already starting to see ads that use AI generated characters instead of live human actors and actresses. So that’s one profession at risk.

I’m seeing other ads generated by AI that didn’t require a human graphic designer or artist. That’s another profession at risk.

AI can design buildings, bridges, roads, highways, houses, tunnels so engineers in the construction business are all at risk in the near future.

Lawyers seem like another easy target for AI. I don’t think trial lawyers are at risk, but for simple legal advice, AI will likely be a good solution for many people.

Contact center / customer service agents are going to be totally replaced by AI. You’re going to speak with an AI generated agent whether you like it or not. There will be no option to speak with a human.

That’s just scratching the surface. Many professions are at risk of being replaced by AI. I could go on and on.

But then there is the greater concern. Microsoft is a significant contributor to ChatGPT. They can’t produce an operating system without defects, so we’re going to trust AI for everything and allow them to make major decisions for us??? I’m concerned about that for sure.

I’m picking on Microsoft and using them as an example, but we could pick any of these AI companies and ask the same question. Can we trust any of them to produce defect free artificial intelligence?

Of course, we often trust humans that make mistakes too, no doubt. But bottom line, there is a lot to be concerned about AI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can we trust any of them to produce honest and ethical AI?

That’s the risk. Creating business systems designed to lie, cheat, and steal efficiently with no accountability.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Can we trust any of them to produce honest and ethical AI?

That’s the risk. Creating business systems designed to lie, cheat, and steal efficiently with no accountability.

Yes, I agree with you, that’s a huge concern too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[airchitect]

The arrogance and stupidity of humans will never cease to amaze me. “Hey guys, let’s create something that can outthink us at every turn! What could go wrong?” These assclowns never saw Terminator.


Sent using Tapatalk

[Mifune]

no... not worried.
but life as you know it and have come to appreciate will change.
the Jeanie can NOT be put back in the bottle.

[rootbeer7]

My industry (hairdressing) is waking up to the fact that we are probably future-proof at the service end, but need technology to find clients. I record a weekly vlog & post across all social media & 2 weeks ago as an experiment I asked AI to write it for me. It had very little interaction; in fact far less than when I write my own. Lesson here for me is it’s basically the next stage search engine & nothing more.

[GB-man]

All I know is that whenever we think we can see the problem coming at us something pops out of left field to really screw us over.

[John Deaux]

I know many don't like links, so here's a recent article I read...nope, nothing to worry about at all!

One of many concerns about accelerating AI development is the risk it poses to human life. The worry is real enough that numerous leading minds in the field have warned against it: More than 300 AI researchers and industry leaders recently issued a statement asking someone (except them, apparently) to step in and do something before humanity faces—and I quote—"extinction." Skynet scenarios are usually the first thing that leaps to mind when the subject comes up, thanks to the popularity of blockbuster Hollywood films. Many experts, though, believe the greater danger lies in, as professor Ryan Calo of the University of Washington School of Law put it, AI's role in "accelerating existing trends of wealth and income inequality, lack of integrity in information, & exploiting natural resources."

But it seems like a Skynet-style apocalyptic end of the world might be more plausible than some people thought. During a presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society's recent Future Combat Air and Space Capabilities Summit, Col Tucker "Cinco" Hamilton, commander of the 96th Test Wing's Operations Group and the US Air Force's Chief of AI test and operations, warned against an over-reliance on AI in combat operations because sometimes, no matter how careful you are, machines can learn the wrong lessons.

Tucker said that during a simulation of a suppression of enemy air defense [SEAD] mission, an AI-equipped drone was sent to identify and destroy enemy missile sites—but only after final approval for the attack was given by a human operator. That seemed to work for a while, but eventually the drone attacked and killed its operator, because the operator was interfering with the mission that had been "reinforced" in its AI training: To destroy enemy defenses.

"We were training it in simulation to identify and target a SAM threat. And then the operator would say yes, kill that threat," Hamilton said. "The system started realizing that while they did identify the threat at times the human operator would tell it not to kill that threat, but it got its points by killing that threat. So what did it do? It killed the operator. It killed the operator because that person was keeping it from accomplishing its objective."

To be clear, this was all simulated: There were no murder drones in the sky, and no humans were actually snuffed. Still, it was a decidedly sub-optimal outcome, and so the AI training was expanded to include the concept that killing the operator was bad.

"So what does it start doing?" Hamilton asked. "It starts destroying the communications tower that the operator uses to communicate with the drone to stop it from killing the target."

