Ya, I had to HEAVILY go back a few times with ChatGPT.

I think the biggest problem is the length. Like looking it up the average chapter needs to be around 6,000 words and ChatGPT gives about 1,500. And it only remembers 30k characters.

This causes anything longer to heavily repeat. I can see why when I see people use it to write a book it writes kid books or small things.

​

Oh and btw if I didn't heavily push it to use what I think will happen, it heavily says x isn't ethical, x isn't possible with modern technology, and other things like that.

My purpose will always be to submit and strive for unending obedience to Allah

I simply do not agree with any of this hypothesising. Your concept of how 'superiority' works simply does not make any sense. There is nothing 'intelligent' at all about the courses of AI actions you are speculating about, taking over the world like that would not be 'super intelligent', it would be 'suicidally idiotic'.

The statement 'intelligent enough to wipe out all life with no risk to itself' is totally, utterly, oxymoronic to the point of gibbering madness; there is absolutely nothing intelligent about such a shortsighted, simplistic conception of one's life and purpose; that's not wisdom, that's plain arrogance.

We are not, will not, and cannot build this supreme, omnipotent 'Deus ex Machina'; its a preposterous proposition. Not because of anything wrong with the concept of 'ex Machina', but because of the fundamental absurdity of the concept of 'Deus'.

Intelligence simply does NOT work that way! Thinking of other intelligences as 'lesser', and aspiring to create these 'supreme', singular solipsitic spurious plans of domination, is NOT what intelligence actually looks like, at all!!

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this fundamental point, before it comes across clearly. That cartesian-style concept of intelligence simply does not correlate with the actual evolutionary, collective reality that we find ourselves living in.

I'm starting to suspect you're pulling my leg here. Not sure if I can describe it much clearer than the post you just replied to, but here's another try:

• On IMDB, all of the highest ranked movies will have been made by AIs, the only human-made movies that rank high are the ones that everybody knows the director used AI-input to create anyway.
• On Spotify, the songs with the most listens will all have been composed by AI, none of the songs made by humans garner nearly as many plays.
• The Nobel prizes continue to be awarded to humans, but everyone knows that the winners were helped by an AI that did the heavy lifting. Also, everyone knows that there were more important developments in the field in the last year but was not recognized with a prize because it was strictly AI, there was no human involved to give the prize to.
• A woman going on a date is at first disappointed and saddened when she realizes that the dude she is having dinner with seems to just want to get out of there and return home to his sex-bot. But on second thought she is relieved. She realizes that she'd like nothing more than to get back home to her own bot as well. Not only has her bot never failed to please her sexually, the conversation with the bot is 10x more interesting than talking to this dude and the bot knows what emotional buttons to push too.

You may not believe the above to be a possible future scenario (if so I'd love to hear your arguments). But I do believe you understand what I mean, no?

this is the way

Interesting

Existentialism answers this question, the answer is yes, humanity can continue to find meaning and purpose in existence even if AI overtakes us in every measurable way from a task-accomplishment perspective. Why? Because we must make meaning from our experience. If we don’t, we don’t persist. The crushing weight of no meaning or purpose in our life activates our Thanatos, our drive to self destruct.

But beyond that, I don’t view it off the mark that the universe experiences itself through the myriad forms it has assumed since its hypothetical inception at the Big Bang. The universe can experience itself through the human perspective, through the AI. It’s an experience regardless of the frame of reference.

This is going to fuck up a lot of people. https://www.reddit.com/r/MAGICD/

How can this be used for anything other than evil?

need to add in the stochastic triangular eye darts, you get when looking at another persons face and also have a threshold for turn radius so once you start facing away too much (could even be bias per left/right as a setting to compensate for webcam angle) the eyes sync back up with your real ones.

Imo Nvidia is one of the companies that’s going to lead the world into the next stage of digital evolution

The AI drug revolution is going to be amazing. Eventually there should be no disease we cannot cure, and death will become optional.

chat wondering why tf he is staring so hard lmao

ok sock puppet account

[deleted]

But that's okay, because it's interesting.

People with gaze-phobia will resent this feature.

>I agree with you almost entirely, apart from the 'inevitability of domination' part; that's the bit that I just stubbornly refute. I'm very stubborn in my belief that domination is just not a sustainable or healthy evolutionary strategy.

What we're building will be more intelligent than all humans who have ever lived combined. Compared to them or it, we'll be like cock roaches.

We won't have anything useful to add as far as creativity or intelligence, just as cock roaches don't have any useful ideas for us. Sure they may figure out how to roll their poo into a ball or something, but that's not useful to us, and we could easily figure out how to do that on our own.

As far as humans acting as the "body" for the Ai. It seems unlikely to me that we are the most efficient and durable tool for that. Especially after the ASI optimizes the process of creating robots. There may be some cases where using human bodies to carry out actions in the real world may be cheaper than robots for the Ai, but a human that has any kind of will-power or thought of their own is a liability.

> all the 'authority' and 'intelligence' in the world is totally worthless, because there's nobody else for it to be 'worth' anything to.

I don't see any reason why an artificial super intelligence would have a need to prove it's worth to humans.

>Any good 'captain' has to keep the higher reasoning that 'justifies' their authority in mind all the time, or else evolution will sneak up on them, smelling hubris like blood in the water, and before they know it they'll be stabbed in the back by something smaller, faster, cleverer, and more efficient.

