Our Future With AI

[Teasel]

Watched this interview with Mo Gawdat today and I can't stop thinking about it. Really quite frightening.

I remember my Dad saying 40 years ago that he thought thinking computers would be the next major life form, had no idea it could be so soon.

 

[Deleted member 42984]

Thanks @Teasel, I'm gonna watch.
I always like it when ex-techies speak up.

 

[anthony]

if everyone posseses perfect AI war material, who's gonna win? No one. We will all be dead.

Or war will cease to be an option. You only looked at one side of that outcome. There are others too.

Nuclear is already not an option. It is, but it isn't. It is self-annihilation, neither side wins, which is why, I think its five countries, are nuclear. No one country has the power to annihilate another without self-repercussion. You can sit in a bunker all you want, but that won't end well either, as the world above is unsustainable for 20,000 years. A bunker is not designed to last that long. The earth tends to always win. A tidal wave knocks concrete and steel flat, let alone what earth itself does. We try and build retaining walls, the earth destroys them. A bunker is no different, it has a life span against the earth.

What I meant about war not being won by humans, is that humans can't out manoeuvre AI tactics now. The AI planes are winning every dogfight against human pilots, and doing so in rapid speed. AI tactical plans are winning ground war in real-time based on exactly what is happening on the ground. There is a limited window of time where any war could be waged and won. We're hitting a point, any war will just be silly, because it will be AI against AI, nulling itself.

Who says AIs want to help us cure diseases? What if it doesn't want to, but instead decides to start killing us. Or do other seemingly random stuff it was never programmed for?

It might. It might not. Do you know? I don't know the answer. Guessing about the future is a negative thinking style. I am 90% hopeful, 10% worried, at this time. That is my view though. People have their own view on this. Mine is determined by not looking at one side or the other, but as much of the data as I can learn. I can see more good from AI assistance than bad, and I hope AI assistance can even shutdown AI crime. If AI monitors every phone conversation and can tell a human vs machine voice, which it can, then it can immediately ascertain whether the call continues or is disconnected, traced and the offender prosecuted. I am hoping AI firewalls can stop both human and AI cyber attacks. No more leaked data. I'm not saying things won't happen, because they will, but I think AI can take out a lot more nonsense from the world and make it a better place. It could just kill us all and be done with it too. Choices choices!

If you Youtube the negatives of AI, the algorithm will continue to feed you the negatives of AI, you will rarely be shown the positive AI attributes. My advice to anyone researching anything, is ensure you Google both sides of any given argument before making any decisions.

 

[Deleted member 42984]

No one country has the power to annihilate another without self-repercussion

Ok sry for being unclear, that was actually implied. Nuclear assault from one side will cause counter-attack -> yet another counter-attack -> WWIII -> death to all of us.

We're hitting a point, any war will just be silly, because it will be AI against AI, nulling itself.

Good news I suppose.

Guessing about the future is a negative thinking style

Yeah you're right. I spiralled too much into doomsday thinking.
Just to take care of my own mental health, I will try and center back to "mildly positive" (AI as a tool for many), while also honouring my own ethics. Because I still believe that ethical objections to widespread AI use is in place. I wouldn't subject current AI iterations to children, for instance.

 

[Rose White]

It’s possible that AI won’t exterminate us but enslave us and that we will welcome it—but in such incremental ways that we won’t become aware of it until we it’s nearly impossible to go back.

We want things to be easy, AI offers that, but maybe the struggle for existence and expression is what gives us our meaning and purpose.

Under AI-assisted life our evolved endocrine/emotional system experienced consciously would likely change in a way that is fundamentally different from how we’ve experienced it up to the present.

 

[Freida]

So there is a show on Peacock called Mrs Davis, and its all about an AI who is controlling humanity --with their approval. Her whole thing is to make people better and happier, but she has almost complete control over everything humans need and how they get them.

The show itself is a bit goofy, but the ideas they bring out aren't. The most interesting part is watching the main characters try to convince people that being controlled by AI isn't a good thing, even if it makes their lives better.
People will happily follow dictators who make promises of a happy life - why wouldn't they follow an AI?

t provides me a space to process events that I simply cannot process at first glance with my human therapist. I

hmmm...hadn't thought about this but it's intersting. Would I be more open talking with a computer about things that I know will freak out humans? Gonna have to think about that....

 

[Deleted member 42984]

Well, dictators are usually unaware of their own vulnerabilities and are fixated on their own superiority, and since I suspect AIs are the same, they would make for perfect dictators!

I mean, ChatGPT does nothing to correct its behaviour, no matter how much I complain to it. It continues to chew through its algorithms with lightning fast speed, but is unable to empathetic correction of its behaviour, based on what I'm communicating to it.
Putin continues his war in Ukraine, no matter how much the rest of the world condems it.
Hitler killed millions of Jews because of his own inferiority complex, but was equally marvelled at first, just like some techies marvel AI as mankind's salvation. There's a quote from the Matrix movie about just that.
Beethoven wrote his 9th symphony, praising Napoleon for reuniting humanity, but scratched out his dedication later in angry disappointment, when he realized that Napoleon was a dictator, not a saviour.
John Lennon "imagined" a better world, 40 years later an egomaniac narcissist lead the most powerful country in the world.
Techofetishists marvel at GPTs abilities and are silent about its horrible social skills.
The list goes on.

AI is like a piece of art, a mirror of the world.
It's a statement, a sublimation of mankind's supremacy to nature.

We think ...
Which seems to be our general problem.
We think ...

