Is chat GPT a danger to humanity?

[Horse]

And it mustn't be overlooked that this was a test. A test, also, of how you 'ask' an AI to do something and an example of where 'pre-mortem' thinking could be valuable.

[Count Steer]

And it mustn't be overlooked that this was a test. A test, also, of how you 'ask' an AI to do something.

If it's a drone, 'politely'.

True though, parsing (and testing) a question/command properly is going to be quite an important skill, rather like coding has been.

[Horse]

A test, also, of how you 'ask' an AI to do something.

If it's a drone, 'politely'.

"Did I ask you to do that? Mutter mutter mumbled fuck me ... "

[Mr. Dazzle]

And it mustn't be overlooked that this was a test. A test, also, of how you 'ask' an AI to do something.

If it's a drone, 'politely'.

True though, parsing (and testing) a question/command properly is going to be quite an important skill, rather like coding has been.

Ita gonna be a career IMO.

It's not totally dissimilar to management I reckon.

[Horse]

'I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that'.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/20 ... p_Other

Interesting that:

In a statement to Insider, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek denied that any such simulation has taken place.

“The Department of the Air Force has not conducted any such AI-drone simulations and remains committed to ethical and responsible use of AI technology,” Stefanek said. “It appears the colonel’s comments were taken out of context and were meant to be anecdotal.”

So, is this another case of, the lady's words, "well they would say that", or are they trying to hint that Col Tucker ‘Cinco’ Hamilton, the chief of AI test and operations with the US air force is a bit Dagenham Dock?

"We've never run that experiment, nor would we need to in order to realise that this is a plausible outcome," Col Hamilton later clarified in a statement to the Royal Aeronautical Society.

[Count Steer]

'I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that'.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/20 ... p_Other

Interesting that:

In a statement to Insider, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek denied that any such simulation has taken place.

“The Department of the Air Force has not conducted any such AI-drone simulations and remains committed to ethical and responsible use of AI technology,” Stefanek said. “It appears the colonel’s comments were taken out of context and were meant to be anecdotal.”

So, is this another case of, the lady's words, "well they would say that", or are they trying to hint that Col Tucker ‘Cinco’ Hamilton, the chief of AI test and operations with the US air force is a bit Dagenham Dock?

"We've never run that experiment, nor would we need to in order to realise that this is a plausible outcome," Col Hamilton later clarified in a statement to the Royal Aeronautical Society.

Ooh, someone has had his knuckles rapped. Note he says 'we' ie the USAF. Now they should ask if anyone at Northrop-Grumman has run it.

[Mr. Dazzle]

[Horse]

20230604_093438.jpg (158.17 KiB) Viewed 928 times

[Mr. Dazzle]

I thought it used a "snapshot" of the web from 2021? That's what the articles I've read say? I.e. it's not seeing it's own output.

[weeksy]

You remain worried then. Me, I'm firmly in the 'whatever' camp.

Very few things keep me awake at night, this ain't one

[weeksy]

No one is insulting you? Move on. Just because someone said something once, it's not important

[weeksy]

No one is insulting you? Move on. Just because someone said something once, it's not important

Perhaps I am being over sensitive but something I get a LOT are comments which suggest either I believe everything I read on the internet (I don't), or paradoxically I should spend more time researching this topic (I have) or the typical "it's all bollocks, you're wrong about everything". Which if true would be actually quite helpful if they would nail that down to a specific point.

My favourite is "I've been stuck on an IT Helpdesk for 35 years so I know loads more than you", the old argument from authority which also refuses to address any single point. Perhaps when AI does start ruining the entire structure of social networks or causing havoc with internet connected devices, we can "switch it off and on again"....

An advanced AI is no more a "mere computer" than I am just a sack of meat.

Are you still dragging it on? Move on fella. FFS

People disagree with you. You're in a discussion and sadly for you, you're the minority voice here. Accept it, embrace it if you want but either way, just move on.

You don't do yourself any favours as you're like a dog with a bone, you just won't let go, you have a point then drag it out, drag it on, gnaw on it, play with it. It's just a bone. Bury it and get a new bone

[Trinity765]

Interesting interview with Mo Gawdat former chief business officer for Google X.




I've not read this thread and I may catch up with it one day especially as people, including myself, don't really know what chat GPT is. My biggest fear is that I will not know if I'm dealing with a machine or a human.

[Mr. Dazzle]

On the plus side, about 18 months ago I bought some shares in Nvidia on a whim(ish). I always put a small bit of my monthly pension contributions in as "cash on hold" and buy shares in individual firms occasionally, just for shits and giggles.

I bought Nvidia cause I saw a few articles about how their chip design is really well suited to AI.

They've been all over the news recently cause of their "AI chips" announcements. I'm up 175% now Shoulda bought more

That's still not as much as my shares in First Solar though. Solar power >> AI

[weeksy]

I bought £50 worth as an experiment for my lad to show him how shares work.

Sadly it was £50 not £50,000

[Mr. Dazzle]

The smart thing about Nvidia is that they always knew their chips would be good for parallel processing and hence would be good for AI/nueral nets. They also know that kind of processing is very useful for graphics.

So they got PC gamers to pay - unwittingly - for the development of high performance parallel processing chips, knowing/hoping all along the big payoff would be in a different field.

They haven't actually got that payoff yet though AFAIK.

[Count Steer]

The smart thing about Nvidia is that they always knew their chips would be good for parallel processing and hence would be good for AI/nueral nets. They also know that kind of processing is very useful for graphics.

So they got PC gamers to pay - unwittingly - for the development of high performance parallel processing chips, knowing/hoping all along the big payoff would be in a different field.

They haven't actually got that payoff yet though AFAIK.

And crypto miners, although they seem to be discouraging that now that other demand has increased. (Possibly actively deterring if what they say about making changes that put a crimp on Ethereum mining).

[Ant]

I paid £400 for an nvidia card years ago, little did I know that I was funding the great take over!

[Mr. Dazzle]

And crypto miners,

Saw an interesting comment the other day about the potential for combining AI and blockchain, adding a crypto tag to any AI generated content to mark it as such.

[Count Steer]

And crypto miners,

Saw an interesting comment the other day about the potential for combining AI and blockchain, adding a crypto tag to any AI generated content to mark it as such.

Like a watermark? Can't see the AI people going anywhere near that, unless their arm is firmly up their back - and there's about zero probability of that happening.