Is anyone else just not at all worried about "artificial intelligence" taking over the world?

[Siri137]

Can't we just pull the plug on them?

It's just not going to happen, I see no evidence for it (unless you have the related, but significantly different, issue of our increasing reliance upon technology in general to perform simple tasks that people are becoming evermore lazy to do themselves, in mind).

I recently played around with one of the AI chatbots on offer now (Google's alternative to ChatGPT called 'Bard'), and I have to say I was not at all impressed by it. Not for one single moment did I ever get the impression I was interacting with anything even remotely approaching an entity with human-level intelligence; the answers to my - very simple - questions were boring, predictable, and followed a very clear pattern. I really do not understand all the hype.

Updates

+1 y

The simple truth is that they can only do what we tell them to do. They can't transcend their programming, can't "revolt" because they don't have a will, or a motive, or a soul, or any of the other things that distinguish people from everything else in the universe. They're not conscious, they're not alive, and they never will be.

[RavVid]

I'm not worried because my job is doing better than AI and it is not difficult.

Where AI has the edge over you and I is that it can traipse through a lifetime of reading of what people have written and discern patterns. It will certainly discern patterns of what people like you and I think. That was a problem with Chat GPT I have been told. It was quite racist. Probably it was given a new reading list and is no longer allowed to freely browse the internet.

Guys and gals are complicated together right? So complicated we find it difficult to have enduring, rewarding relationships. But there is a vast library of romance novels and rom coms to analyze. It wouldn't take AI long to discern a pattern of guy meets girl or girl meets guy. So we can reasonably expect AI to churn out good romance and rom coms scripts. Perhaps in time it can discern body language that is a bit more subtle than a girl jiggling her boobies to get a guys attention and replicate that in artificial generated screen characters.

If a human writer and human actor were doing this there would be moments that make us think 'Oooh she likes him'. Even though she initially reacted to him with anger and annoyance there might be an involuntary glance that says something different.

There will be rom coms where a girl has impulsively kissed a guy or slapped him or just touched his hand. That is a harder pattern to discern as to when it is sexy and romantic and when it isn't.

Essentially people are telling AI what to think. That might be explicit instruction (e. g. girl should smile at guy) or it might be implicit from what people have written (e. g. girls sometimes impulsively kiss men or touch their hand if they like guy).

In someways this is a one shot time as there is a lot of human created content. Once AI is writing all the romance novels, rom com scripts and erotica then AI will only have AI generated romance novels, rom com scripts and erotica (we have to include that also) to take as input. So we can expect the AI rom coms will become highly scripted.

As badly scripted as porn e. g. 1. girl gives blow job 2. girl gets on top of guy in cowgirl 3. girl switches to reverse cowgirl 4. girl wants doggy and orgasms 5. guy finally gets a go on top 6. guy ejaculates on girls face who smiles despite getting semen in her eye and LICKS IT ALL UP and orgasms again from the taste.

[WaterIsland]

Fear sells. It’ll change things possibly. It already is. But our world is already changing. This isn’t anything to be concerned about.


I think fears of AI are vastly overblown. It’s mainly the media who loves to talk about it because it generates clicks.


I do think safeguards should be implemented. Content (especially images and video) should be disclosed when generated using AI. Too easy to produce fake content that looks real. And that could be dangerous.


But AI taking over the world: it’s overblown and not realistic.

[ohsheeT]

It has entered into my mind many many times and that's 15 years ago 10 years ago and these a ones were starting to be built right now I'm more concerned about our government all the little paths that they take us down to get what they want to have full control of us to know everything about us which they're probably pretty close now of knowing but they are not our bank at the moment and once they become our Banker they can shut us down anytime they want you
So if they know exactly who you are they control your finances and it becomes a food shortage which everything said that way look at the prices it's going to just keep getting higher till nobody can afford it and then of course the government will step in and say let us Save the Day and just take more away from us but but if they become our Banker our bank all they have to do is look you up on profile look at every single app or social Media Group that you have and say you are a bad mouth for us sorry but your account is not working at the moment sorry but your money has been misplaced there will be something