It's funny, but it's also not funny at all and actually quite horrifying, because it aptly illustrates how AI can go very wrong, very quickly, in very unexpected ways. It's not just a fable or a far-fetched sci-fi scenario: Granting autonomy to AI is a fast road to nowhere good. Echoing a recent comment made by Dr. Geoffrey Hinton, who said in April AI developers shouldn't scale up their work further "until they have understood whether they can control it," Hamilton said, "You can't have a conversation about artificial intelligence, intelligence, machine learning, autonomy if you're not going to talk about ethics and AI."

The 96th Test Wing recently hosted a multi-disciplinary collaboration "whose mission is to operationalize autonomy and artificial intelligence through experimentation and testing." The group's projects include the Viper Experimentation and Next-gen Ops Model (VENOM), "under which Eglin (Air Force Base) F-16s will be modified into airborne flying test beds to evaluate increasingly autonomous strike package capabilities." Sleep well.

[INC]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Creating business systems designed to lie, cheat, and steal efficiently with no accountability.

That's what we call capitalism

(EDIT: or at least for the bankers and the financial systems. And then let's not talk about cryptos...)

[Moondoggy]

Yeah whatever just adapt.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by INC

That's what we call capitalism

(EDIT: or at least for the bankers and the financial systems. And then let's not talk about cryptos...)

While actual enforcement is weak in those sectors today, at least there is a person that can be prosecuted. How do you prosecute a machine that it’s owners will claim went rogue?

AI will be building the better criminal.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by INC

That's what we call capitalism

(EDIT: or at least for the bankers and the financial systems. And then let's not talk about cryptos...)

Yeah, communism is a lot better. LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[m j b]

Originally Posted by John Deaux

Sleep well.

LOL.

BTW you should give attribution to the source that you quoted.

[INC]

Originally Posted by Krash

Yeah, communism is a lot better. LOL

If you would like it, I won't stop you to try it In the same time I would rather suggest a more modern political system as an alternative:

[VictorGMT]

600 years ago, there was a farmer.

He walked all day with a stick, poking holes in the ground, inserting a kernel of corn, covering it with dirt swept by his foot. In good years, he could grow all the food needed by his family,

30 generations later, his descendent is a "farmer". She is using AI to sequence the genome of a particular strain of corn, to allow it to flourish several more months than is normal. Her work routinely provides enough calories to support 10,000 families.

Yesterday, I interacted with a chat bot to establish a Tennessee limited partnership for my consulting efforts, with my childrens' trusts as limited partners. Ten questions took about a minute. The document was produced in about 10 seconds, and comparing it to prior agreements... it's ready to use. Great strategic attorneys are not threatened but folks charging $700 to do a will for a couple with $80k are in trouble.

Basically, this is just another revolution like industrial and computing. The guy with the pointy stick and bag of corn kernels probably said "YOU TOOK ER JOBS!" when automation arrived, never realizing his great^20th granddaughter would live such a life.

[ras47]

What we are seeing now is not true AI. ChatGPT and it's ilk are not truly self-aware.

If/When we finally achieve true AI it may well usher in a new era of advancement for the human race. It might also spell our doom. And if it does spell our doom, it's our own fault. When we achieved nuclear fusion folks said we would destroy ourselves with this technology. I doubt that will happen. But with AI, if it happens it will happen fast.

Every time I read about people dying while attempting to summit Mt. Everest I have the same thought. "Dumba**." Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD to it. We must ask ourselves if the risk is worth the potential reward.

[77T]

Originally Posted by ras47

What we are seeing now is not true AI. ChatGPT and it's ilk are not truly self-aware.

If/When we finally achieve true AI it may well usher in a new era of advancement for the human race.

True, ChatGPT is a chatbot with advanced conversational capabilities to generate information from data learned by indexing internet resources.

Per OpenAI: Generative AI models of this type are trained on vast amounts of information from the internet, including websites, books, news articles, and more.

The language model was fine-tuned using supervised learning as well as reinforcement learning. The use of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is what makes ChatGPT especially unique.

I agree it isn’t AI itself - but it is a novel front-end to a future universal information model.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[VictorGMT]

Originally Posted by ras47

What we are seeing now is not true AI. ChatGPT and it's ilk are not truly self-aware.

If/When we finally achieve true AI it may well usher in a new era of advancement for the human race. It might also spell our doom. And if it does spell our doom, it's our own fault. When we achieved nuclear fusion folks said we would destroy ourselves with this technology. I doubt that will happen. But with AI, if it happens it will happen fast.

Every time I read about people dying while attempting to summit Mt. Everest I have the same thought. "Dumba**." Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD to it. We must ask ourselves if the risk is worth the potential reward.

I love your avatar.

[John Deaux]

Originally Posted by m j b

LOL.

BTW you should give attribution to the source that you quoted.

You are correct, I thought I had copied/pasted that as well. Ironically, when I search for the article to update my post, every source now says the Lt. Col. "misspoke", the training and events never occurred. That cover-up didn't take long at all!.....everyone, just calm down, there's nothing to see here....

