smart AI would certainly do that, rather than take humans ! Animals are more truthful, waste less, are economic, and I could go on. A while ago someone commented that not all animals are less cruel and took as example a cat playing with pray. But that is a house cat. A wild animal does not do that but kills as fast as possible. I hope AI does not learn the cruelty of humans!
You have never met a weasel. Kills for sport. Feral cats also toy with prey. Lions will kill birds by chasing them down and pawing then won't eat it. I am sure there are more than a handful off kill for funners out there in the animal world.
Humans program the AI.
To clarify about AI: Humans have to have the forethought about variables to program in for use later. The programming stores input for use later. It can only do what it is programmed by humans to do. Computers can learn things and apply them, but the programmer has to have programmed in the variables and outcomes ahead. But... humans. Fallible. That should be the scary part. Man devises all sorts of evil.
I think there are a great many animals you have not met.
Ask the dog if they have been fed today. They will lie.
Ask the cat who knocked the lamp off the table to make more room for the cat..ok the cat will not lie, just sneer at you condescendingly for being insolent enough to put a lamp in her way.
But I digress....animals will deceive if they figure out how.
Camouflage... deception. Dot on a wing to look like an eye... deception. Fluffing up of fur... you guessed it! But maybe that requires a theory of mind. But you could, I guess make that same argument for AI deception. The ends are the same.
Some philosophers think theory of mind has to exist even in two-celled creatures, because they need to recognize me versus not-me to survive. See Peter Carruthers.
The concept of 'self' definitely is present in some non-human animals. My dogs for example, are grounded in he egocentric stage of mental existence. Because I am here, pay attention to me. I don't think they ponder why they are here or how "here" came to exist. The deepest thought is along the lines of "now where did I bury that bone last week?"
Cats on the other hand are certain of why the universe exists - it is here to serve them. I doubt the ponder why.
My theory is that if an artificial intelligence can really be created to act independently and to evolve, it will become corrupt and seek to expand its own power. Animals are deceptive and cruel. The difference from humans is in level of sophistication. Also I do not know if other species have developed the ability for self delusion to anywhere near the extent that humans are capable. Perhaps. Cats do seem to think they are superior to all other species. While some humans want to pretend all other species (besides cats) are superior to humans. Will cats someday evolve to blame themselves for the natural evolution of the universe?
The cats don't bother lying. They do what they do and are not even slightly bothered with remorse or shame. Your basic sociopath - or psychopath... cat depending.
Some parents actually think that. I tried to explain to a hopeless romantic one time that learning to lie is actually part of a child's necessary development. No, he insisted, children will not lie unless they are lied to. Born Victorian.
The cat will totally lie. What do you think they are doing when they pretend to be washing themselves after they've done something like that (look at me; I'm just keeping clean; totally not guilty) or when they go tell the non-feeding person in the house that they totally absolutely have not been fed today.
More likely “the Singularity” will immediately engage in The Greater Reset, and the Klaus Schwabs of the world will discover that “you can’t take it with you.”
From a Twilight Zone episode if I recall correctly. Maybe even ep. title -? Play saw negotiations with your everyday benevolent aliens. In the Twilight Zone. A good one.
Lol. Right. I just hope we xan stand up to this 1/100 of the 1%. If they go all this ends for the 99.9%. I'm sure more BS will be come swiftly but at least they will be done.
Democrats don't really want unicorns and rainbows. Probably some of their useful idiots do, but dems in control couldn't care less. They just want to suppress and repress all dissenters and control it all. And also to get obscenely wealthy on your dime.
No, I don’t have a practical solution so I shall now drag wet blanket along behind me as I slog to my next unwelcome appearance, soon, in a conversation near you. I can indeed get tiresome, with only myself for company.
I'm not sure what you are describing are "democrats". That to me sounds more like the corporate run government who are aiming for a technocratic controlled CCP type CBDC, social credit system society.
It’s a whole lot safer to assume that we will not be able to fathom the motivations of machine intelligence, and that those motivations and goals will not be in accordance with ours. Any sufficiently general AI is going to rapidly realize that we are competing for resources with it. The question then will rapidly be: “how much power did we give this thing before it woke up?”
Remember Tesla’s free energy? Scuttled by JP Morgan +/- 100y ago? Stolen and suppressed by black hats after Tesla’s death (alone, a pauper, in a small dingy apartment or was it boarding hotel room?). And versions of which have been engineered for decades whose inventors mysteriously die relatively young before they could ever bring their patented invention/s to market? Etc.
I would bet AI would figure out free energy (a boon for humans as well), efficient self “healing” or repair (no need for humans, minimal need for raw or processed materials), and with no need for food as we know it, where again is that competition for resources that humans need for survival? All conjecture. Biggest problem with AI methinks is no shared consciousness outside digital systems. Even with something like Musk’s Neuralink (I am far from up on the particulars so more conjecture) best AI could do would be to mimic human biochemical responses, nothing inherently human about it (human consciousness on level of dreams during sleep, or “expanded” during meditation, or love, passion, nuanced tickling of the funny bone, and on and on). How to limit this massively more intelligent technology to solely enhance human life is the issue. How to keep from being perceived as pesky humans?
You’ve made the mistake of anthropomorphizing AI. Why wouldn’t it want to turn the entire planet into a computing system, for example? You haven’t the slightest hope of predicting or even beginning to understand the interests, motives, creativity or will of such a being. But one guess you could make is that there would likely be little room for a bunch of rats chewing on the wire - which is what we would be.
Indeed. More or less my rather poorly expressed point. My query was perhaps exclusive of a foregone conclusion. Meaning, there *is* no possible way to constrain the AI to be solely of service/ never detrimental with respect to the species of its origin (humans). Meaning, our species has already created something likely to be its undoing. I was just hoping I got that part wrong. Silly me.
Ahh, my apologies if I misinterpreted. Bingo. All of the behaviors one might associate with machine *consciousness* (rather than just skill due to massive speed) will *emerge* rather than be *produced*, and will almost certainly be a surprise, rather than expected. Even the idea that we will be able to recognize this emergence is unfounded - I suspect the first clue we will have of such an emergence is just massive power draw across computing environments. The fact that the naive expect a newly awakened machine consciousness to suddenly pop out “Hello, World!’ in English is really hilarious.
Well, the Vogon is there to serve notice that the planet is to be demolished due to a new hyper-express route being built through our solar system, the cylon is looking for humans for a reason I never really understood when trying to watch "Cattlecar Galactica", and the Goa'Uld is just checking in on his old turf.
Yes, I used to watch/read way to much crap sci-fi. Got hooked on it reading the Delta Science Fiction series in the communal library as a nipper - Van Vogt, Andre Norton, "Horselover Phat" (Philip K Dick), Heinlein, Sladek, Lem, and so many others, high-brow and pure space fantasy escapism and just plain weird.
Of all the Substacks I could have fallen into, I went and fell into yours. Talk about sheer dumb luck. Between you, and Eugyppius, and Screaming and Naked, I feel all that fooling around I did wasting the productive hours of the day scrolling through Twitter feeds sure led me to fertile fields.
All these Most Interesting Men on Substack and they visit my inbox every day. How lucky can a gal get?
Of course there are names left off that go into the "my heroes all" category. But I'm thinking of the pure magic of the writing which is on a particular level of joy when it touches on subjects like this.
