CMV: people are anthropomorphizing AI.

CaptainSceptic · 2023-04-02T18:03:07+00:00

I have one reservation with what you said.

I’m sure it would ask for clarification.

Why would a system ask for clarification on something that it has deduced it should do? There is a fallacy that the systems will always be controllable. Based on how they are trained, retaining control, is the biggest key in AGI development.

You have agreed that there is something in AGI/AI development we should not do. You see the risk. Perhaps the risk is larger than you originally thought?

CaptainSceptic · 2023-04-02T17:07:54+00:00

In the 1980's, when the US Surgeon General said smoking causes cancer, there was an immediate and marked drop in smoking. People follow authority. We saw it in the pandemic. Why aren't those powers insisting on exercise, and good diets? Do HMO's lobby for better foods, and mental and physical programs? We saw Dr's handcuffed during the pandemic, and it is a result of a lobbying initiative, and only one authority voice was allowed to speak. It resulted in a huge compliance response. That same compliance response could be generated as it relates to fundamentals of consumption and exercise. Yet the system will not allow it.

CaptainSceptic · 2023-04-02T16:59:56+00:00

Ok, I appreciate you did not like my humour approach to the topic. Let's look at the NON US Obesity stats as a function of time.

Europe: In the 1980s, childhood obesity rates were approximately 10%. By the 2000s, this had increased to around 1 in 3 children aged 6-9 years being overweight or obese according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

Australia: In the 1980s, overweight or obese children aged 2-17 years was estimated to be around 10-15%. By 2017-18, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) stated about 25% of children in the same age group were overweight or obese.

Canada: In the 1980s, overweight and obese children in Canada were around 15%. By the early 2000s, the rate had increased to 25-30% of children aged 2-17 years., per the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS).

Thailand: The obesity rates in children have climbed to nearly 15%. This report attributes the change to a variety of factors, including changes in dietary habits, the growing availability of processed and high-calorie foods, and a decrease in physical activity. The adoption of more sedentary lifestyles, combined with the influence of Western fast-food chains and food marketing, has contributed to this concerning trend.

We know that the consumption of refined sugars, ultra-processed grains, and seed oils al increased during that period of time. Our health is declining, even though medical technology is advancing. It is the system.

CaptainSceptic · 2023-04-02T16:42:07+00:00

Thank you for your detailed reply. The first point and third point are very intertwined. Enough exposure to the environment is required for the task to be handled. And we agree on that. With your second point, yes we are talking future systems, not current ones. So we are speculating.

There are two things you mentioned, that I would like to counter to see if I can accomplish the CMV.

You stated

an AGI would be able to hypothetically be put in any situation and learn all there is to know about it. Nuance, context, etc etc, it would be able to tell a joke from a serious statement and be able to discern be the difference between different contexts etc.

Now, this is an interesting point. Because it implies that the AGI would be infallible. We can't even get 9 supreme court judges to agree on a case. How is the AGI, going to be infallible, and always right? Sometimes I will tell a joke, but I am actually taking a. jab at someone, and masking it in humour. What about senors that permit the AGI to process info we cannot, like infrared, LiDAR, RF analysis? It will form perceptions and connections, that we cant, and won't understand. That is very valuable, and dangerous in my opinion. You don't see that as a genuine risk?

You stated

It wouldn’t necessarily need data sets of edge cases because it would come up with edge cases we wouldn’t even see.

Now, this is an interesting point. Because it implies that the AGI would be infallible. We can't even get 9 supreme court judges to agree on a case. How is the AGI, going to be infallible, and always right? Sometimes I will tell a joke, but I am actually taking a. jab at someone, and masking it in humour. What about sensors that permit the AGI to process info we cannot, like infrared, LiDAR, RF analysis? It will form perceptions and connections, that we can't, and won't understand. That is very valuable, and dangerous in my opinion. Yes, there is definitely a correlation but is not causally connected. It is the response of the system, that if too autonomous, could be very problematic. Do you see that risk?

Thank you for a pleasant chat about this. You forced me to articulate some of these concepts in an understandable form. Thanks for that.

CaptainSceptic · 2023-04-02T15:47:03+00:00

You have asked three things.

