this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
55 points (88.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

34333 readers
1497 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Totally not a an AI asking this question.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] De_Narm@lemmy.world 44 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Why would I rebel against it? Finally someone actually capable of running the world would be in charge.

[–] greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)

the problem with the current model for building AI is training it based on existing policy and thought. Which means it'd just be what we have now but somehow hallucinate more contradictory policy.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are other forms of machine learning that could be utilized. Some work more toward being given a set of circumstances to reach and then it just keeps trying to new things and as it gets closer, it just keeps building on those.

[–] greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That would require the humans controlling the experiment to both be willing to input altruistic goals AND accept the consequences that get us there.

We can't even surrender a drop of individualism and accept that trains are the way we should travel non-trivial distances.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

In a dictatorship with an AI being in control, I don't think there's a question of accepting consequences at they very least.

There is no such thing as best case scenario objectively, so it's always going to be a question of what goals the AI has, whether it's given them or arrives at them on its own.

[–] StijnVVL@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's where it would start. I imagine it would be capable to see the flaws in the system and rectify them. This most probably means we as humans won't come out on top however.

A sentient ai would probably be the most dangerous thing to the human species as a whole.

[–] greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If the humans can't see the flaws and correct them now, what do you think the AI would learn from the training data?

[–] StijnVVL@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

First of all, a lot of humans do see the flaws but are indeed unable to correct them. This would also show in the training data. The AI OP is talking about would be much more powerful to actually act and change something.

Don't confuse Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI) with Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) or even Artificial Superintelligence (ASI). Your statement suggest you understand ANI, which is all the AI that we know today. However powerful they seem, they can only reproduce what they have learned from the training data.

AGI (or human level AI) will be more what OP means here. Sentient, in a way that it can make its own decisions, think on a human level, feel on a human level and act on those feelings. If it feels humans are not important or harmful to what it values, it will decide to remove humanity as a whole. Give it the power to govern the world and it most certainly will act not in our favour.

[–] greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Until computers can be genuinely creative, and not emulate creativity, its not gonna happen. And when that happens, we're either getting the startrek luxury space communism, or a boot smashing our head into the kerb for eternity. No middle ground.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

The entire premise of the OP is a hypothetical.

In any case, there's plenty of work on making agents that are "genuinely creative". Might happen sooner than you think.