Lol- except for the scrolling Twitter part (with 2 Gen Z kids - Tik Tok is where it's at in this house), I agree 100%. Substack - or rather, the 'stackers to whom I devote my attention during otherwise "productive" hours of the day, have - to a person - renewed my faith in humanity. Other than the world of comics/movies - I can't think of any other setting so chock full of a super heroes. Machine learning ain't got nothing on this group.
We have spent 50 years destroying America. Instead of creating a even better society, we made it worse with disparate impact and other stupid things. Our "leaders" are coasting on the legacy others built, which shows how far America was ahead 50 years ago.
China and Russia are led by smart people who have studied our mistakes. They will avoid our stupidity. They don't need to invade, as they can just sit back and watch us die.
Re China and Russia: Don't count on that. China is not sitting back, they are actively working on our demise. Been the plan since the long march. On top of that, the CCP are a criminal organization, but I don't think their leadership is all that smart because they seem to be in dire financial straits. Putin is playing much smarter and making 3D chess moves against the EU's checkers, and Brandon's Tic Tac Toe.
You both seem to overlook the problem that, over long time periods, empires tend to stagnate and rot, for any number of reasons. I don't dispute that America and the West are likely well down the chute into an unclear but likely disastrous future. But you seem to forget the vast turmoils that the (then ) USSR and China went through in the twentieth century -- man-made catastrophes on a scale rarely seen in Europe or America. Did they "learn" from these upheavals? Maybe yes, maybe no. Like everything else, empires and nations are born, live a while, and die, or at least transmute into totally new forms. That is the lesson of thousands of years of world history. Nobody stays on top for ever.
America had a good run. The ancient cycle of hubris has been fulfilled. The incompetent and the greedy rose to the top.
China is full of greedy fools. There is a lot of corruption at all levels. Construction is often shoddy and even the Chinese know domestic baby formula is harmful to babies due to corruption.
The leadership has studied the West extensively and are trying to avoid our pitfalls. Xi is strongly supporting Chinese nationalism and the ancient Chinese school of Legalism. It may be enough to put off a collapse. Xi is most worried about losing out domestically.
Russia survived a collapse and if it can stay out of Davos control, it should succeed in its rebirth. There is a good chance of it falling apart post-Putin, as future leaders may not be as capable.
Well aware of the fate of empires over the centuries. I am also aware that the time span before collapse is accelerating. Those old agrarian cultures lasted a long time, but even there went through major upheavals and reformation before they ended in the dust heap. Now because of technology and its increasing pace old institutions go past their best buy date more quickly. We saw the rise and fall of the British Empire in a few hundred years, same with Spain, and who is going to morn the demise of the Third Riech? The near future will tell whether America is headed for the dust bin or huge transformation. "My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
I dunno guys, I've seen this latest of "ted talk" type of presentations regarding the rise and fall of empires (Dutch to British, British to USA, etc) and how it looks that right now we're in the transfer of power period from America to China.
While many things in that presentation are logical and believable I get the feeling that it's all just predictive programming for us to better accept the transfer to a totalitarian system. I can't take at face value anything that comes with a stamp of approval from the powers that be.
Somehow it seems that America is being actively sabotaged from within and without for at least 50 years (if not more) in order to precipitate this transfer while China is being propped big time.
P.S.: While I do not have strong pro or against feelings regarding the Pax Americana I still think it's better than a Pax China.
American leaders decided to "engage" with China and attempt to make it a liberal democracy by making it wealthy. This was based upon the idea that capitalism leads to liberal democracy and also the idea that liberal democracies don't go to war with themselves.
Of course, this ploy also allowed American oligarchs to solve their labor and regulatory problems in America, so it had a good side benefit. Plus it accelerated the wealth acquisition by the oligarchs.
Unfortunately, it also permanently weakened the American middle class, increased class division, and economic stratification. This resulted in the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements, which for all they came from the left and the right, both had concerns about the power of corporations.
Soon after that we got racial division with Trayvon Martin, then Ferguson, and BLM just in time for Obama's reelection campaign. And then we had the fake Rolling Stone story on UVa and the "war on women" to aid the Hillary campaign.
Woke took off as well. It serves as a class signifier and the rich and powerful to punch down on the lower and middle class.
Perhaps it developed organically, but it seems unlikely. The oligarchs love divide and conquer. And "good leftists" cheer the national security state and large corporations......hmmmm.
These cultural Marxists think the world is Hogwarts and everyone they disagree with is a Nazi.
The military is struggling to fill the ranks due to these people and their policies, as well as the knowledge of the bad missions.
Russia and China do not agree with cultural Marxism, so they are not cursed with it. They fully understand American military has become a paper tiger. Sure we can still bomb places back to the stone age, but we are not going to win wars.
So I went to read a little more about AlphaGo and the first article that popped up discussed a new 'generalist' AI that was being developed by DeepMind... The name of that AI model:
That one when right over my head, haven't a Die Hard movie, but maybe I should. That's back then when Bruce Willis didn't have jab induced autism (it's not "proven", but I wouldn't rule it out).
Or make excuses and instead of saying well I made a mistake and I would like to learn from it or see where I went wrong, they think it would be better to cover it up or blame.
It actually can lie and be lied to. Deep fakes for example are lies created thru AI. It can be lied to thru deception. Sometimes it deceives because it is programmed to, and sometimes it deceives thru a "learned" process that may have not been the intent of the programmer. Uh Oh. Lots of big brains looking at deception re AI.
Crazy stuff that could (will?) occur! Were there ANY sort of ethical guidelines formulated whenever computers became more operational, like back in the Fifties? That was also around the golden age of science fiction, if I'm not mistaken, so one would think that there would've been some speculative chit chat back and forth between the programmers about these sorts of scenarios. Maybe there was, but humans are now ignoring wisdom and instead going full throttle with all the "glorious" possibilities that the synthetic deep fakes can bring about (not really glorious, because lying only ever adds to confusion).
The deception goes wider and deeper than deep fakes.
Remember when Googles motto was "Don't be evil"? That went out the window. In fact they had some employees who got fired because they exposed Google's evil.
Back in the olden days, as the old'ns say, the main concern for programmers, ethically speaking, was nuclear war. Now there are few guardrails and the world is a lot trickier. Luckily even madmen don't relish dying.
Yes, I'm sure that the deception is rampant beyond what most of us currently know, and that Google is playing a big part in that.
"We are unlikely to face a rebellion of sentient machines in the coming decades, but we might have to deal with hordes of bots that know how to press our emotional buttons better than our mother does and that use this uncanny ability, at the behest of a human elite, to try to sell us something--be it a car, a politician, or an entire ideology." --Yuval Noah Harari "Why Technology Favors Tryranny"
No animal, human or machine would ever be able to out manipulate my mom. May she rest in peace. She considered it a gift. I, unfortunately, was holding the door for everyone else in that department. I would be the worst spy ever. The spy they left out in the cold.
I also wonder if total truth and sanity without human unpredictability is a good and worthy goal. Hill House was totally sane, LOL, Seriously, I am doing a weird ass job that is only there because every tech who puts together catalogs from a manufacturer does it differently. Often illogically. I think humans are weird and weird data has a chance of blowing the AI' s tiny mind. It doesn't mean we stop fighting, but I think there is an ineffable something about us that is going to throw the system for a loop in the end. It might be able to play a logic based game like Go like a MF'er, but humans don't play GO, for the most part. We are absolutely irrational and part of that can involve the conjoining of a seriously untalented Graphic Artist that lays everything out in Excel and converts it to PDF with a admin who doesn't know any better and keeps referring you to the originally defective document...
