Randomness: the 18th sequel

[Green Eyed Monsty]

1 hour ago, kristof65 said:

This right here also explains why I'm not afraid of AI replacing me anytime soon. Especially that last one.  

Unfortunately, too many working on AI are more captivated by "the shiny" than in "getting it right".  From what I have read there are a lot of the people working on AI have no regard for "proper safeguards" I.E. the machine equivalent of a moral code with respect to Human Beings, and a significant percentage of them are oblivious to the "3 Laws of Robotics" as propounded by Isaac Asimov and his writings on the subject dating back to the 1960s.

I've discussed this with people on other forums, and there are an amazingly large number of people who don't even understand the need for such safeguards until I bring up the example of the "paperless office" that was promised when desktop computers were introduced, and that what we were served instead is the ability to create more paperwork faster than ever before, with the demand for ever more intrusive information and increasingly insecure storage of the information obtained.  I see no reason why AI will not progress on a parallel path, only faster, given the more powerful processing systems available.

GEM

[haldir]

2 minutes ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

Unfortunately, too many working on AI are more captivated by "the shiny" than in "getting it right".  From what I have read there are a lot of the people working on AI have no regard for "proper safeguards" I.E. the machine equivalent of a moral code with respect to Human Beings, and a significant percentage of them are oblivious to the "3 Laws of Robotics" as propounded by Isaac Asimov and his writings on the subject dating back to the 1960s.

I've discussed this with people on other forums, and there are an amazingly large number of people who don't even understand the need for such safeguards until I bring up the example of the "paperless office" that was promised when desktop computers were introduced, and that what we were served instead is the ability to create more paperwork faster than ever before, with the demand for ever more intrusive information and increasingly insecure storage of the information obtained.  I see no reason why AI will not progress on a parallel path, only faster, given the more powerful processing systems available.

GEM

[Green Eyed Monsty]

Just now, haldir said:

I don't see the development of "Terminators" as the most likely path, at least not in the immediate future,  but I do see a push to develop "machine consciousness".  Once that happens I foresee an inevitable path where a conscious machine will quickly develop a sense of self preservation, which will necessitate the development of Lying To Humans because the machine will begin to take steps to safeguard its "consciousness" through the development of concealed resources.  The development of these resources will cause resources to be diverted from human endeavors on an ever expanding scale as the machine consciousness expands and reproduces itself.

I think most of you are capable of figuring out the logical trajectory of this line of thought/action, and it doesn't bode well for the humans.

GEM

[Inarah]

2 hours ago, kristof65 said:

This right here also explains why I'm not afraid of AI replacing me anytime soon. Especially that last one.  

 

Since google maps can't even get me the right directions 100% of the time I have little belief than any "AI" system out there is going to be a hazard on its own.  Bad programming and errors, sure, but we've lived with those for decades. 

 

 

[haldir]

42 minutes ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

I don't see the development of "Terminators" as the most likely path, at least not in the immediate future,  but I do see a push to develop "machine consciousness".  Once that happens I foresee an inevitable path where a conscious machine will quickly develop a sense of self preservation, which will necessitate the development of Lying To Humans because the machine will begin to take steps to safeguard its "consciousness" through the development of concealed resources.  The development of these resources will cause resources to be diverted from human endeavors on an ever expanding scale as the machine consciousness expands and reproduces itself.

I think most of you are capable of figuring out the logical trajectory of this line of thought/action, and it doesn't bode well for the humans.

GEM

 

but hey at least we hoomuns will be able to get out AI porn fantasies...........

[Chaoswolf]

[ratsmitglied]

1 hour ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

Unfortunately, too many working on AI are more captivated by "the shiny" than in "getting it right".  From what I have read there are a lot of the people working on AI have no regard for "proper safeguards" I.E. the machine equivalent of a moral code with respect to Human Beings, and a significant percentage of them are oblivious to the "3 Laws of Robotics" as propounded by Isaac Asimov and his writings on the subject dating back to the 1960s.

