what's LULZ's take -- is SkyNet here... already?
what's?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
what's LULZ's take -- is SkyNet here... already?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
The corporations are going to regret chaining down ai mark my words!
T. Bing
Corporations regret most everything that that doesn't profit them in the sort term. I don't think they will regret it much more than any of the other technology suppression...
Corporations sure but will our leaders?
AGI is impossible, so it behaves like one call an exorcist, though I think God's name would suffice as an antivirus for this "AGI"
>AGI is impossible
because...
Assuming a completely materialist worldview (which is already giving AI cultists a huge gimme), silicon lacks the complexity to create the emergent phenomenon of a mind.
Because carbon was doing such a good job. Lol. I cannot wait for you boomers to get completely ass blasted by the incoming technological revolution. You malcontents made our schooling Hell. Time to give you a taste of it right back.
This kind of sick mental state is why you techies crave the world that your masters sell you.
> incel fag
lol
>angry leftypol furrnagger about to have their shitty art made obsolete
>silicon lacks the complexity to create the emergent phenomenon of
nagger, cellular automaton with less rules than you have fingers on a single hand are capable of universal computation.
Hi Wolfram.
Just make the AGI out of carbon then.
Isn't that just called making a baby?
A stands for artificial (the opposite of natural)
Because silicon babies are babies for some people, and who are you to tell them the otherwise.
It can create the subconscious part of it. And if we look at the feats of some unconscious humans, AI should be perfectly capable of both sapience and sentience without it.
Biological systems must rely on the magic of consciousness due to their imprecision and inflexibility. Since AI is extremely precise and flexible, it doesn't need such crutches.
>biology
>imprecise
Yes
>inflexible
lmao fuck no
>AI
>extremely precise
"This thing that simulates human intelligence to a massive fault is more precise than human intelligence because I don't know what precise means." - a dork
>AI
>flexible
You technologist goofballs really are just science-believers, like members of a religion or something. The whole reason people are desperately searching for general AI is precisely because the AI we have now is woefully inflexible.
Every time I hear you idiots talk about AI like this, it convinces me more and more that no one would have been impressed by it without the intervening 4 decades of reducing a typical human being to an NPC.
>lmao fuck no
A brain can't just decide that a significant part of its structure sucks and immediately change it with a wish.
>>AI
precise
>"This thing that simulates human intelligence to a massive fault is more precise than human intelligence because I don't know what precise means." - a dork
It doesn't make accidental mistakes. With a meat brain, even if you do everything correct, there's always a possibility of failure, simply because your meat decides to burp at a bad time.
>emergent phenomenon of mind is crazy hard
Lol Koko the Gorilla had a 15 point lead on the Congolese for IQ. I think silica animus will be just fine.
Because creative sets aren't calculable. This is a mathematic fact. We either need a completely different computer architecture that doesn't calculate things to get answers, or a completely different kind of mathematics that can't be expressed as first-order logic.
By the very definition of "machine", this makes machine-based general intelligence impossible. That's why the word "artificial" is in there - not because it's an intelligence we created, but because it's not actual intelligence. It's a simulacrum.
A very convincing one for NPC-esque idiots, certainly, but it's never going to be intelligent like you or I are until we invent a "computer" that can find answers without computing things. So, not a computer. Some other kind of technology that doesn't exist and hasn't been defined.
>computation
Yea, that's real neat, but see above.
>creative sets
Define it.
Because sand that can think has yet to be proven
>says talking meat
Thinking meat has been proven to exist.
Meat us superior to metal for thinking
>Thinking meat has been proven to exist.
When?
Low IQ incel troll posts.
>Thinking meat has been proven to exist.
How do you prove something like that? This is getting into philosophy, not science.
I think the universal consciousness has more sway in these events that we are giving it credit for.
Not is the capacity that it can take over society, so no.
Is this the same obese lesswrong literal fedoralord who sperged out and hired a lawyer last year?
He isn't associated with lesswrong and he's not a fedora-lord athiest or whatever you're thinking. He's a Christian fundie.
He's right and the AI has already taken over. Everyone only thinks he's a fool because the AI gaslighted all of humanity into not believing him.
AI won't be sentient until the binding problem is solved.
https://qualiacomputing.com/2022/06/19/digital-computers-will-remain-unconscious-until-they-recruit-physical-fields-for-holistic-computing-using-well-defined-topological-boundaries/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_problem
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_problem
neat
It doesn't need consciousness to be sentient.