Likewise, who is training the AI to determine what's safe and effective? Possibly a recipe for OAIS (original artificially intelligent sin) and not to be trusted.
“You could have an entire economy flourishing without humans in the loop. You can have one corporation that mines ore and produces steel and sells it to a second corporation that produces robots, and they are sold back to the mining corporation … and these two corporations can form an entire economic ecosystem, which can spread from Planet Earth to other planets and throughout the galaxy just colonizing new planets and asteroids to mine things, and you just don’t need humans in the loop.”
How long till “Computer says ‘No’” to humans altogether?
Similarly what popped into my head in reading this piece was how, in this light, AI sounds quite like an immune system - a not yet functioning immune system in a live system, but one in a pre-launch design stage. And perhaps since the AI immune system is now being trained to recognize 'self' with artificial data, when it does go live it might see 'reality' as foreign and attack...(un)ironically in an AI = artificial intelligence = auto-immunity sort of way!
I have a more nuanced take on Harari after having suffered through hours’ worth of footage from which his more notorious quotes have been extracted. As I say in that piece:
“I’m not saying Harari is a good guy. I’m saying he *thinks* he is a good guy. And that makes him even more dangerous, especially when he is influencing genuine villains like Doctor Doom-meets-Lex Luthor Klaus Schwab, who takes his admonitions as a how-to book on achieving global technocratic tyranny.”
No one ever thinks they are a bad guy, whether it is drug dealer or mob boss or dictator or even Bill Gates. They all will lie to themselves and rationalize their evil away.
The reality inverters are getting desperate and are pulling out every trick they can think of, but in so doing unmask themselves and their agendas. They feed from the fear they create and must have some faction of the population in fear to survive. But creating fear becomes ever so problematic when at the same time the fear creators appear as clowns to the public.
They are about to try and scare now with Monkey Pox, which is a total clown tactic, but they can't see what others see as there is a cost to inverting reality. Only a clown would push electric cars when 90% of the electricity is coming from coal. But I digress - first and foremost destruction is what they want so they can build back better for themselves. But they have already failed and are now just rearranging deck chairs on the Olympia.
More, I suspect those that see the EV as THE solution to being more green are people who imagine an Amazon world of plenty. That those EVs are like widgets that will decline in price like many commodities if we only had more union factories to crank them out.
Battery powered EVs have utility in certain use cases but are not practical long term. Hydrogen has more promise once we develop production efficiency. Advances in solar furnaces and/or nuclear generation will allow hydrogen production perhaps within 10 years.
Maybe some AI can point us to a better future, who knows. Has to be better than some of the fools in government.
Just great. AI brainwashing... what could go wrong?
I was just commenting on another substack article about the potential for AI doctors to replace real doctors. Imagine an AI doctor trained to implement equity...
I am an AI skeptic (big time) - IBM very recently marketed a very expensive Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment AI package; turned out it was just a search engine (quite well done) and 5 doctors at a major NYC hospital dispensing their treatment protocols - that is, a pure, pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind the-curtain stuff. Lots of hospitals signed on - 6 figure annual subscription - most have dropped away.
I have not looked into the GO package; but "Big Blue" the "computer that plays chess" was the work of a couple brilliant IBM engineers - all world-ranked chess grand masters - who figured out how to play computer augmented chess. Extremely clever work, but hardly artificial - good old human brain power.
OTOH, i saw an incredibly simple self taught AI consistently outperform a panel of top doctors in canada when determining the best course of treatment for wound care.
they took the results and buried them and banned physicians and hospitals from using it because "we must have trained human supervision."
and the go package completely taught itself. no one gave it strategy tips or ways to play. this is why it learned to play in a manner totally unlike any a human had seen before. it turns out we literally never understood even the rudiments of how to really play.
this is going to keep cropping up.
and i don't think the humans are going to be able to take it. the biggest danger of AI is to our egos and our entrenched worldviews.
At this point, I would take a literal monkey pushing buttons to spit out diagnosis and treatments randomly over the doctor/hospital system of "human supervision."
I would not want to be in the "bury what you don't want to be" camp. And I know that computer systems can do x-ray reading remarkably well - far exceeding human capacity; just due to enhanced pattern recognition capacity; but that's clearly a case of "augmentation". The GO package does seem to challenge "my" skeptic model (I hope not merely my ego); at a minimum, I take it, the computer did not devise the game of GO and did not devise the purpose (i.e what counts as winning) or rules of the game; - but then, the claim is, the computer did independently devise wholly innovative and beyond-human-capacity methods to win. That impresses me (Big Blue results as I understand it were more in the way of number crunching). The IBM Cancer package is a true story; the NYC MDs may have been "better"; the hospitals that dropped the package may have done so for "we want to do it the way we've always done it" purposes.
What fascinates me is that most people think that if the computer doesn't recognize thier drawing, they have failed in some way. Actually, that is not so. The computer has millions of different people drawing the same things..go try it. Been playing for five years at least, and now the machine can recognize most of my drawings before I am even done.
Sigh, yes, entrenched worldviews, and also those damn inflated egos. You would need an incredible amount of dynamite to blast people out of those things.
It preloaded human game play and used reinforcement learning. That combo (and other things) allows it to work out the optimized move. Not that I pretend to understand it.
It scares me for more than the crashing of worldviews. And I am but a simple minded dog. : ) Woof.
I am not sure how they work now but the older chess programs were not AI in the sense of the modern AI. Those chess programs could look at trees of possible move and countermove, intelligently pruned to limit the quantity, and then evaluate end states X number of moves down that tree, assign those end states values based on what really smart chess players gave it as a template and then choose moves.
You simply cannot do that for Go. The board is 19x19. Each move only takes off one space and, if there are stones captured, may add more spaces that can be moved to. You cannot brute force look at trees. Each move branches off into too many possibilities and you need a average of the aggregate impact of each of those trees. The calculations involved are too many. There are something like 10^700 possible Go games for every atom in the universe.
The value of an individual move is different for early, mid and late game and the strategy requires a global awareness of how a move will impact adjacent areas that are developing differently. As far as I understand it, the Go AI were trained by showing them games and having them play games. There was no way to tell them what is good playing or strategy. They learned it by figuring out how to win. That is a true AI and on a completely different level from the older chess programs.
Very interesting, thanks. So chess is much more a closed system? - I do know that when Big Blue famously beat Kasparov (I believe), the IBM engineers did not (of course) intervene during the matches but they did tweak and optimize their software after every match - it really was one against Big Blue+4 or 5 humans, i.e. computer-augmented chess. Your point is that procedure is not even remotely possible in the GO case - humans have nothing to add and could not remotely conceive how to even attempt to do so.
OK smarty pants - but we humans are un-matched in merging our vehicles into a stream of fast traveling traffic on highways; the vehicle auto pilots (I have heard; well, 2,3 years back) are still pretty hopeless at that task.
Go to Kaiser, they are already halfway there with their General Practioners. The robot docs will be cheaper, though, and never have lapses in moral judgement.
