Liste des Groupes | Revenir à se design |
On 5/17/2024 7:11 PM, Edward Rawde wrote:"Don Y" <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote in message>
news:v28rap$2e811$3@dont-email.me...On 5/17/2024 1:43 PM, Edward Rawde wrote:>Not sure how he managed to say master debaters that many times while>
seemingly keeping a straight face but it reminds me of this:
https://www.learningmethods.com/downloads/pdf/james.alcock--the.belief.engine.pdf
>
One thing which bothers me about AI is that if it's like us but way
more
intelligent than us then...
The 'I' in AI doesn't refer to the same sense of "intelligence" that
you are imagining.
Strange that you could know what I was imagining.
People are invariably mislead by thinking that there is "intelligence"
involved in the technology. If there is intelligence, then there should
be *reason*, right? If there is reason, then I should be able to inquire
as to what, specifically, those reasons were for any "decision"/choice
that is made.
>...
>
Where it will be in 10 years is impossible to predict.
But, as the genie is
out of the bottle, there is nothing to stop others from using/abusing it
in ways that we might not consider palatable! (Do you really think an
adversary will follow YOUR rules for its use -- if they see a way to
achieve gains?)
>
The risk from AI is that it makes decisions without being able to
articulate
a "reason" in a verifiable form.
And, then marches on -- without our...
ever "blessing" it's conclusion(s). There is no understanding; no
REASONING;
it's all just pattern observation/matching.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.