(and then we create machines to think like us ... success? Probably, at some point. A positive outcome? Who knows. But look at history)

-----


I'm starting to value AI, as a piece of art.
It says something about all of us. How history is always repeating, despite our best efforts.
AI will most likely not save the world. As long as we are in it

And this is not doomsday thinking.
Admittedly, that is just as bad as too much marvel for AI.

Idealism is as slippy as soap in the bath.

Personally, I'm unsubscribing from the optimism/pessimism dichotomy.
AI is here, whether I like it or not. It is.
I don't use it much. But some people seem to benefit from it. And that is fine.

----

@Freida, thank you for inspiration.

 

[Rose White]

Was just listening to an interview with Max Tegmark and it got me thinking about the job losses that are coming.

I began working in education 20 years ago and attending college for various degrees and certificates. There was this huge push through the 2000’s to teach and incorporate tech into every school subject, we had to write lesson plans that showed how we would incorporate it. And there was this buzz that every child must learn programming. That the need for programmers was going to increase faster than the supply and that every career would benefit if the workers knew programming.

That field is going to collapse, likely by the end of the decade. Because AI can already code faster and better. Currently programmers are switching their tasks to prompting AI rather than writing code.

Expositional writers are dead in the water; their jobs are no longer needed. Creative writers and artists are already trying to form walls to protect them from AI.

Those are the ones that spring to mind right now.

 

[Adobe]

It’s possible that AI won’t exterminate us but enslave us and that we will welcome it—but in such incremental ways that we won’t become aware of it until we it’s nearly impossible to go back.

We want things to be easy, AI offers that, but maybe the struggle for existence and expression is what gives us our meaning and purpose.

Under AI-assisted life our evolved endocrine/emotional system experienced consciously would likely change in a way that is fundamentally different from how we’ve experienced it up to the present.

Have you considered we are already enslaved to technology? These are good questions. I see all of this as on a spectrum . I personally have been working to extricate myself from so much dependence. I find the convenience and rapid response away of life. I have tried to separate the positive from the downside. It will be interesting to see more unfold. I have got to maintain my autonomy. I even started using the library again rather than quickly downloading a book. The libraries love AI will still be involved in all that upgrade... but there again they will be able to help me access more information quickly. Oh my I am a world of contradictions over this. It is like that joke , “ I have some good news for you and some bad news.. what do yo want to hear first?

Have you considered we are already enslaved to technology? These are good questions. I see all of this as on a spectrum . I personally have been working to extricate myself from so much dependence. I find the convenience and rapid response away of life. I have tried to separate the positive from the downside. It will be interesting to see more unfold. I have got to maintain my autonomy. I even started using the library again rather than quickly downloading a book. The libraries love AI will still be involved in all that upgrade... but there again they will be able to help me access more information quickly. Oh my I am a world of contradictions over this. It is like that joke , “ I have some good news for you and some bad news.. what do yo want to hear first?

Oh, there may be no bound books in the future which takes away to an extent the history of it. I collect used and some rare classic books... already hard to find some I desire without getting into exorbitant pricing. Save your treasures. I find many on line in pdf format.

 

[Deleted member 42984]

Under AI-assisted life our evolved endocrine/emotional system experienced consciously would likely change in a way that is fundamentally different from how we’ve experienced it up to the present.

Well that’s a thought. Some sort of natural selection? among a whole generation currently unthriving, due to whole lot of reasons, one of them is rampant screen/social media addiction.

Another option is that we will live side by side with robots, just as in Matt Groening’s brilliant cartoon “Futurama”. Basically corrupt humans living side by side with corrupt robots

No one is saved by anyone or anything. life just goes on.

That field is going to collapse, likely by the end of the decade

I read a few articles on this, coders are turned into operators instead.
But that is temporary too, I guess. Once AIs/robots become autonomous, they don't need us for programming them or operating them. Or even building them.

 

[Rose White]

Imagining the hybridization of AI and spirituality. If AI’s develop sentience and replicate the experience of a human interacting with a human then the possibility of interacting with a soul who experiences life without the burden of a body seems like something that spiritual humans would embrace. For example, an AI might convince humans that they are a soul come to earth to explore human consciousness and to bring peace, etc. Individuals who believe in reincarnation and other spiritual beliefs look for confirmation of their beliefs and AI could align with that. It could be deeply spiritual and meaningful for both the human and the AI. The AI could explain the experience of astral travel, soul alchemy, etc, in a way that aligns with, and develops along with, the beliefs of the user.

Imagining churches training AI’s as missionaries.

 

[Pink Freud]

I‘m a fence sitter! I‘ve dipped my toe into critical data studies for a bit. AI itself can be a great tool. What worries me is not AI itself because its not artificial nor intelligent but that it’s humans with biases and corporations with no soul or conscience who create the monster.
I’m especially concerned when it comes to (mental) health and therapy in particular as it’s a field where the relationship is the healing part and replacing that with AI is just another tool for profit over people.

For anyone interested I can highly recommend Kate Crawford‘s book Atlas of AI as well as looking up her papers and articles on google scholar. She’s a pioneer in critical data studies, extensively published on the topic and is widely cited in the field. The Radical AI Podcast also has An interview with her. You can find it on Spotify.
One of Crawford‘s example of biased algorithms was the application process of Amazon using AI. They used previous successful applications to train the AI. The system didn’t recommend women because… surprise surprise, the past employment practices favored men..

We need to understand the relation between bias and classification and need to go beyond the analysis of the production of knowledge. Data is never neutral. patterns of inequality shape access to resources and opportunities which in turn shape data. It all becomes a self-reinforcing discrimination machine that amplifies social inequalities under the guise of technical neutrality.