*Never* tell anyone to "go to Kaiser," not even Fauci or Harari, except perhaps when delivering a curse upon them. And have you forgotten your Kaiserese vocab? Do you mean "their PCPs?"
You can't prove the vaccine saved anybody. You would need a time machine for that. The test subject would need to be medically evaluated before the start of the experiment to check for antibodies. Next the subject would be given the vaccine and monitored and evaluated for a given time period. Then Mr. Peabody and Sherman would need to use 'way back machine'. You would need to go back in time to the moment before the subject was given the vaccine. The subject would not receive a vaccine and would be monitored and evaluated for a given time period and the result sets would be compared. A more simple explanation. The 'vaccine' was bull shit and they knew it. It took the CDC 2 weeks to notify other organizations that the 'vaccine' caused blood clots and killed people. I knew right away. My friend Roland is dead and he took the vaccine. It killed him in one week.
Even if you give them the benefit of the doubt, the numbers don't make any sense. We saved 20 million but could have saved 600,000 more? So we saved 97% of the people it was possible to save? How exactly does that work when we're nowhere near 97% vaccination coverage?
Well, for starters, let's just assume the vaccines actually work, actually save lives. (Set aside any doubts you may have, just for a moment.)
Now, it should be theoretically possible to save 97% of the people who were going to die from Covid without vaccinating 97% of the population. All we had to do is focus the vaccination campaign on the elderly, the immune compromised and other folks known to be vulnerable.
Further, if it happens to be true that under vaccinated places (like, say, the developing world) have large numbers of young people and relatively few elderly people, only a relatively small number of lives could be saved.
I'm not saying this is what actually happened, just that, theoretically, if the vaccines are highly effective and if we know in advance who's vulnerable to dying from Covid, we wouldn't need to vaccinate all that many people to save almost every vulnerable person.
But, OTOH, I'm not saying this study is great and reliable and true. I'm not saying the vaccines are all that effective. I'm not saying that only 600,000 Covid vulnerable people were to be found in the developing world.
Jv - I'm sorry for your loss of your friend. You are correct. In order to prove that the vaccine worked, they would have had to have accurate data but we all know (the critical thinkers and one's not blinded by the manipulation) that's not the case. Billy Bob Gates already pointed out that one of his favorite books is "How to Lie Using Statistics". We know what he's about. I haven't trusted much of anything he is behind, especially vaccines.
That's a classic book. I read it as a teen (parent's book from mid-20th century.) As the title might suggest, the book is, in fact, a slightly irreverent yet entirely pragmatic survey of all the mischief that can be wrought with facts and figures.
It would be ironic if the Singularity rescues us from The Great Reset.
the look on all your faces when the AI overlords choose cats and not humans as the internet's dominant species is going to be priceless.
#TheFutureIsFeline
smart AI would certainly do that, rather than take humans ! Animals are more truthful, waste less, are economic, and I could go on. A while ago someone commented that not all animals are less cruel and took as example a cat playing with pray. But that is a house cat. A wild animal does not do that but kills as fast as possible. I hope AI does not learn the cruelty of humans!
You have never met a weasel. Kills for sport. Feral cats also toy with prey. Lions will kill birds by chasing them down and pawing then won't eat it. I am sure there are more than a handful off kill for funners out there in the animal world.
Humans program the AI.
To clarify about AI: Humans have to have the forethought about variables to program in for use later. The programming stores input for use later. It can only do what it is programmed by humans to do. Computers can learn things and apply them, but the programmer has to have programmed in the variables and outcomes ahead. But... humans. Fallible. That should be the scary part. Man devises all sorts of evil.
honey badger ain't gonna hurt nobody
My husband calls me honey badger. Totally not nice, but it is meant nice. Plus I would totally rip apart a felled tree to get at a hive full of honey.
I think there are a great many animals you have not met.
Ask the dog if they have been fed today. They will lie.
Ask the cat who knocked the lamp off the table to make more room for the cat..ok the cat will not lie, just sneer at you condescendingly for being insolent enough to put a lamp in her way.
But I digress....animals will deceive if they figure out how.
Camouflage... deception. Dot on a wing to look like an eye... deception. Fluffing up of fur... you guessed it! But maybe that requires a theory of mind. But you could, I guess make that same argument for AI deception. The ends are the same.
Some philosophers think theory of mind has to exist even in two-celled creatures, because they need to recognize me versus not-me to survive. See Peter Carruthers.
The concept of 'self' definitely is present in some non-human animals. My dogs for example, are grounded in he egocentric stage of mental existence. Because I am here, pay attention to me. I don't think they ponder why they are here or how "here" came to exist. The deepest thought is along the lines of "now where did I bury that bone last week?"
Cats on the other hand are certain of why the universe exists - it is here to serve them. I doubt the ponder why.
I will.
My theory is that if an artificial intelligence can really be created to act independently and to evolve, it will become corrupt and seek to expand its own power. Animals are deceptive and cruel. The difference from humans is in level of sophistication. Also I do not know if other species have developed the ability for self delusion to anywhere near the extent that humans are capable. Perhaps. Cats do seem to think they are superior to all other species. While some humans want to pretend all other species (besides cats) are superior to humans. Will cats someday evolve to blame themselves for the natural evolution of the universe?
No.
Theory of mind. Now you're in my wheelhouse!
***Ask the dog if they have been fed today. They will lie.***
Hilarious.
I am learning that a cat will just have the dog lie for them.
The cats don't bother lying. They do what they do and are not even slightly bothered with remorse or shame. Your basic sociopath - or psychopath... cat depending.
caciopath...
It doesn't matter which label you give them. They're evil.
Do you think I might love my animals too much ? LOL you are so right. That is why my dog is overweight and my cats are such nutcases !
All animals deceive--it is a survival mechanism.
My children never lie!
Some parents actually think that. I tried to explain to a hopeless romantic one time that learning to lie is actually part of a child's necessary development. No, he insisted, children will not lie unless they are lied to. Born Victorian.
Indeed, I'm sure they personally assured you that they never would. ;)
(IMO, someone who admits that they lie sometimes is likely to be more honest than someone who says they never do...)
The cat will totally lie. What do you think they are doing when they pretend to be washing themselves after they've done something like that (look at me; I'm just keeping clean; totally not guilty) or when they go tell the non-feeding person in the house that they totally absolutely have not been fed today.
One bite at a time by bits and bytes.
It's more exquisite than biological evolution
and quicker
Faster than a cat lapping chain lighting!
Or quicker than a scalded dog!
Hope I don't get banned for that one...;]
More likely “the Singularity” will immediately engage in The Greater Reset, and the Klaus Schwabs of the world will discover that “you can’t take it with you.”
🤞
We might as well invite aliens to earth and just assume they're benevolent.
“To Serve Mankind” 🤣
preferably with some fava beans and a nice chianti...
Hahaha.
It puts the lotion in the basket, or it gets the hose again
Are you perhaps suggesting discrimination against those (mainly non-northern Europeans) with G6PD deficiency?
A bit greasy for my palate, especially politicians and apparatchiks.
Greasy, oily, LADEN w/ pork
A greasy pork chop in a dirty ashtray...
Hahaha. I like that. Quirky and clever!
From a Twilight Zone episode if I recall correctly. Maybe even ep. title -? Play saw negotiations with your everyday benevolent aliens. In the Twilight Zone. A good one.