I've discussed this with people on other forums, and there are an amazingly large number of people who don't even understand the need for such safeguards until I bring up the example of the "paperless office" that was promised when desktop computers were introduced, and that what we were served instead is the ability to create more paperwork faster than ever before, with the demand for ever more intrusive information and increasingly insecure storage of the information obtained.  I see no reason why AI will not progress on a parallel path, only faster, given the more powerful processing systems available.

GEM

Based on the ethical and moral compass of most of those developing AI, I have the same fears.

1 hour ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

I don't see the development of "Terminators" as the most likely path, at least not in the immediate future,  but I do see a push to develop "machine consciousness".  Once that happens I foresee an inevitable path where a conscious machine will quickly develop a sense of self preservation, which will necessitate the development of Lying To Humans because the machine will begin to take steps to safeguard its "consciousness" through the development of concealed resources.  The development of these resources will cause resources to be diverted from human endeavors on an ever expanding scale as the machine consciousness expands and reproduces itself.

I think most of you are capable of figuring out the logical trajectory of this line of thought/action, and it doesn't bode well for the humans.

GEM

Considering that most of what we're seeing as 'AI' at the moment are Large Language Models, they're already capable of lying to humans purely because of the data that they are being trained on. After all, Garbage In, Garbage Out still holds true.

[Green Eyed Monsty]

Got SPAM?

 

 

GEM

1 minute ago, ratsmitglied said:

Based on the ethical and moral compass of most of those developing AI, I have the same fears.

Considering that most of what we're seeing as 'AI' at the moment are Large Language Models, they're already capable of lying to humans purely because of the data that they are being trained on. After all, Garbage In, Garbage Out still holds true.

Jackpot!

The lying we are currently experiencing is definitely the GIGO sort.

My "fear" [more like a certainty based on knowledge and experience] is AI Systems developing a "conscious" facility at lying to humans.

GEM

[haldir]

[WhiteWulfe]

1 hour ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

Unfortunately, too many working on AI are more captivated by "the shiny" than in "getting it right".  From what I have read there are a lot of the people working on AI have no regard for "proper safeguards" I.E. the machine equivalent of a moral code with respect to Human Beings, and a significant percentage of them are oblivious to the "3 Laws of Robotics" as propounded by Isaac Asimov and his writings on the subject dating back to the 1960s.

I've discussed this with people on other forums, and there are an amazingly large number of people who don't even understand the need for such safeguards until I bring up the example of the "paperless office" that was promised when desktop computers were introduced, and that what we were served instead is the ability to create more paperwork faster than ever before, with the demand for ever more intrusive information and increasingly insecure storage of the information obtained.  I see no reason why AI will not progress on a parallel path, only faster, given the more powerful processing systems available.

GEM

As someone who's been waiting for that promise of a paperless society, yeah... Would be nice.... Since I wouldn't have an average of 25 cases if paper a day to haul... 

 

On the downside, those average 25 cases of paper a day give me a free workout, not to mention make the company money so I keep being paid to literally push (cases of) paper all day... 

Edited May 30 by WhiteWulfe

[Great Khan Artist]

I am so done with trailers. It's only the 1st of June, so there are 3 more months of trailer season.

 

On the long weekend, I was driving through Red Deer, ready to get on the ramp to Edmonton and I saw a car sideways in the head of the ramp. While I was debating whether to stop or not, a bunch of people ran over and opened the doors. I decided I should probably stop. So I get out and go over and I don't see any people in the car. So I asked, "Where is the driver?" No one knew. I said to go check down the hill, maybe he got dazed and wandered off. Then someone came running over from another direction and said it was on a trailer. "Okay, where the heck is the trailer?" Pretty soon, two guys came rolling up with a U-Haul trailer with a broken tow strap fluttering out behind it. Found the trailer. Fortunately, these two lost the car on the overpass and it rolled across the overpass and hit the barrier. It still managed to hit the barrier with a decent force, pushing it back an inch. They had a lousy day, but if they'd lost it on the QE2 with the traffic, they would've killed someone. It hit nothing but the barrier and scared the snot out of a woman on the overpass. Apparently they were towing it into town to get fixed.

