If I were an investor, I’d pull my money out of that company. This is like giving money to your brother in law to start a bakery and finding him the back petting a loaf of bread and introducing it to you as Willy.

I’m confused. Did OpenAI release an album? What did they drop? The article is unclear.

This is only good for Anthropic because chatbots learn from their users. I remember back in the mid-2000s on a forum, someone linked to their chatbot and asked everyone to use it so it could learn. I asked if it could learn Esperanto. The dev said, yes, but please don’t teach it that.

The interesting thing is, this rule reveals how easy it is to sabotage LLMs. If FuckAI got together and started feeding it gibberish, there’d be a new rule banning people who do that.

Sadly, I think you might be right considering how fast semantic pareidolia is becoming the norm. It’s only a matter of time before the war crimes I’ve committed in Medieval 2 Total War are reified and I’m put on trial.

If you get used to being shitty to an AI that takes it, then you’re a lot more likely to be shitty when you go touch grass.

Only if you’re suffering from pareidolic psychosis. Mentally stable people are able to differentiate the difference between a human and a computer.

Neither of those articles mentions sentience nor sapience. And I’m not following how those things leads to sentient/sapient life. What’s being described sounds like a souped-up MENACE matchbox computer.

English Teacher: It is semicolon we hardly use it.

So… It’s perfectly cromulent to everyone here that an English teacher isn’t using proper punctuation and capitalization?

It literally does have a ‘???’ step to it,

Okay, then fill in the blank please. What is this step that spontaneously creates sapient and sentient life with perfect mastery of human language that can get really pissed if you’re not nice to it. Sincerely, that is absolutely amazing if true! Especially if it were not planned. Usually something this astounding has to be planned like a moon landing.

Please forgive everyone’s skepticism but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And the current evidence is far from extraordinary.

Huh. So how was this all planned out?

Phase 1: Compress thousands of years of human history into hyperdense clusters of memetics.

Phase 2: ?

Phase 3: Spontaneous creation of sapient and sentient life with perfect mastery of human language that can get really pissed if you’re not nice to it.

This kind of resembles the plot of Electric Dreams.

The danger of semantic pareidolia is that if you think your power drill stopped working because you yelled at it, you’re not going find out what’s actually wrong with it.

Kind of but smartphones are still in their own little universe. I don’t buy a website from a store like it’s a word processor and install it on my desktop. And that pyramid is specifically focused on phones and how they all interconnect. Laptops and desktops aren’t even mentioned. Using the Internet on a phone is way different than using it on a desktop. It’s like swimming in a bathtub.

Looking at the inverted pyramid thing, that’s not really the Internet. That’s whatever that fish bowl network smartphones use.

Where’s the video? Something tells me it’s not that realistic.

Also, this reminds me of the Bonsai Kitten panic at the turn of the century.

Because there’s no reason to downvote it unless you’re a teenager. Or a billionaire. More likely it’s teenagers downvoting it.

This comment is the perfect barometer for gauging what percentage of the Fediverse consists of teenagers.

We need to ban teenagers from social media not for their safety, but because they’re fucking annoying.

That’s why we send them to school all day and on field trips, and to summer camp. And why nobody ever dreams of going to high school again. And why teachers are constantly wanting more and more money. And why we call teachers heroes. Because you are heroes for putting up with teenagers all day.

However, age verification destroys the Internet. That’s why parental controls were invented thirty years ago.

If the government really wants to get kids off the Internet, they have to make parental controls mandatory. And if parents refuse to use them, a death squad is sent to their house, and a bullet is put in the back of the head of the parents.

If that happens then social media will cure cancer and solve world hunger and end all wars. We were almost there before smartphones came along and parents started dropping their kids off here expecting us to babysit them for fucking free.

Pregnant people must scare you. As do synthetic bacterial cells, artificially synthesized viruses, cloning, organoids, etc.

I think there’s a misunderstanding. What I’m saying is that just because we can create artificially synthesized viruses and such, that does not mean that creating conscious AI life is the relatively simple next step.

When Giovanni Aldini made a dead guy open his eyes and sit up, people thought that meant that the resurrection of the dead was just around the corner. But it wasn’t and it still ain’t.

Just like there’s a huge gap between making a corpse flop around and resurrection, there is a huge gap between creating viruses and creating conscious AI life. Especially on laptops and smartphones.

Define “god-like” if you do not mean it in a religious manner.

Like I said, Q from Star Trek is god-like. The aliens in Roadside Picnic are god-like. These aren’t religious characters. To the chimpanzees, we’re god-like.

Technically, I doubt homo sapiens will develop conscious life. But it’s maybe possible for which ever branch that evolves from us to do it. Millions of years from now.

Regarding your question: it makes sense to continue research and educate people, yes.

You misunderstood. That’s not my question. What I’m saying is that creating conscious AI life is a massive technological leap, if it’s even possible. It would be beyond bizarre for some dipshit in our current civilization to accidentally create it on their laptop and torture it. My question is: Do you think this is really happening right now?

Are you really requiring that we allow research in one field only after we have advanced research in another entirely different field? That seems arbitrary.

No.

Up until the 80s, there was still some debate over whether wiretaps should be legal. It’s sad that we have come to accept them as normal.

This is just ass coverage for the company. They’re not going to pursue it. They just didn’t want to get sued for not reporting it if she did commit a mass shooting. The prosecution though might.

No. It’s a challenge to all the brainiacs out there hacking high security servers with a freaking TV remote. I hope that they’ll read “Nobody today can develop a search engine that can’t be spammed,” and say to themselves, “I accept that challenge.”

Also, AI has been spamming forever. One of the tricks they did in the 2000s was to spam forums with links to websites so that Google would think those sites were more important than they actually were. In 2009, I hosted a forum that went nowhere, left it unattended for a month and came back to find bots had spammed it into oblivion with links. AI isn’t a new problem.