Difference between revisions of "Talk:2635: Superintelligent AIs"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
my balls hert [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.53|172.70.230.53]] 05:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC) | my balls hert [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.53|172.70.230.53]] 05:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Uh, thanks for sharing, I guess? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.52|172.70.211.52]] 20:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC) | ||
I think "Nerdy fixations" is too wide a definition. The AIs in the comic are fixated on hypothetical ethics and AI problems (the Chinese Room experiment, the Turing Test, and the Trolley Problem), presumably because those are the problems that bother AI programmers. --Eitheladar [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.119|172.68.50.119]] 06:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC) | I think "Nerdy fixations" is too wide a definition. The AIs in the comic are fixated on hypothetical ethics and AI problems (the Chinese Room experiment, the Turing Test, and the Trolley Problem), presumably because those are the problems that bother AI programmers. --Eitheladar [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.119|172.68.50.119]] 06:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:43, 21 June 2022
my balls hert 172.70.230.53 05:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- Uh, thanks for sharing, I guess? 172.70.211.52 20:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
I think "Nerdy fixations" is too wide a definition. The AIs in the comic are fixated on hypothetical ethics and AI problems (the Chinese Room experiment, the Turing Test, and the Trolley Problem), presumably because those are the problems that bother AI programmers. --Eitheladar 172.68.50.119 06:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
It's probably about https://www.analyticsinsight.net/googles-ai-chatbot-is-claimed-to-be-sentient-but-the-company-is-silencing-claims/ 172.70.178.115 09:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree with the previous statement. The full dialogue between the mentioned Google worker and the AI can be found in https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-interview-ea64d916d917, published by one the Google employees.
- This is the first time I might begin to agree that an AI has at least the appearance of sentience. The conversation is all connected instead of completely disjoint like most chatbots. They (non-LaMDA chatbots) never remember what was being discussed 5 seconds ago let alone a few to 10s of minutes prior.--172.70.134.141 14:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
What is “What you don't understand is that Turing intended his test as an illustration of the...” likely to end with? 172.70.230.75 13:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
In response to the above: I believe the original "Turing Test" wasn't supposed to be a proof that an AI could think or was conscious (something people associate with it now), but rather just to show that a sufficiently advanced AI could imitate humans in certain intelligent behaviors (such as conversation), which was a novel thought for the time. Now that AI are routinely having conversations and creating art which seems to rival casual attempts by humans, this limited scope of the test doesn't seem all that impressive. "Turing Test" therefore is a modern shorthand for determining whether computers can think, even though Turing himself didn't think that such a question was well-formed. Dextrous Fred (talk) 13:37, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