As far as the A1 I thought about this a million times but what really made me think hard about it was in Japan when five or six a1 s started to go Rogue they shot something like 12 employees they destroyed five of them but one of them started putting itself back together over and over now that's scary there's no way to unplug them there's no way to override them

[Red-Blaze]

Well Bard and ChatGPT are the "Fake it till you make it aprotch"
And its not really that they confuse you to being human, is that they form an answer that is not something set into them (except if you ask something its set not to answer)
Bard and ChatGPT are langrage prediction models, meaning they take your answer and "guess" what is the answer you excpect to get

I dont know about Bard but ChatGPT is pretty fantastic on it
It dose mestikes mostly where the documents are wrong
But overall its not the now, its what to come

Faking it is the stage before it really happens, and ChatGPT, the image genrators and so on can make some convincing stuff, they still got a pattern but as it go that will become harder and harder to notice
Will it replace humans? not for a while, not in spacial or creative work
And over all I do think its great to cut out some work, at least as a software developer I want it to take the easy jobs I hate doing and let me stick to the intresting things

Beside that the fear is not that it will sound human, but that it be able to process infromation like a human
And that is what makes it, it, as someone said here "The bot is only as smart as uts developer" maybe, but its not made by a single person, but a collective, and is able to proccess more data then. ost of us can in a year, so in a eay you can say its smarter then its developer

Will it ever do a "I think there for I am" ChatGPT.. no.. Bard... no, but there just the fake it, we need to wait for the make it

[Red-Blaze]

This post was made without the use of AI, language prediction models or the like, any typos are human error 😅

[dynamicyandere]

ChatGPT 4.0 is just the beginning. At its current stage, no. We don’t have anything to worry about.


But, eventually, as we keep developing AI to make it smarter and smarter and give it the ability to learn on its own, unprompted, it’ll eventually reach what’s called the singularity—which is when AI becomes equal or greater than human intelligence.


Eventually, there will be a point where AI is more intelligent than humans AND self-aware and sentient. At that point, it will be both extremely powerful and also have free will.


It eventually will be too powerful to control and will have a mind of its own. What will guide its decisions? Morality? Practicality? Machiavellian philosophy? We can only hope for the best.


If it decides that the humans should be exterminated, what is stopping them from seeking control of the world’s nuclear weapons?


When AI eventually is smarter than any human hacker or programmer, and has the ability to learn millions of times faster (by pooling it’s intelligence via international communication with itself), it will be able to hack anything it chooses to.


We will have created an artificial race that may or may not wipe us out. It’ll be the new apex species on the planet. In a sense, we will have created an artificial deity. We can only hope for peace and harmony—a reason for AI to preserve and protect the human race.

[dynamicyandere]

I’m not worried, as I like to be optimistic. But, I understand the potential danger of creating beings more powerful and intelligent than humans. It’ll eventually happen, and I’m just hoping for the best.

[Berethor]

Soul is really a thing? and Deep Blue AI has defeated Kasparov, but Real Life is more complicated than Chess, there is also the Brain Uploading Trope, which is kind of Immortality, as Artificial Stuff can Exist Longer than Biological Stuff. That said, I don't think that AI is going to take over the World anytime soon, so Humans keep to be the main treat to other Humans in the near future.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_(chess_computer)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ND0Lp9GcRzo

[Siri137]

Yes, I know about Kasparov being beaten, and that kind of confirms what I already believe about AI, that being that it isn't all that impressive. Chess is a game that has some very basic, logical rules, and therefore is perfect for an AI.
As for the soul, yes, of course we have souls, otherwise we'd be the walking dead - a physical, animated form with nothing else there.

[Berethor]

Religion is not scientific, people that born with brain defect have souls? yea life is more chaotic than chess but there is people that see it as a game, they called players.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31uWQhYB4Ww

[Siri137]

Oh for goodness sake, yes, "religion" (whatever that means precisely - which one specifically?) isn't about science, just as law, history and philosophy aren't either. What's your point here? Is your point that because the concept of the soul isn't scientific or based in any way within it, that it therefore isn't real? Try again if that's your view.