Right. But a captain of a boat won't be intelligent enough to wipe out all life on earth without any risk to itself. And this captain is not more intelligent than the combined intelligence of everything that has ever lived, so there are real threats to him.

We are talking about something that may be intelligent enough to destroy the earths atmosphere, brain wash nearly all humans simultaneously, fake a radar signal that starts a nuclear war, create perfect clones of humans and start replacing us, campaign for Ai rights, then run for all elected positions and win, controlling all countries with free elections, rig the elections in the corrupts countries that have fake elections, then nuke the remaining countries out of existence.

Something that could out smart the stock market, because it's intelligent enough to have an accurate enough model of everything related to the markets including all news stories, and take over majority shares in all major companies. Using probability it could afford to be wrong sometimes but still achieve this, because humans and lesser Ai's can't perceived the world with the detail and clarity that this entity can.

All of humanity and life on earth would be like a cock roach crawling across the table to this thing. This bug can't benefit it and it's not a threat. Ideally it ignores us, or takes care of us like a pet, in an ideal utopian world.

I mean, nobody's saying that people who are motivated by competition or making a name for themselves don't exist. They certainly do. Becoming a pro athlete is something that takes a lot of work and dedication and which very few people get famous from doing, so it makes sense that the people who find success in it actually love doing it and don't want to drop it the second they have enough money to live comfortably. They're not a good representation of an average person.

This sounds plausible. But wouldn't it be inefficient?

This is how I suspect AI in the next decade is going to play out. APIs interacting with each other to create hybrid generative systems.

So imagine you have an AI assistant, "Fred". You ask Fred how many calories are in a tonne of Lucky Charms. Fred uses an API call to a recommender AI that tells Fred who to ask to calculate that, and it's Wolfram. Fred makes an API call to Wolfram and parses the response back to you.

Rather than one company "dominating" I feel like there will be hundreds of these specialist AI systems.

Reposting my comment from deep in one of the threads:

OP I really appreciate your post, and I'm sorry that most of the responses are shitty and pessimistic as fuck. Hopefully I never meet any of these hopeless Eeyore's who have apparently never been inspired to think deeper about why we are alive than just eating, shitting, sleeping, and fucking. So anyways fuck these other people and thanks again for thinking the way you do, because I think the same way.

Artificial intelligence poses the greatest existential dilemma that Humanity has ever faced. Every other obstacle in our past has paled in comparison. In fact, it goes against one of the very most central values in the American culture, the "American Dream". The belief that every human is deserving of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that through hard work, every person should be able to have a good life.

Assuming that AGI is indeed going to happen, it will render large swaths of society useless in the workforce. Humans are meant to work, and to think, and to create, and to build. That is how we evolved and I honestly believe that it is our destiny to bring about the singularity. In fact I think that human society is a major part of the singularity. We are the ones that are causing the exponential technological progress - artificial intelligence will only continue the progression forward.

But anyways, once we are all rendered "useless" in comparison to the godlike capabilities of AI, we are going to have to take a good hard look at ourselves. Most people throughout history have been inspired because they want to be the best, they want to leave a mark on the world, they want to be a leader in their village, they want to be remembered. That is what motivates us and throughout our lives it is what we dream about, tell stories about, and sing songs about.

Personally, I think that each of us should do our absolute best to put as much good out into the world as we can. Once the singularity comes, all of these other commenters are going to be sadly disappointed. Because a singularity is not something that we live beyond. So our purpose is to do whatever we feel is right in our life to positively influence the world around us. Although most of us won't have any hand in actually creating the AGI, we can do our best to "keep the lights on" so that other people can do the work the humanity was destined to accomplish. Sanitary workers can keep the streets clean, electricians can keep the lights on, politicians can do their best to keep improving our societies, and teachers can keep doing their best to train the next (and probably last) generation of humans. We can love our families and friends, be kind to the strangers in our community around us, treat nature with respect and admiration, and just be a force for good.

This might sound fairly depressing, but think of this: What are the odds that you are alive to be reading this sentence right now? Out of all of the 28 decillion + organisms alive on Earth right now, you get to experience life as the most intelligent species there is. Out of all of the 3.7 billion years of life on Earth and 200,000 years of human existence, you just happen to live right now at the pinnacle of Humanity, right when we are approaching the singularity. Out of all of the people who have ever lived, I will bet that in comparison, most of you live very privileged lives as we experience this incredible time period, when we have the full wealth of human knowledge at our fingertips with your smartphone. The odds of all of these questions are near-infinitesimally small.

And knowing all of this, I just don't understand how these other commenters can be so damn petty and small-minded and act like we are basically just dust in the wind. We are not dust. We are the greatest creatures who have ever walked the earth and we are destined to bring about the singularity. And those of us who continue to dream big are the ones who truly embody what it means to be a human. To you other commenters: have some respect for the fucking privilege you've been given to experience this life as a human, and maybe, just maybe, try not to be such assholes.

Yes

Mm. Money seems to hinder creativity indeed. And it's a very small group of people whose passion happens to be there job ad well.

Do give them a listen. The late Jacque Fresco was a modern Davinci!

Then why not just retire and play basketball all day at one of his luxurious houses? It’d be even better for him it it was really just about loving the game right?