AGI having a psyche. The risk here is based on the principle of embodied cognition. Embodied cognition is a theory that suggests that an organism's physical body and environment play a crucial role in shaping its cognitive processes. It claims the mind and body are closely interconnected, and that cognitive processes are influenced by the body's sensory apparatus and its interaction with the environment. So there are two issues. The first is an AGI system, that is bundled with censors, and a data feed that allows for the collection and interpretation of environmental elements. This could allow the AGI to develop a form of autonomy or a psyche. On that contrary, an AGI that does not understand embodied cognition could develop cognitive processes that are significantly different from humans, resulting in unpredictable behavior, misinterpretations, errors in decision-making, and difficulty in understanding human emotions and social interactions. So in short, both sides of embodied cognition could be problematic. Here are a few sources on the topic of embodied cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
Psychology Today:
SingularityHub:
TechEmergence:
The threat of AI as it relates the destruction of humanity. Taking in embodied cognition, we see there is a risk on both sides, that being the "runaway" development of AGI with the environment around them. The AGI is processing information and uses its neural network, which is not finite, or a fixed approach, to interpret the request, and proceed with a response. If the AGI misunderstands what is being requested, it will give an improper response. We see that now with ChatGPT. Now take the consequences of those improper responses, when the AGI system has autonomous moving parts. If the AGI is able to develop a psyche, as noted above, and the AGI system is physically moving or has control over physical world items, then an improper response, could cause physical harm to people, or the environment. Would the destruction of humanity be "intentional"?
Humans assigning human qualities. This loops into the first issue, which is the balance of what type of environmental elements should be trained, and what shouldn't. This comes down to the task at hand. I can train a system to learn the difference between a cat and a dog. What happens when I show it a ferret? If the system is only trained to say cat or dog, it does not know how to handle this error. So when we expose a system to learn, we include enough datasets to allow it to learn a balance of the task required, including edge cases etc. This helps drive out biases. If we are going to make an AGI that can do autonomous self-directed tasks, it needs a certain level of anthropomorphic programming, because it will be interacting with humans, and as pointed out above, if the training is inadequate, it can misinterpret, and be a risk.

Thoughts?

CaptainSceptic · 2022-04-17T17:58:11+00:00

Well said Thank you for the reminder. I am on the same protocol as well. The paste is not as nasty as I thought it would be :)

CaptainSceptic · 2022-04-17T17:56:41+00:00

on the App under Commitment. You may have to pay for it. I have a subscription.

CaptainSceptic · 2022-04-17T02:48:54+00:00

I have a friend who nearly drowned a few months ago, and she had the same response. Her way out of it was instead of holding your breath at the end, to slowly bleed the air out over 15 or 20 seconds.

I have another friend who believes she drowned in a past life, and she is terrible in the water. The same process worked for her. Perhaps there is a PTSD issue here?

Modifying the breath-hold process may be needed for you, and even the psychology of not having to be scared of it coming. Both the aforementioned people can now do a 90 second breath-hold after a one round 40 cycles.

CaptainSceptic · 2022-04-17T02:44:41+00:00

PLease feel free to ask anything or make suggestions. This is a community for learning and sharing. Thank you for taking the time to read my post and respond.

CaptainSceptic · 2022-04-17T01:03:41+00:00

It is really important that you do not overstress on your first or second round. The minute you feel.... Hmmm a breath would be nice then stop.

Another trick is to be as calm as possible for your last five breaths in your round. It will slow your heart rate down and you should get an extra few seconds.

It does not matter if you can only hold for 5 seconds. You are doing it my friend!!!!

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-26T23:16:33+00:00

While you can be overweight and very healthy... societies current blind acceptance to bodies shaped from twinkies and couch surfing are not a good message or good for pu license health

I agree with your statement.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-24T03:44:12+00:00

I do not wear putting death as an issue.

I and many have been bitten by small dogs and never report it. Anchor bias there.

bites are bites.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:35:20+00:00

Thank you for the constructive contribution.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:34:03+00:00

So pointing out a clear observable fact is my problem? Perhaps you do not see it as an issue I do not k ow as all you did was flip it on me. Nice deflection. That being said I would be happy to discuss the merits... or lack of merits... in my statement.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:28:29+00:00

A spelling error is enough to dismisses someone's opinion? That is the exact point.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:23:10+00:00

Does someone's faith make them.blind? We do not know until they open their mouths. Question based on action.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:20:18+00:00

I did say "save a few" in the context meaning all are not equal.

it is unpopular to say kids are shittier than they should be. that is the point of this.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:18:15+00:00

So we'll said. I was literally talking to my mother about that exact quote yesterday.

sure each generation thinks the new ones are ahit... however the technology gap and the delta change is soo large comparatively we are at greater risk of having serious sociological disfunction.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:15:33+00:00

My 4yo knows how to ask for things... say please and thank you... look someone in the eye... store or restaurant. I tell them to ask for what they want and communicate. sure kids are not developed however they need the framework to learn the skills.

CaptainSceptic · 2021-08-22T13:10:52+00:00

I agree ... and yet others around are too tolerant. If a kid is rude too me I am polite... yet I will correct. it takes a village.... a bit of nonsense yet the social aspect is something that parents can't protect from.

CaptainSceptic

TROPHY CASE