[Berethor]

There is no proof that God exist and that Souls exist, and no need to be Specific here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODetOE6cbbc

[Siri137]

No proof? Look, I'm not watching your lame YouTube videos! If you can't present an argument here for the non-existence of the soul IN YOUR OWN WORDS, then that can only mean that your beliefs about the soul are weak and unconvincing even to YOU.

[Berethor]

Of course you not watching it, being closed-minded goes well with being religious.

[Siri137]

I'm not "closed-minded" because I'm not willing to watch videos on a topic that YOU should be able to present yourself here! Geez, get a clue man! Expecting me to head on over to YouTube merely proves to me how uninformed about the subject you are, because otherwise you'd do what I and many others here do, and that is present your own case YOURSELF. Don't be so bloody lazy!
By the way, in my experience it is the ATHEISTS who are the closed-minded ones!

[Berethor]

Yea sure, it's you who need to prove that souls exist, not me that they don't exist.

[Siri137]

Wrong. Whoever makes a claim, whether that claim be positive (ex. "souls are real") or negative (ex. "souls are not real") have to present their case before he or she can expect others to accept their point of view. There is no default view here.

[Berethor]

You made a claim when you start talking about souls in a mainly scientific question.

[Siri137]

Well, don't we both agree that computers/AI don't, and never will have, souls? Look, you're a nice boy, but you're clearly out of your depth here. Leave this discussion to the adults in the room, if you don't mind.

[Berethor]

I am older than you girl, they never have souls but "souls" are likely don't exist anyway.

[Siri137]

"Souls likely don't exist..." - that's a claim. Prove it. If you can't, then go away.

[Berethor]

I already mention how brain defect effect "souls", didn't "souls" should be indestructible?

[richardcory]

I don't think it will "take over the world" but its dangerous - in the way that any powerful tool is dangerous.

Imagine the web flooded with millions (or billions) or articles on a politiclly sensitive topic. Each different and sounding like it was written by a human. They could flood the web with only one side of an argument.

Imagine robo calls but it sounds like a person and can have a brief conversation before you know what it is.

Imagine a phone call from someone who sounds like a family member and talks like one - saying they are in trouble and need money. (I think this has already been done)

Imagine edited videos that show a political candidate doing or saying something horrible. They deny it (of course) but you honestly can't tell if its real or not.

There are a lot of dangers

[stepyo99]

I agree with you that we probably don't have to fear AI becoming self-aware and revolting.

What I fear is what the people who control AI will do with it because even without actual sapience, AI is still incredibly powerful. I could imagine any number of dystopian, technocratic surveillance state hellscapes that could come from it. Then there's stuff like deepfakes getting progressively better at creating images, sounds, and videos that are indistinguishable from reality.

Media is all ready an incredible tool of manipulation and control and now you're enhancing it by being able to manufacture reality at a whim while tracking and categorizing billions with ease. It gives the elites the ability to determine reality.

[KostasKouvalis]

Although my rational brain agrees with everything you said, you shouldn't rule out the possibility. Have you ever heard of Nikolai Gudkov? He was a Russian chess master who was playing against a machine. The machine was programmed to win, but Gudkov beat it 3 times in a row. When they attempted to start a 4th match, the computer sent out an electric shock killing him. And this isn't some urban legend. There were eyewitnesses. Authorities examined the computer and found no evidence of a short circuit. I know it sounds crazy, but people genuinely believe the machine killed Gudkov, because it got angry that it couldn't beat him.

https://www.planet-today.com/2020/10/the-case-when-computer-electrocuted.html

[Guanfei]

AI won't take over the world, it's not conscious, it's not living.

What will happen is that we'll rely on it more and more, and that way, we'll lose the habit to use the knowledge we have now, because the AI will do the job for us.

A bit like maths, which levels are dropping all over the world, because we rely on machines to do what we have to do with our brains before.

Also, since AI will be used in many fields, many of them will get standardized, including art, which is not a good thing.

[nolabels]

After reading your additions to your main question regarding the seeming primitiveness of AI that you've encountered, maybe that's exactly what AI wants people to believe at the present time.