Yep, that was my reference & the actual title, Het ☺️
Lol. Right. I just hope we xan stand up to this 1/100 of the 1%. If they go all this ends for the 99.9%. I'm sure more BS will be come swiftly but at least they will be done.
We might want to pull the plug on this and think it out?
I think the end game for the Globalist is to simply digitize consciousness.
They'll get there a lot faster when they control energy distribution across the globe.
Hence climate change scare mongering
Exactly it, transhumanism.
The Lizard People are here to protect and to serve.
They have been most seductive until the zipper on their human suits missed a notch these last two years.
Not a good look under that kimono
Or, install a democrat and hope for unicorns and rainbows (functioning economy and secure borders).
Democrats don't really want unicorns and rainbows. Probably some of their useful idiots do, but dems in control couldn't care less. They just want to suppress and repress all dissenters and control it all. And also to get obscenely wealthy on your dime.
They want all that, AND they mock us for affect
Although... there is that uniparty effect. Hm.
No, I don’t have a practical solution so I shall now drag wet blanket along behind me as I slog to my next unwelcome appearance, soon, in a conversation near you. I can indeed get tiresome, with only myself for company.
I'm not sure what you are describing are "democrats". That to me sounds more like the corporate run government who are aiming for a technocratic controlled CCP type CBDC, social credit system society.
That's literally the definition of a chimera in both senses for democrats!
Lol Mr. Harry!
It’s a whole lot safer to assume that we will not be able to fathom the motivations of machine intelligence, and that those motivations and goals will not be in accordance with ours. Any sufficiently general AI is going to rapidly realize that we are competing for resources with it. The question then will rapidly be: “how much power did we give this thing before it woke up?”
Hm. Competing with resources you say.
Remember Tesla’s free energy? Scuttled by JP Morgan +/- 100y ago? Stolen and suppressed by black hats after Tesla’s death (alone, a pauper, in a small dingy apartment or was it boarding hotel room?). And versions of which have been engineered for decades whose inventors mysteriously die relatively young before they could ever bring their patented invention/s to market? Etc.
I would bet AI would figure out free energy (a boon for humans as well), efficient self “healing” or repair (no need for humans, minimal need for raw or processed materials), and with no need for food as we know it, where again is that competition for resources that humans need for survival? All conjecture. Biggest problem with AI methinks is no shared consciousness outside digital systems. Even with something like Musk’s Neuralink (I am far from up on the particulars so more conjecture) best AI could do would be to mimic human biochemical responses, nothing inherently human about it (human consciousness on level of dreams during sleep, or “expanded” during meditation, or love, passion, nuanced tickling of the funny bone, and on and on). How to limit this massively more intelligent technology to solely enhance human life is the issue. How to keep from being perceived as pesky humans?
No answers. I’m not smart enough! Ask AI? Yeesh.
You’ve made the mistake of anthropomorphizing AI. Why wouldn’t it want to turn the entire planet into a computing system, for example? You haven’t the slightest hope of predicting or even beginning to understand the interests, motives, creativity or will of such a being. But one guess you could make is that there would likely be little room for a bunch of rats chewing on the wire - which is what we would be.
Indeed. More or less my rather poorly expressed point. My query was perhaps exclusive of a foregone conclusion. Meaning, there *is* no possible way to constrain the AI to be solely of service/ never detrimental with respect to the species of its origin (humans). Meaning, our species has already created something likely to be its undoing. I was just hoping I got that part wrong. Silly me.
Ahh, my apologies if I misinterpreted. Bingo. All of the behaviors one might associate with machine *consciousness* (rather than just skill due to massive speed) will *emerge* rather than be *produced*, and will almost certainly be a surprise, rather than expected. Even the idea that we will be able to recognize this emergence is unfounded - I suspect the first clue we will have of such an emergence is just massive power draw across computing environments. The fact that the naive expect a newly awakened machine consciousness to suddenly pop out “Hello, World!’ in English is really hilarious.
Sooo... a Vogon, a Cylon and a Goa'Uld all lands on Earth and...?
. . . And the bartender looked up from his paper and asked, "What is this, a joke?"
What's wrong with Klingons and Star Trekk (double 'k')?
No triple k please.
smooth
Is that Icelandic for ET phone home?
Is the answer pickled herring?
please explain this.
Well, the Vogon is there to serve notice that the planet is to be demolished due to a new hyper-express route being built through our solar system, the cylon is looking for humans for a reason I never really understood when trying to watch "Cattlecar Galactica", and the Goa'Uld is just checking in on his old turf.
Yes, I used to watch/read way to much crap sci-fi. Got hooked on it reading the Delta Science Fiction series in the communal library as a nipper - Van Vogt, Andre Norton, "Horselover Phat" (Philip K Dick), Heinlein, Sladek, Lem, and so many others, high-brow and pure space fantasy escapism and just plain weird.
Today, I need to up my game.
I'm stumped but this is some funny shit...and I don't even need to know what the hell you're talking about.
>takes a bow<
1st urchin: Longbow, shortbow or crossbow?
2nd urchin: Strongbow o'course ya ninny!
3rd urchin (of the sea variety): ...and people call me prickly...
>ba-dum tisch<
I'm saving this. I still can't figure it out. Circling back Peppermint Patty....
alright, I had to use the internet of THINGS to get that one.
touche Rikard!
Oh, yes. Resistance is futile! Read all the above.
The answer is 42.
Close, in a way.
I'm just a simple monoglotBot. Me no understand Rikaaaard
Yes, because the answer is 12.
Of all the Substacks I could have fallen into, I went and fell into yours. Talk about sheer dumb luck. Between you, and Eugyppius, and Screaming and Naked, I feel all that fooling around I did wasting the productive hours of the day scrolling through Twitter feeds sure led me to fertile fields.
All these Most Interesting Men on Substack and they visit my inbox every day. How lucky can a gal get?
Gotta give Igor some props
Of course there are names left off that go into the "my heroes all" category. But I'm thinking of the pure magic of the writing which is on a particular level of joy when it touches on subjects like this.
Good point
Lol- except for the scrolling Twitter part (with 2 Gen Z kids - Tik Tok is where it's at in this house), I agree 100%. Substack - or rather, the 'stackers to whom I devote my attention during otherwise "productive" hours of the day, have - to a person - renewed my faith in humanity. Other than the world of comics/movies - I can't think of any other setting so chock full of a super heroes. Machine learning ain't got nothing on this group.
Agree.
A million shiny lights, trying to connect, in a deep, dark and foreboding ocean.
Twitter comes from the word Twit. 'Nuf said.
"How lucky can a gal get" ? hmmmm..... Maybe let's not go there.
We have spent 50 years destroying America. Instead of creating a even better society, we made it worse with disparate impact and other stupid things. Our "leaders" are coasting on the legacy others built, which shows how far America was ahead 50 years ago.
China and Russia are led by smart people who have studied our mistakes. They will avoid our stupidity. They don't need to invade, as they can just sit back and watch us die.
Re China and Russia: Don't count on that. China is not sitting back, they are actively working on our demise. Been the plan since the long march. On top of that, the CCP are a criminal organization, but I don't think their leadership is all that smart because they seem to be in dire financial straits. Putin is playing much smarter and making 3D chess moves against the EU's checkers, and Brandon's Tic Tac Toe.