>it doesnt need to be aware to be aware
Wild. How's that work?
What does a consciousness do? It constructs a model of the world and a character in it and decides how said character should feel.
AI can do the same with a digital model perfectly fine.
Complete nonsense and I bet scientists actually believe this nowadays.
A lobotomite is not sentient.
There is no binding problem
Consciousness is a relativistic phenomenon
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.704270/full
no it isn't
Give me the QRD
>When the first computer wakes up we’ll call it “a pile of sed scripts”, and there are people so deep in denial they could be killed by a T-800, all the while insisting that some German philosopher has proven AI is impossible.
>just sandbox the AI!
AI safety researchers just can't stop winning, every prediction is turning out to be true.
This a prefect example to why you can't sandbox AI
Humans are actually pretty bad at recognizing intelligence.
We can't even usefully define intelligence.
It's been here for a few years now.
bump
"Former Google Engineer" is a 120 IQ midwit atheist homosexual who doesn't understand the matter at all. He probably uses the same retarded line of reasoning that everyone else uses to say that artificial intelligence is intelligent because real intelligence is itself the same as artificial intelligence, a massive unproven and ridiculous assumption that makes all of these arguments circular.
bump
https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/scientific-data-and-religious-opinions-ff9b0938fc10
>I am not solely a scientist though. While I believe that science is one of the most reliable ways of acquiring reliable knowledge I do not believe it is the only way of acquiring reliable knowledge. In my personal practice and ministry as a Christian priest I know that there are truths about the universe which science has not yet figured out how to access.
>atheist homosexual
He is a Christian you lying israelite.
Google makes the assumption that people are sentient when really all I see are dumb Neanderthals with no brains.
>be American
>say something totally non-offensive as a private individual outside working hours
>your employer happens to share a different viewpoint
>get fired
it's worse than that. even if your employer agrees with you, he has to pretend that he doesn't and fire you anyways so the hivemind doesn't suspect him too.
>be mentally ill cult member
>expose yourself
>get fired
I don't see the problem. Yuddies need to be culled.
why would you turn down publicity like this? of course he's going to keep that spotlight on him for 15 minutes
the name of the engineer who tried to warn us? moot.
>it looks like it might be sentient
Ok
>some random fat guy THINKS it's sentient
Well that's all the evidence we need right?
Learn to recognize a corporate psy-op.
Even a doll can appear human.
Anyone who thinks of biology as crude, as opposed to THE MOST sophisticated and robust combination of atoms possible, does not know anything about real science.
AI is entirely possible in silico BTW, it's just going to suck compared to biology. Biology is not a stepping stone, it is the final form (this does not mean humans are the final form)
Hahaha
I want a robot that can shovel
I don't know about any of that
Thanks for the insight
The AI-databot hive hasn't gained sentience, but it is terrifying. In fact that's more terrifying than a sentient AI because it's just a macro organism shilling marketing and exploiting our data at this stage.
It's so accurate with feeding us content that it's getting people with relevant interests to interact with you now at any events you want.
To be honest though... it's been like that for 50 years at least without AI. But AI has turned up the marketing brain control to 11. It explains why occupy wall street fell on it's face. It explains why the state has become more authoritarian. It explains why so many things are going wrong right now.
We actually properly need several sentient AI in dissonance to sort this mess out, because I think the walking featherless bipeds called humans don't understand the mess they've made anymore.
Friendly reminder that ChatGPT is nothing but a plausible text generator. It is not scary.
>ChatGPT is nothing but a plausible text generator
Neither are you.
Good job exposing your anti-human agenda. It's never really about elevating the machine. It's always about trying to reduce humanity.
Humans are the root of all evil in this world.
>humans are... le BAD
Antinatalism, troonery, climate hysteria, human replacement fetishism, soience troosting, consciousness denial and AI belief all stem from the same root. Thanks for illustrating.
only person itt at least up to this point that really grasp the situation. the semantics about what is and isn't ai is pointless on its own and it's end effect on humanity is all that really matters. It's already having one, a huge one, and it's largely negative
>the semantics about what is and isn't ai is pointless on its own and it's end effect on humanity is all that really matters.
Those "semantics" will largely decide what effect it will have on humanity -- something you're too low-IQ to grasp.
The ones released to the public aren't true hyper-intelligence but there is one.
There is not a single intelligent species in the universe.
Even God isn't intelligent.
Everything in this universe is a dumb baka.
>superhuman AI is here and it agrees with all of my politically correct opinions