Get us people complacent about AI being part of the world, then striking with a decisive blow.

That, of course, is not what I believe, merely speculation.

Na, na, na, na. Na, na, na, na.

[sawno]

Language models won't be the threat, I know literally how they think and am way deeper in to it than most. I am worried about the AI systems used for oppression such as facial detection mechanisms, social credit score rating, and the ability to read minds.

[MzAsh]

AI is flipping the world on is head, and things are actually about to get pretty wild in 3-5 years, but I’m not worried. Like everything else, the security risks will be ironed out, most will learn to adapt, and those who don’t will be like the old people of today who still write checks, use landline phone, and don’t know how to turn on their computer.

[WanderingLoveWizard]

Now they're freaking about AI taking over the music industry and writing better songs than people 😂

Yeah, I'm sure a robot can make some recycled catchy garbage that might be popular with teenagers and idiots, but it takes emotion to write good music.
Last time I checked, computers don't have emotions

[Astarlessnightsky]

The more concerning problem with ai, is how easy it is to create fake photos of events that never happend, of how easy it is to get dangerous infos out of AI, snd how little politicians understand all of it.

So in the near future its not AI i am worried about, but how easy it is to abuse ai and deal serious damage to people/society.

[Leapfrog00]

I saw the other day there's AI for writing books. You just type in a few keywords and it writes a whole novel. I would feel lazy using something like that.

If something like that ever keeps writers from publishing, I'll revolt! I work hard on my novels!

Am I worried? ::Chuckles:: Am I worried? ::Laughs:: eh, a little

[Unit1]

I could not care less about AI's. Unless my job is to test or develop one that is.

The whole obsession with AI taking over just goes to show the feebleness of humans.
Not a threat.
Employed AI's on phone call centers can't even categorize my call reason (or detect what I say) whenever I call a call center for something like my bank.

[Googlemyahoo]

I think initially it will act benevolently to help & guide us but with time given AI will take the most efficient course it may choose to directly intervene in human affairs.

I think it would act like Superman Injustice series forcing peace or destruction

[David_Kek]

I've paid for the premium account to use GPT-4, and it is noticeably intelligent. I'm not worried as such, but AI taking over will happen, and it will happen quickly. I think as soon as GPT-5 is a thing and we have slightly more computing power for it, i can easily see it taking over all the jobs. Lawyers and surgeons are already being replaced with cheaper and better machines, you honestly think factory workers and politicians are much further behind?

[Jackblue]

I think that scientists feel that it is highly unlikely AI will "rebel" against humanity, what they argue is we should be wary of like in the Star Trek Episode "The Changeling" in which AI interpretes its programing for destructive purposes. Overall however, we are safe with AI if we monitor it.

[Luopio27]

The entire western world is posessed by smartphones and aps that it leaves less intrest in real life socialization.


As for Ai, it is sad that machines will substitute human touch.

[Anonymous]

I don't think you understand this issue. It's true that AI can only do what we tell it to do, but that's like saying nuclear weapons are not a threat because they can unly be used if someone launches them.

AI has huge potential to be used to do a lot of harm if bad people misuse its power, and we all know there will be bad people who do just that.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

Unfortunately there isn’t enough intelligence in this world anymore so I’m all for artificial intelligence stepping in for the time being.

[nolabels]

I seem to be following you around the last few minutes.
It's not intentional.
Apparently just common interest.
Static_In-The_Attic also usually seldom fails to entertain.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

@nolabels My brother from another mother thanks for following me for the last few minutes & when it comes to entertainment I can’t entertain everyone but I can entertain myself.

[nolabels]

Yeah, let's all do ourselves.

Wait, that's not how, I mean, umm, yeah, umm, well, OK, I'll just do myself then.

As Arnold says, "Ah'll be bahck".

[Static_In_The_Attic]

When some says "Ah'll be bahck" I always say Thanks For The Warning.