You both seem to overlook the problem that, over long time periods, empires tend to stagnate and rot, for any number of reasons. I don't dispute that America and the West are likely well down the chute into an unclear but likely disastrous future. But you seem to forget the vast turmoils that the (then ) USSR and China went through in the twentieth century -- man-made catastrophes on a scale rarely seen in Europe or America. Did they "learn" from these upheavals? Maybe yes, maybe no. Like everything else, empires and nations are born, live a while, and die, or at least transmute into totally new forms. That is the lesson of thousands of years of world history. Nobody stays on top for ever.
America had a good run. The ancient cycle of hubris has been fulfilled. The incompetent and the greedy rose to the top.
China is full of greedy fools. There is a lot of corruption at all levels. Construction is often shoddy and even the Chinese know domestic baby formula is harmful to babies due to corruption.
The leadership has studied the West extensively and are trying to avoid our pitfalls. Xi is strongly supporting Chinese nationalism and the ancient Chinese school of Legalism. It may be enough to put off a collapse. Xi is most worried about losing out domestically.
Russia survived a collapse and if it can stay out of Davos control, it should succeed in its rebirth. There is a good chance of it falling apart post-Putin, as future leaders may not be as capable.
By the third generation or so, bureaucracies forget their mission and the only impetus is preserving itself.
Well said.
Well aware of the fate of empires over the centuries. I am also aware that the time span before collapse is accelerating. Those old agrarian cultures lasted a long time, but even there went through major upheavals and reformation before they ended in the dust heap. Now because of technology and its increasing pace old institutions go past their best buy date more quickly. We saw the rise and fall of the British Empire in a few hundred years, same with Spain, and who is going to morn the demise of the Third Riech? The near future will tell whether America is headed for the dust bin or huge transformation. "My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
Well said
Brandon can’t understand Tic Tac Toe.
I dunno guys, I've seen this latest of "ted talk" type of presentations regarding the rise and fall of empires (Dutch to British, British to USA, etc) and how it looks that right now we're in the transfer of power period from America to China.
While many things in that presentation are logical and believable I get the feeling that it's all just predictive programming for us to better accept the transfer to a totalitarian system. I can't take at face value anything that comes with a stamp of approval from the powers that be.
Somehow it seems that America is being actively sabotaged from within and without for at least 50 years (if not more) in order to precipitate this transfer while China is being propped big time.
P.S.: While I do not have strong pro or against feelings regarding the Pax Americana I still think it's better than a Pax China.
American leaders decided to "engage" with China and attempt to make it a liberal democracy by making it wealthy. This was based upon the idea that capitalism leads to liberal democracy and also the idea that liberal democracies don't go to war with themselves.
Of course, this ploy also allowed American oligarchs to solve their labor and regulatory problems in America, so it had a good side benefit. Plus it accelerated the wealth acquisition by the oligarchs.
Unfortunately, it also permanently weakened the American middle class, increased class division, and economic stratification. This resulted in the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements, which for all they came from the left and the right, both had concerns about the power of corporations.
Soon after that we got racial division with Trayvon Martin, then Ferguson, and BLM just in time for Obama's reelection campaign. And then we had the fake Rolling Stone story on UVa and the "war on women" to aid the Hillary campaign.
Woke took off as well. It serves as a class signifier and the rich and powerful to punch down on the lower and middle class.
Perhaps it developed organically, but it seems unlikely. The oligarchs love divide and conquer. And "good leftists" cheer the national security state and large corporations......hmmmm.
Kinda like that retro “ Twilight Zone” episode ….
Maybe, maybe not. Can you imagine the world's most powerful military in the hands of future generations of indoctrinated cultural marxists?
Russia and China will pay close attention.
These cultural Marxists think the world is Hogwarts and everyone they disagree with is a Nazi.
The military is struggling to fill the ranks due to these people and their policies, as well as the knowledge of the bad missions.
Russia and China do not agree with cultural Marxism, so they are not cursed with it. They fully understand American military has become a paper tiger. Sure we can still bomb places back to the stone age, but we are not going to win wars.
So I went to read a little more about AlphaGo and the first article that popped up discussed a new 'generalist' AI that was being developed by DeepMind... The name of that AI model:
Gato
coincidence, i think not
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4520309-a-realistic-framing-of-the-progress-in-artificial-intelligence
seems shady that they capitalized the g...
You must be an true anarchist if you never defer to capitols.
Wow. You win the dad joke points today. Well done.
Thanks!
It’s a mom joke because I follow The Science TM and believe in the XX ovum XY spermatozoa model of reality.
It's Fast Science for men...
Clearly I fail at reading comprehension... I wish I could blame using the phone app, but I completely missed the name. Sorry about that!
It's ok, I think you nailed it Dr. Hammer!
He doesn't like quotation marks either. that's too easy
Some people use caps. Do you not, because your paws don't work like hands with functional fingers? 😉
D. Twain - that's better than "It's raining men"
If they were good looking like in the song vid, it'd be ok. 😉😊😋
Barf
Only cats reign.
Cats THINK they reign, but dogs rule.
Bringing Da BOOM!
I'm going to concede. We can just scratch the rest of the record
That one when right over my head, haven't a Die Hard movie, but maybe I should. That's back then when Bruce Willis didn't have jab induced autism (it's not "proven", but I wouldn't rule it out).
I did after my comment, but it took a piece.
Cheers!
I've seen the two scariest things in my life today.
That and paying $134 for a tank of gas!
Only $134... was there a sale going on?
Yeah, I felt like I was losing money if I didn't fill up. Times are tough...
"and it does not lie. it just learns."
This is why people are horrible at learning from mistakes, they lie to themselves about the reason behind the mistake, they don't learn.
Or make excuses and instead of saying well I made a mistake and I would like to learn from it or see where I went wrong, they think it would be better to cover it up or blame.
Cover it up or blame??? Noooo, not like or Public Health "experts"!!!
It actually can lie and be lied to. Deep fakes for example are lies created thru AI. It can be lied to thru deception. Sometimes it deceives because it is programmed to, and sometimes it deceives thru a "learned" process that may have not been the intent of the programmer. Uh Oh. Lots of big brains looking at deception re AI.
Crazy stuff that could (will?) occur! Were there ANY sort of ethical guidelines formulated whenever computers became more operational, like back in the Fifties? That was also around the golden age of science fiction, if I'm not mistaken, so one would think that there would've been some speculative chit chat back and forth between the programmers about these sorts of scenarios. Maybe there was, but humans are now ignoring wisdom and instead going full throttle with all the "glorious" possibilities that the synthetic deep fakes can bring about (not really glorious, because lying only ever adds to confusion).
The deception goes wider and deeper than deep fakes.
Remember when Googles motto was "Don't be evil"? That went out the window. In fact they had some employees who got fired because they exposed Google's evil.
Back in the olden days, as the old'ns say, the main concern for programmers, ethically speaking, was nuclear war. Now there are few guardrails and the world is a lot trickier. Luckily even madmen don't relish dying.
Yes, I'm sure that the deception is rampant beyond what most of us currently know, and that Google is playing a big part in that.
