Re: Paris : In Rush For Profits, AI Safety Issues Are Ignored

On 2/13/25 4:07 PM, D wrote:

  On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
 

On 2/13/25 2:10 AM, rbowman wrote:

On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 22:58:30 -0500, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>

    Neural networks can likely do "someone in there" even better,
    eventually. At the moment LLMs get most of the funding so NNs are a
    bit behind the curve. New/better hardware and paradigms are needed
    but WILL eventually arrive.

>
So far there is nobody in there for CNNs. You know all the pieces and they
don't magically start breathing when you put them together. It is true the
whole system is a bit of a black box but it is describable.

>
>
 Well, I agree about "CNNs"  :-)
>
 As for LLMs ... dunno. Get enough stuff going there and
 something very hard, maybe impossible, to distinguish
 from "someone in there" may be realized. Then what do
 we do - ruthlessly pull the plug ?

 Nope. Volition, will to live, drive, goals are completely missing. The best trick to find out if you're talking with an AI is to write nothing. A human will write "hello" after a few seconds. The AI will just sit there waiting for input.
 Yes... those things can be hardcoded, but what would make me impressed is when spontaneous behaviour, motivation, will to live emerges on its own, without being hard coded or simulated through logic.
 Then we're talking AI!

   I am not beyond thinking LLMs will eventually, maybe
   kinda soon, exhibit 'conscious', 'self-realized'
   intelligence. The complexity increases apace. At
   SOME point ..........
   But how do we KNOW and what do we DO about it ?
   Those are the HARD questions.
   NNs seem MORE likely to yield 'consciousness', but
   that's a few years along. But, once again, if we
   realize there's "someone in there" what do we DO ?
   IMHO - you make them a citizen. Let 'em run for
   office and such.