Artificial Intelligence and Public Comment

[Irrelevant]

I can see AI writing 90% of television and movies but they'll all be Mall Cop or Miss Congeniality or another 400 seasons of the kardishians, MILF Island, etc.

Citizen Kane won't come from it. Neither will a giant of cinematic ingenuity like Nate & Hays. The worlds created by people like Tolkien and Lucas won't come from AI. The Boulder Monitor will never replace their most excellent columnist with AI because AI can't taste the $*)Q!#@$ gravy on the Chicken Fried steak to adequately convey it's texture, aroma and flavor.

You're, once again, overly optimistic.

It can and it will. And even if it can't, we won't be able to tell.

 

[Irrelevant]

AI's flaw, whether it is writing or coding or whatever, is it tries to follow the known rules and takes no risk. In the end, everything it produces leans toward the food equivalent of plain white toast. Getting to the point where it takes risks and tries something new might be hard because history shows a lot of the things that lead to the greatest payoffs were ideas that didn't look great at the beginning.

...for now. That won't be the case forever.

 

[Ben Lamb]

You're, once again, overly optimistic.

It can and it will. And even if it can't, we won't be able to tell.

I'm just old enough to have lived through a few of these existential crises.

 

[Irrelevant]

I'm just old enough to have lived through a few of these existential crises.

You sound like BHR talking about the stock market...

 

[Gulf of America]

I'm just old enough to have lived through a few of these existential crises.

I recently listened to a podcast with the author of If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, and he painted a pretty compelling picture of an existential crisis if Artificial Superintelligence is ever achieved. Now lets be clear, LLM's/chatbots are a long way from that, but basically the three possible scenarios he lays out are:
1) It fails, artificial intelligence is never achieved. This is the best case scenario. But there are a lot of people betting a lot of money against it.
2) It succeeds, there are a couple people who hold the levers to control it and they are basically god-emperors who control everything and everyone.
2) It succeeds, and nobody can control it. In its quest for progress, however it defines that, there is a certain point where humans are an impediment. It may not be malicious, like nuking everyone, just like extinction of species has often times not been intentional malevolence, but our quest for progress ultimately consumed the places or things they needed to survive.

I had a hard time poking holes in the argument, but would love to hear why he's wrong.

 

[SAJ-99]

...for now. That won't be the case forever.

That's the question. Does the feedback loop prevent it from breaking out of the feedback loop?

I'm just old enough to have lived through a few of these existential crises.

This one seems faster. My belief is change has to happen at a speed society can adapt to it. This one looks like a high speed train running us all toward mediocrity. If we replace human labor with computers fast enough, people will lose their heads.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I had a hard time poking holes in the argument, but would love to hear why he's wrong.

Yes, Skynet is a distinct possibility. But - so is Star Trek.

Humans rise to the level of technology. I think our shared narrative shows that.

 

[kwyeewyk]

I can see AI writing 90% of television and movies but they'll all be Mall Cop or Miss Congeniality or another 400 seasons of the kardishians, MILF Island, etc.

 

[Gulf of America]

Yes, Skynet is a distinct possibility. But - so is Star Trek.

Humans rise to the level of technology. I think our shared narrative shows that.

The fact that Elon shared many of the concerns of the author and ultimately jumped on board, because if god-emperors are inevitable he's damn well gonna be one of 'em, doesn't give me a ton of hope. If AI is controlling the municipal water system, and has to make the decision in a drought between sending water to the data center that powers it or sending water to the people of the community, which do you think it's going to do? That's not a terminator situation, it's more like an AI making a rational self-preservation decision, and then people killing each other because that's what we do.

 

[Ben Lamb]

The fact that Elon shared many of the concerns of the author and ultimately jumped on board, because if god-emperors are inevitable he's damn well gonna be one of 'em, doesn't give me a ton of hope. If AI is controlling the municipal water system, and has to make the decision in a drought between sending water to the data center that powers it or sending water to the people of the community, which do you think it's going to do? That's not a terminator situation, it's more like an AI making a rational self-preservation decision, and then people killing each other because that's what we do.