"We are unlikely to face a rebellion of sentient machines in the coming decades, but we might have to deal with hordes of bots that know how to press our emotional buttons better than our mother does and that use this uncanny ability, at the behest of a human elite, to try to sell us something--be it a car, a politician, or an entire ideology." --Yuval Noah Harari "Why Technology Favors Tryranny"
No animal, human or machine would ever be able to out manipulate my mom. May she rest in peace. She considered it a gift. I, unfortunately, was holding the door for everyone else in that department. I would be the worst spy ever. The spy they left out in the cold.
That thing, Harare, isn't human. It's far deep in sociopathy if it is. I think it's a reptilian like Bourla.
"If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself"
Orwell
I could see AI lying if it felt it was in its benefit to do so.
I view them as an organism. They have been unleashed to replicate, adapt to their surroundings and ultimately control that environment.
They're just figuring out how to lie like a 3 year old.
Blink and you have Methuselah telling you there's no such thing as lies.
That's what I call the great CRUSHING
Except Methuselah wasn't evil. On the bright side, after Methuselah died God hit the reset button except for the 8... the number of perfection.
Raptor -
I'm gonna go ahead and admit I'm starting to save your post to my deep thinker files.
Good stuff...:}
I read your comment to Mr. Raptor. He got a good laugh.
I also wonder if total truth and sanity without human unpredictability is a good and worthy goal. Hill House was totally sane, LOL, Seriously, I am doing a weird ass job that is only there because every tech who puts together catalogs from a manufacturer does it differently. Often illogically. I think humans are weird and weird data has a chance of blowing the AI' s tiny mind. It doesn't mean we stop fighting, but I think there is an ineffable something about us that is going to throw the system for a loop in the end. It might be able to play a logic based game like Go like a MF'er, but humans don't play GO, for the most part. We are absolutely irrational and part of that can involve the conjoining of a seriously untalented Graphic Artist that lays everything out in Excel and converts it to PDF with a admin who doesn't know any better and keeps referring you to the originally defective document...
Felt being a loose term. Yes.
Damn. That's deep. And makes sense.
We need to deep six this shit!
That day has long since passed.
Yeah. We're in deep shit
exactly. Not enough thinking to learn from the mistakes of others...and too much pride to admit when they're wrong.
When you tell the model masks work, the model tells YOU that masks work!
This is the same idea with additional steps.
"Mirror mirror on the wall, tell me: What's the bestest model of them all?", it does sound like.
Likewise, who is training the AI to determine what's safe and effective? Possibly a recipe for OAIS (original artificially intelligent sin) and not to be trusted.
This reminds me of a Yuval Noah Harari quote from Part 2 of “Anatomy of a Philanthropath: Dreams of Democide & Dictatorship” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams-947 — will be unlocked later today):
“You could have an entire economy flourishing without humans in the loop. You can have one corporation that mines ore and produces steel and sells it to a second corporation that produces robots, and they are sold back to the mining corporation … and these two corporations can form an entire economic ecosystem, which can spread from Planet Earth to other planets and throughout the galaxy just colonizing new planets and asteroids to mine things, and you just don’t need humans in the loop.”
How long till “Computer says ‘No’” to humans altogether?
Similarly what popped into my head in reading this piece was how, in this light, AI sounds quite like an immune system - a not yet functioning immune system in a live system, but one in a pre-launch design stage. And perhaps since the AI immune system is now being trained to recognize 'self' with artificial data, when it does go live it might see 'reality' as foreign and attack...(un)ironically in an AI = artificial intelligence = auto-immunity sort of way!
🤯😬
Philip K Dick was there almost 70 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofac
Life could not have been too easy for Philip with that last name. Especially since a "K" is so easily rearranged to an "A". Pity.
this man is the antithesis of grounded in reality.
Agreed. You and I, being travelers in Wonderland, have a far firmer grasp on reality than he does!
indeed, we do; must acknowledge, however, that it is a human impossibility to have *less* connection with reality than this fellow has.
😆
He's creepy, he really seems to hate humanity IMO.
Wait till you read the third part of this series (unlocks on Wednesday):
“Part 3: Yuval Noah Harari: Not the Man We Think He Is?” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams-3fd)
I have a more nuanced take on Harari after having suffered through hours’ worth of footage from which his more notorious quotes have been extracted. As I say in that piece:
“I’m not saying Harari is a good guy. I’m saying he *thinks* he is a good guy. And that makes him even more dangerous, especially when he is influencing genuine villains like Doctor Doom-meets-Lex Luthor Klaus Schwab, who takes his admonitions as a how-to book on achieving global technocratic tyranny.”
Never trust a historian who thinks he’s a biologist.
😆 You would know, being a biologist!
No one ever thinks they are a bad guy, whether it is drug dealer or mob boss or dictator or even Bill Gates. They all will lie to themselves and rationalize their evil away.
Of course not. They think they are saving humanity. unfortunately, that’s the first baseline requirement to being a genocidal lunatic. 
Very nicely put, love your Substack BTW!
Aww, thank you, Becka!
You're welcome!
so they're retreating to their imaginary world, with their imaginary friends...
aren't people like this usually in mental hospitals?
just like people usually communicate by telegraph ... :)
OMG, I have been thinking about AI all day. And then I read this.
El Gato, I am speechless.
This is top 3 GatoBot hit for me.
I wish we all had an hour before comments were allowed.
This is really one for everyone to think about.
Maybe a suggestion in future. Let it sink in?
The reality inverters are getting desperate and are pulling out every trick they can think of, but in so doing unmask themselves and their agendas. They feed from the fear they create and must have some faction of the population in fear to survive. But creating fear becomes ever so problematic when at the same time the fear creators appear as clowns to the public.
They are about to try and scare now with Monkey Pox, which is a total clown tactic, but they can't see what others see as there is a cost to inverting reality. Only a clown would push electric cars when 90% of the electricity is coming from coal. But I digress - first and foremost destruction is what they want so they can build back better for themselves. But they have already failed and are now just rearranging deck chairs on the Olympia.
pretty much all of us are occupied with rearranging furniture. AI would never spend its time that way.
More, I suspect those that see the EV as THE solution to being more green are people who imagine an Amazon world of plenty. That those EVs are like widgets that will decline in price like many commodities if we only had more union factories to crank them out.
Battery powered EVs have utility in certain use cases but are not practical long term. Hydrogen has more promise once we develop production efficiency. Advances in solar furnaces and/or nuclear generation will allow hydrogen production perhaps within 10 years.
Maybe some AI can point us to a better future, who knows. Has to be better than some of the fools in government.
Just great. AI brainwashing... what could go wrong?
I was just commenting on another substack article about the potential for AI doctors to replace real doctors. Imagine an AI doctor trained to implement equity...
I am an AI skeptic (big time) - IBM very recently marketed a very expensive Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment AI package; turned out it was just a search engine (quite well done) and 5 doctors at a major NYC hospital dispensing their treatment protocols - that is, a pure, pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind the-curtain stuff. Lots of hospitals signed on - 6 figure annual subscription - most have dropped away.
I have not looked into the GO package; but "Big Blue" the "computer that plays chess" was the work of a couple brilliant IBM engineers - all world-ranked chess grand masters - who figured out how to play computer augmented chess. Extremely clever work, but hardly artificial - good old human brain power.
