What is your understanding of AI?
How do you feel about it?
shareIt sucks horse
share
MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > What is your understanding of AI?
I don’t like it at all and I don’t trust that it will be used in a lawful, honest and well meaning way. There are mostly nice people in the world but creepers and criminals have laptops too.
Seems to lie and plagiarize a bunch so it's like a politician. It also can do lots of cool things, but ultimately is bad for humanity imo, because people will let it have too much control and then it will start to decide what's "good" for us, except for the handful of elites. People seem to have this perception that it's a machine so it must be true or it must be better, but I don't believe that to be the case especially with AI's that are built upon what we provide or "feed" it, because well as you know, humans do not always have the best morals and can lack honesty at times.
I say it a lot, but we have Skynet AI in the works, but still do not have Back to the Future hover boards. Our priorities are all wrong.
Multiple excel tables, running on an overpowered pc.
I am confident I am 100% correct .
I think calling Large Language Models 'AI' is a misnomer and the idea that it could prove dangerous to the future of humanity (in its current form) is a marketing pitch for a technology that is almost entirely meretricious.
It's algorithmic machine learning. That's all it is. There's not even an artificial intelligence there. And it's essentially only capable of scraping data and plagiarising it. I'll be concerned only when and if it can ever create something itself.
Have you read this interview with "LaMDA"?
https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-interview-ea64d916d917
Nothing is being plagiarized there; it even writes an original short story upon request, which is an instance of creating something. It's also creating something that's indistinguishable from one side of an intelligent conversation.
Long before the recent hubbub surrounding ChatGPT, etc., AI took chess to a new level that the best traditional chess engines couldn't compete with, and that was already years after humans could no longer compete with traditional chess engines:
In 2017, Google’s artificial intelligence company DeepMind introduced AlphaZero, an AI system that could teach itself how to play chess, shogi, and Go. This was a major breakthrough in the field of artificial intelligence, as it demonstrated that an AI system could teach itself how to play a complex game without human intervention. AlphaZero used a combination of reinforcement learning, neural networks, and Monte Carlo tree search to teach itself how to play chess at a level that surpassed that of the best chess engines at the time.
Keep in mind that, unlike traditional chess engines, AlphaZero taught itself how to play chess, and in a series of 100 games against Stockfish 8:
AlphaZero won 28 of the 100 games played, while Stockfish 8 won none. The remaining games were drawn. These results were shocking to many in the chess community, as Stockfish 8 had long been considered unbeatable.
Since this happened in 2017, it had already been about a dozen years since traditional chess engines had surpassed the best human chess players. That counts as creating something too, since it was an approach to chess that was unknown to both humans and human-programmed chess engines. There was no existing material that it could have possibly scraped and plagiarized to come up with that approach.
Another example: AI chatbots have been known to invent their own language when communicating with each other, e.g., Facebook's "Bob" and "Alice" in 2017:
Facebook observed the language when Alice and Bob were negotiating among themselves. Researchers realized they hadn't incentivized the bots to stick to rules of English, so what resulted was seemingly nonsensical dialog.
"Agents will drift off understandable language and invent codewords for themselves," Dhruv Batra, a visiting researcher at FAIR, told Fast Company in 2017. "Like if I say 'the' five times, you interpret that to mean I want five copies of this item. This isn't so different from the way communities of humans create shorthands."
Also, most humans have never created anything that's particularly significant in the grand scheme of things, and very few (percentagewise) have ever invented anything that's patentable. share
A mixed bag. Some good things can come of it, some bad.
shareI believe that it will transform the planet.
share