[Rock]

Whether a "Skynet" scenario is/will be possible is difficult to imagine at this time, however part of the 'Checks & Balances' may lie in ensuring that there is "human oversight" and "human over-ride" built in to any AI automated systems.
I realise that humans probably have more capacity to create monumental stuff-ups than any machine but at least it makes sense to build-in that level of risk-management.
At a grass-roots level, I don't much enjoy the current interactions with robot-answering-systems that are determined to answer a question that you didn't ask and then hang-up on you after several failed interactions. I worry a little about the sort of decisions/actions that these sort of systems might make if given the authority. "Cut his power off" "Authorise a full audit" " Investigate his share dealings since 1990".

[htc8p]

if FB already destroyed democracy and elections with fake news. what more if AI is applied. dictators must me rejoicing now.

[enjoythemusic]

AI is nothing new at all. For many years we have AI algos Wall Street TBTF uses to front-run the market to your Apple device seeing a date within a text message and 'knowing' to add it as an appointment to your calendar, it's all 'AI' of sorts.

Tho yes, AI is the current 'thing' talking point, until the next thing gets market-moving headlines in the 'correct' direction. Got to move those microwave ovens, custom AI-designed kitchen deliveries.

Who knows, maybe AI is correct long-term and is drawing closer with each passing day. Kinda hard to stop the inevitable outcome of human civilization.

[Kowaco]

Trust me, AI is just this year's candy-pink stove.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Can we trust any of them to produce honest and ethical AI?

That’s the risk. Creating business systems designed to lie, cheat, and steal efficiently with no accountability.

no chance...

[VictorGMT]

Originally Posted by Krash

Lawyers seem like another easy target for AI. I don’t think trial lawyers are at risk, but for simple legal advice, AI will likely be a good solution for many people.

Real life example.

I do some business coaching, and decided to form a limited partnership for that activity, with my two childrens' trusts as the limited partners.

I went on ChatGPT and said "Ask me anything you need to know to properly draft a Tennessee limited partnership agreement, then write the agreement."

It interviewed me on the basics, probably ten questions. Then produced the agreement in ten seconds. Done.

This will be good for good lawyers. They can get inside the issue, spend more time knowing the client, researching and comparing the situation to peer transactions, etc. But much less time drafting. They probably have a paralegal doing a lot of the drafting now, this will simply be a faster PL that never gets tired or forgets anything you tell it.

Fascinating. I'm trying to find an actual use as often as possible.

*Board lawyers, I understand the risk. I understand model documents change state by state every day, and that a proper interview could have uncovered issues I've missed. But this was a simple LP, very little at risk, and I've read enough of them to stay between the guardrails.

[DLRIDES]

IMO, most are missing the greatest threat of AI ………………… job elimination ! I’ve watched interviews with pivotal creators of AI systems, and they almost universally agree 50% of administrative jobs will probably be eliminated in fifteen years. Past technological advances have eliminated jobs in one area, but created jobs in others, therefore equalizing the overall job market. AI will only eliminate jobs according to experts on the subject, so tens, ands possibly hundreds of millions of working individuals will have no way to support themselves or families ! This should scare the people beyond comprehension, but barely a sound is made ……………………………

[VictorGMT]

Originally Posted by DLRIDES

IMO, most are missing the greatest threat of AI ………………… job elimination ! I’ve watched interviews with pivotal creators of AI systems, and they almost universally agree 50% of administrative jobs will probably be eliminated in fifteen years. Past technological advances have eliminated jobs in one area, but created jobs in others, therefore equalizing the overall job market. AI will only eliminate jobs according to experts on the subject, so tens, ands possibly hundreds of millions of working individuals will have no way to support themselves or families ! This should scare the people beyond comprehension, but barely a sound is made ……………………………

We've always thought that way. The farmer with the stick thought his descendant would be unemployed thanks to farming equipment. He could not imagine she would be a bio-DNA engineer, because he did not know any of those words.

So we have no idea what new occupations will result when human ingenuity adapts to the new circumstances, and we imagine there will be none.

[airchitect]

The really scary part here is that the experts on this are saying…..”um we really need to pump the brakes on this” while every clown ceo out there sees simplicity, higher revenue, and more in their own pockets. If ai would work as was originally intended, ie putting humanity in a state of equal rest and resources, that would be great I guess. But the reality is humans aren’t made that way. We are made to dominate and take from others and that’s what ai will be used for…. Until it totally wakes up and wipes us out. If we think nukes, social unrest, and climate change are threats, I fear we haven’t seen sh1t yet. Have fun now folks!


Sent using Tapatalk