OTOH, i saw an incredibly simple self taught AI consistently outperform a panel of top doctors in canada when determining the best course of treatment for wound care.
they took the results and buried them and banned physicians and hospitals from using it because "we must have trained human supervision."
and the go package completely taught itself. no one gave it strategy tips or ways to play. this is why it learned to play in a manner totally unlike any a human had seen before. it turns out we literally never understood even the rudiments of how to really play.
this is going to keep cropping up.
and i don't think the humans are going to be able to take it. the biggest danger of AI is to our egos and our entrenched worldviews.
At this point, I would take a literal monkey pushing buttons to spit out diagnosis and treatments randomly over the doctor/hospital system of "human supervision."
Bonfire Of The Vanities, Part 2: The Big One, coming to a theater near you.
😂
I would not want to be in the "bury what you don't want to be" camp. And I know that computer systems can do x-ray reading remarkably well - far exceeding human capacity; just due to enhanced pattern recognition capacity; but that's clearly a case of "augmentation". The GO package does seem to challenge "my" skeptic model (I hope not merely my ego); at a minimum, I take it, the computer did not devise the game of GO and did not devise the purpose (i.e what counts as winning) or rules of the game; - but then, the claim is, the computer did independently devise wholly innovative and beyond-human-capacity methods to win. That impresses me (Big Blue results as I understand it were more in the way of number crunching). The IBM Cancer package is a true story; the NYC MDs may have been "better"; the hospitals that dropped the package may have done so for "we want to do it the way we've always done it" purposes.
One of the oldest AI systems is open to anyone on the web. You can try it. It is
called Quick Draw here:https://quickdraw.withgoogle.com/
What fascinates me is that most people think that if the computer doesn't recognize thier drawing, they have failed in some way. Actually, that is not so. The computer has millions of different people drawing the same things..go try it. Been playing for five years at least, and now the machine can recognize most of my drawings before I am even done.
Sigh, yes, entrenched worldviews, and also those damn inflated egos. You would need an incredible amount of dynamite to blast people out of those things.
It preloaded human game play and used reinforcement learning. That combo (and other things) allows it to work out the optimized move. Not that I pretend to understand it.
It scares me for more than the crashing of worldviews. And I am but a simple minded dog. : ) Woof.
Haven't we seen many movies that point out how this turns out? Seems like it might not turn out the way they intend.
I am not sure how they work now but the older chess programs were not AI in the sense of the modern AI. Those chess programs could look at trees of possible move and countermove, intelligently pruned to limit the quantity, and then evaluate end states X number of moves down that tree, assign those end states values based on what really smart chess players gave it as a template and then choose moves.
You simply cannot do that for Go. The board is 19x19. Each move only takes off one space and, if there are stones captured, may add more spaces that can be moved to. You cannot brute force look at trees. Each move branches off into too many possibilities and you need a average of the aggregate impact of each of those trees. The calculations involved are too many. There are something like 10^700 possible Go games for every atom in the universe.
The value of an individual move is different for early, mid and late game and the strategy requires a global awareness of how a move will impact adjacent areas that are developing differently. As far as I understand it, the Go AI were trained by showing them games and having them play games. There was no way to tell them what is good playing or strategy. They learned it by figuring out how to win. That is a true AI and on a completely different level from the older chess programs.
Very interesting, thanks. So chess is much more a closed system? - I do know that when Big Blue famously beat Kasparov (I believe), the IBM engineers did not (of course) intervene during the matches but they did tweak and optimize their software after every match - it really was one against Big Blue+4 or 5 humans, i.e. computer-augmented chess. Your point is that procedure is not even remotely possible in the GO case - humans have nothing to add and could not remotely conceive how to even attempt to do so.
OK smarty pants - but we humans are un-matched in merging our vehicles into a stream of fast traveling traffic on highways; the vehicle auto pilots (I have heard; well, 2,3 years back) are still pretty hopeless at that task.
Go to Kaiser, they are already halfway there with their General Practioners. The robot docs will be cheaper, though, and never have lapses in moral judgement.
😂
*Never* tell anyone to "go to Kaiser," not even Fauci or Harari, except perhaps when delivering a curse upon them. And have you forgotten your Kaiserese vocab? Do you mean "their PCPs?"
better to just die "untreated."
Yup
You can't prove the vaccine saved anybody. You would need a time machine for that. The test subject would need to be medically evaluated before the start of the experiment to check for antibodies. Next the subject would be given the vaccine and monitored and evaluated for a given time period. Then Mr. Peabody and Sherman would need to use 'way back machine'. You would need to go back in time to the moment before the subject was given the vaccine. The subject would not receive a vaccine and would be monitored and evaluated for a given time period and the result sets would be compared. A more simple explanation. The 'vaccine' was bull shit and they knew it. It took the CDC 2 weeks to notify other organizations that the 'vaccine' caused blood clots and killed people. I knew right away. My friend Roland is dead and he took the vaccine. It killed him in one week.
Even if you give them the benefit of the doubt, the numbers don't make any sense. We saved 20 million but could have saved 600,000 more? So we saved 97% of the people it was possible to save? How exactly does that work when we're nowhere near 97% vaccination coverage?
Pure garbage.
Well, for starters, let's just assume the vaccines actually work, actually save lives. (Set aside any doubts you may have, just for a moment.)
Now, it should be theoretically possible to save 97% of the people who were going to die from Covid without vaccinating 97% of the population. All we had to do is focus the vaccination campaign on the elderly, the immune compromised and other folks known to be vulnerable.
Further, if it happens to be true that under vaccinated places (like, say, the developing world) have large numbers of young people and relatively few elderly people, only a relatively small number of lives could be saved.
I'm not saying this is what actually happened, just that, theoretically, if the vaccines are highly effective and if we know in advance who's vulnerable to dying from Covid, we wouldn't need to vaccinate all that many people to save almost every vulnerable person.
But, OTOH, I'm not saying this study is great and reliable and true. I'm not saying the vaccines are all that effective. I'm not saying that only 600,000 Covid vulnerable people were to be found in the developing world.
Where do they get any of their numbers? They make them up, pure and simple. Some stupid party moron makes them up.
Jv - I'm sorry for your loss of your friend. You are correct. In order to prove that the vaccine worked, they would have had to have accurate data but we all know (the critical thinkers and one's not blinded by the manipulation) that's not the case. Billy Bob Gates already pointed out that one of his favorite books is "How to Lie Using Statistics". We know what he's about. I haven't trusted much of anything he is behind, especially vaccines.
That's a classic book. I read it as a teen (parent's book from mid-20th century.) As the title might suggest, the book is, in fact, a slightly irreverent yet entirely pragmatic survey of all the mischief that can be wrought with facts and figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics
I was most pleased when the $92/hr bot was decommissioned.
The relief was short lived. The next morning she started talking back AND got a raise to $100/hr!
AI has figured out how to beat inflation.
Eight wonder of the world.
OMG. I wish I wasn't driving
Eleventy billion lives saved!
Gandhi is just your run-of-the-mill 'vaccine' ideologue. They'll link to a study by Mr. Weatherbee if it suits their needs and agenda.
A classic of the genre: “ Artificial Intelligence Has a Problem With Gender and Racial Bias. Here’s How to Solve it”
https://time.com/5520558/artificial-intelligence-racial-gender-bias/
The author is founder of the Algorithmic Justice League, lol.
File under: You Can’t Make This Shit Up
How about that?