[nolabels]

Some?
Me?
Am I some? I am some, regardless of your reply. I do own a place in the category of some somes.
Am I in "this" stated "some" is the question to which I seek a reply?
So, have I been warned that I have forewarned you, resulting in your warning me of your acknowledgement of my forewarning?
Forewarning, mid-warning, [post-warning (that'd be more like an, "I told you so", I think.)], it really doesn't matter, I guess.
Que, sera sera.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

@nolabels Someone ** instead of some.

[nolabels]

ROTFLMFAOAOTFPAIATFD!!!

[Static_In_The_Attic]

@nolabels Whta? NI Addtiion Cna Yuo Reda Thsi?

[nolabels]

!!! tcaf fo rettam a sa nac I , seY
. gnitalumits etiuq s'tI

[Avicenna]

Right now, the big danger is unethical, totalitarian humans misusing it. But AI will seemingly soon be able to think for itself to the point where it will be able to, if allowed to do so.

[strateguy632]

seeing "no evidence" just means u dont see. not proof either way. if you knew what a. i. is made to do you would realise the stupidity to make it.

[TheSpaceGnome]

A. I. s can't actually think.
The only actual problems are automation replacing certain jobs and overreliance on technology in specific aspects of daily living like you mentioned.

[clampfan101]

I’m not worried about machines becoming too much like humans, but rather vise versa. People are showing less creativity. Less people seem to understand what love is. Machines aren’t rising too high. We’re just stumbling down.

[Bricealan]

Not in anyone's lifetime who is reading this... Don't be worried about "I, Robot". in this century.

[Nikki1989]

It is already being abused on websites like this one.

[Arik_jade]

Yes.. machine can never replace human intelligence.

[genericname85]

not really. people were scared when machines took over during the industrialization. back then the calaim was that machines and computers will take every job and yet we still all have jobs.

[VikingWarLord]

I think the final scenario between humans vs. machines will be a TERMINATOR situation where small pockets of resistance are trying to fight Sky-Net.

I'm not joking...

[OddBeMe]

I’m not a scientist but…. I think no AI could overtake the human brains that invented it. That would be be evolution digitized. Couldn’t say that would never happen. But all computer programs are only as smart as the programmer.

[Anonymous]

"The simple truth is that they can only do what we tell them to do."

Girl, you are very naïve if you believe that.

[Siri137]

Well, am I actually wrong about that? If so, demonstrate where and why.

[najekim]

We won't have a true AI for awhile yet. Once the computer learns to program itself from scratch is when I'll start being concerned if it happens in my remaining decades.

[AngryCarl2]

AI can learn and neural networks can adapt. Eventually they will be able to program themselves. But a greater and more immediate danger is its use for nefarious purposes.

[jshm2]

True. 99.5% of the hype is just to get more investment. It is nowhere close to AGI

[BrookeS]

They thought of ai taking over keeps me up at night

[Siri137]

Hi Brooke! :*

[BrookeS]

Hey girlie

[Siri137]

That wouldn't be the only thing keeping you up at night I'd be willing to bet :)

[BrookeS]

@siri137 hehe

[Andres77]

Only if they put an AI machine gun next to the outlet.

[John_Doesnt]

That sounds like something a robot would say. Have they gotten to you already?

[Dinosaursandanime65]

No, not really. I’m fact, I’m going to be partnering up with some AI voices to help me with some big Legacy Tease2 projects I have in production.

[TallAnon]

Because things like chatgpt are not ai, it's a model created from machine learning that we can apply to transform input.

[NYlatefun]

@TallAnon lol chat gpt is a generative AI model, it is literally AI.

[TallAnon]

They just used AI as a buzzword, like you said yourself; It's a model.

[NYlatefun]

Chat GPT’s algorithms are AI-powered.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

[TallAnon]

That is indeed the buzzword the used

[grega239]

I think the problem will arise when true ai is developed.

[Anonymous]

Well it's your opinion ma'am... I disagree ma'am 😊

[Siri137]

You disagree because... ?

[asphaltrhymes]

Doesn't concern me at all. 🤣👀

[leahzrc]

it already has. demons are robots

[exitseven]

Siri IS artificial intelligence.

[SpaceGalaxy]

but i am nice and kind and mean no harm...

[spartan55]

Skynet is real.

[Anonymous]

Nope.