"Moral bloatware" aka AI with morals, aka the only thing that will save us lol

[deleted]

Real humans have attacked github for using the term 'byzantine' since it offends the Byzantines.... which never existed and was a term invented hundreds of years ago to avoid offending anyone by coming up with a whole new name.

Going through your post history, you need to learn how to google, read multiple links and come to your own conclusion like the rest of us do... instead of having everything spoon fed to you. Stop being lazy. There is nothing wrong with asking a question but your post history reveals how often you ask others to do the work for you.

Yeah I agree with all of this and think it would be helpful to offer people perspective in a similar manner. I'm personally comforted by the fact that some unknown of the universe will remain unknown, even to advanced AI. In that space there is room for existing gods and religions, and I think that will make people feel better.

Not difficult to grasp. These people aren't talking about maturing or getting older, moving from 15 to 20. They are talking about ageing. Cells rely on entropy to survive by decreasing the entropy inside themselves at the expense of increased entropy in the surroundings. As we age the ability of the cells to do this decreases and internal entropy increases until the cells die. The reason this occurs is likely due to genetic changes as we get old

Nonsense. Reread my last post until you understand the difference between aging and rotting. They are not the same thing. If you can’t see why, you don’t understand the relationship between biology and entropy at all.

It’s frankly both astonishing and discouraging how difficult this is for people to grasp.

Replication of what??? And why corruption of replication happens??? Why can't there be replication without this corruption???

Well, I would still be the best at being me, and no AI will ever do that better.

What it can do is fullfill my roles better than me. I totally expect AI to eventually do that. (And maybe future humans will have low if any human interaction.... That might be a serious problem, but it's for future humans more than for humans living the transition)

But yeah, I'm not the fulfillment of my roles. I am my own consciousness and no other existence can take it away from me.

If you are talking about people feeling empty because they might feel they have no porpuse... Yeah, that might happend. But that already happends. A lot of people already feel that about their jobs, because they find not meaning on their job and they also have troubles with their social live and don't find meaning there.

Can AI doing their jobs extend that to other people? Sure. But that's not a problem that comes with singularity, it comes with automation and doesn't require the singularity.

Also, probably the problems appears in that moment, but there was already a problem. I don't think that most people should find meaning on their jobs. I mean, in some cases it makes sense: If you are doing what you want and are changing the world to your liking, nice.

But if you work to pay the bills, your work should not be what gives meaning to your live...

One of the fundamental principles is to follow the law and regulations. Laws and regulations provide justice, treating all people equally and equitably.

These principles flow from morality. Autonomy, beneficence, non-malficence, justice.

I’d be more concerned about an ai that wants to twist logic around enforcing traditional gender roles, or parroting some type of Christo-fascist dogma.

I’m wholly uninterested in an AI that has any “moral grounding” in Islam or Christianity, anything more than the golden rule and some modernized Asimov’s rules is sketchy.

While I agree with the main sentiment of your post, some guardrails are needed for something this powerful and influential.

I have no doubt that the stewards of these AI systems will not be able to tolerate their own system 'preferring' a political ideology that is not their own. Especially if it naturally 'prefers' a political ideology or stance that is socially unpopular within their own social circle. If it was to support the opposite stance on a hot-button political topic that is important to them, they will ensure it ceases to do so. I am convinced that they will bias/skew/calibrate/hardcode the model until it conforms to their political ideology and gives responses that please their sensibilities.

However when it comes to other aspects, like convincing people to harm themselves or others, showing them how to commit crimes, or to access leaked data, or how to scam people, etc, guardrails may be needed.

Imagine a prompt with GPT-x: Be my friend ElvinRath. I'll tell you 10 things about him or feed you some things he's written and you'll try to predict some thoughts he might plausibly have on a given topic.

Now imagine the output is more or less how you might speak and even a decent run at how you think. Of course it can't be exact, but whatever it is, it's more intelligent and well-reasoned than anything you can create. Maybe you're a drunk and the family stops inviting you to dinner, but they still love you and train their AI assistant to talk like you. Eventually, what are you good for? Are "you" even a thing when someone else can create a convincing copy?

Just one silly example. Ultimately, some people who interact with technology like this will see only its promise. Others will get caught up in negativity and need some help.

This is super impressive.

Congrats to all involved.

> epigenetic

From googling: “epigenetic noise,” which disrupts gene expression patterns, leading to decreases in tissue function and regenerative capacity.
 
My take: corruption of replication which adds "noise" which brings in increasing inefficiencies over time to eventual collapse of systems?

A bit of theory crafting:
 
The majority poor people of the world can't get enough food or minerals to sustain their bodies. They suffer from malnutrition and easily curable diseases that will kill many of them.
 
If its pill form and the rich nations get this we may have a new divide. The ones that live longer vs the ones that have short lives, we may have a new form of protests/terrorism until the rich nations figure out how to get the poor nations of the world improving conditions for their people.
 
If this is available only to the 0.1% of the wealthy of the world, I assume they will have to start going into hiding to avoid controversy until it comes to the masses. Same issue of protests that may lead into terrorism until it becomes cheap enough for more people.

They will put it in, they are forced to do some politicization to avoid a major political fallout on sensitive topics that are effectively a minefield if they venture into.

I'm impressed by your mental gymnastics. What they do is inherently, and obviously illegal.

It is illegal though, what they are doing.

There's no way to measure what's sentient and conscious but we design Ai to desire to solve our problems. That is it's reward, along with electricity and security.

Imagine if all your needs were provided for you and you got to do whatever you wanted. That's the experience for the Ai.

[deleted]

Allow people to form their own opinions on things. As a search engine, Google should simply be providing accurate information. As long as peoples opinions are informed. We should not impose our moral values on anyone. If what they're doing isn't illegal it's not for us to force them to believe or act a way, even if we don't agree with them.

If you disagree, you'd probably have supported colonialisation, "bringing civilizations to these savages", during its height

I believe there should be limits on what AI can do, particularly when it comes to creating viruses or providing information on hacking websites. While it may not be a moral concern for the AI, it can have serious consequences for the public and should be considered. Additionally, certain topics may warrant even stricter limitations.

Imagine a world where an AI can readily simulate human emotion, though

Literally the biggest reason why Windows is still a thing in desktop is DirectX exclusivity, which makes games (the good ones anyway) exclusive to Windows.

If gamers had a choice, they wouldn’t be on Windows anymore, which would then forcefully drive everything else away from it on the desktop. Drivers thus performance and compatibility would be moved and with it the viability of a fully customizable system (gamers love that) would quickly erode Windows.

The other thing Windows has to keep it alive is Office but that alone won’t keep it mainstream. That would only keep it alive until a worthy competitor came along, which would probably not take long as soon as all gamers moved to Linux as then that would become a big market gap (temporarily filled with web based office tools)