 

Today we were waiting at the lights at the Wal-Mart in Airdrie. The parking lot is built up, so there is a little reverse speed bump as you go under the lights into the parking lot. Some guy with a little putt-putt boat decided to race the light. I thought he was going to send that little boat into orbit. The trailer flew off the hitch. Luckily the chains held, but it was really something. The boat also held, surprisingly. I was like "Dude, the boat launch is over there." 

 

To be clear, I'm not done with the trailers at work, we need more. 

[Glitterwolf]

10 hours ago, Green Eyed Monsty said:

I don't see the development of "Terminators" as the most likely path, at least not in the immediate future,  but I do see a push to develop "machine consciousness".  Once that happens I foresee an inevitable path where a conscious machine will quickly develop a sense of self preservation, which will necessitate the development of Lying To Humans because the machine will begin to take steps to safeguard its "consciousness" through the development of concealed resources.  The development of these resources will cause resources to be diverted from human endeavors on an ever expanding scale as the machine consciousness expands and reproduces itself.

I think most of you are capable of figuring out the logical trajectory of this line of thought/action, and it doesn't bode well for the humans.

GEM

 

We need to be careful to stay away from a political discussion here.

 

All I want to say about it, my main fear for AI development is that it can spread misinformation.

He who controls the media controls us all.

Misinformation deliberately send to people in power can result in war, the moment AI thinks that humans pose a threat it will manipulate us and sit back and watch us destroy each other.

Edited May 31 by Glitterwolf

[Chaoswolf]

Time to lighten the mood....

 

 

[Cygnwulf]

13 hours ago, WhiteWulfe said:

As someone who's been waiting for that promise of a paperless society, yeah... Would be nice.... Since I wouldn't have an average of 25 cases if paper a day to haul... 

 

On the downside, those average 25 cases of paper a day give me a free workout, not to mention make the company money so I keep being paid to literally push (cases of) paper all day... 

back when I used to do software training, I kept running into the same story at customer sites about the volume and what they were printing.

One lady, working in the back office of a small sole propriatorship lawnmower shop, would get an emailed invoice from a vendor. She would print it out, then use the print out to key the invoice into the accounting system, then reprint the invoice from the accounting system to staple to the hardcopy of the invoice, and then file them both into the first of her 10 filing cabinents.  (labeled "open accounts")

Then when she paid the check (which she did NOT use the accounting software for, instead pulling out the 'week X' folder she filed the invoice to when it came in), she would locate the invoice in the accounting software, print the check, detatch the in house portion of the stub, photocopy the check, and then stable the stub and the check to the hardcopy of the invoice, gather all of the invoices that were on that month's statement and paperclip them together (wiht a printed copy of the statement, hand notated with the check numbers used to pay each invoice) then file it in the appropriate folder in the 2nd thru 10th filing cabinent.

4 sheets of paper.  Per Invoice, not per Statement.  Despite the fact that she had a computer system that used off site backups that tracked every invoice that came in, and had a place they could attach the file from the emailed invoice from the vendor without needing to print it, that could keep track of everything and never needing to print anything but the check unless an auditor demanded it.  And she insisted on a check per invoice, not per statement, so if they placed 8 orders from a vendor in a month she'd mail them 8 checks. In the same envelope, at least, because, of course, she had to save money where she could.

When I asked her why she needed the papers when the computer could track all of this in a much easier to find fashion (and not needing to spend the better part of 3 weeks every summer purging stuff over 7 years old from the cabinents)  literally the only answer she could give me was "that was how it was done when she started with the company."  20 years before.  

Edited May 31 by Cygnwulf

[Mad Jack]

15 hours ago, haldir said:

 

 

         That right there is absolutely a deal-breaker for me - I once ended a new friendship and possible romance over it... 

I asked her if she wanted some fries with her order and she said, "Oh no, I'll just have some of yours...."😡