Yes, in Genesis, God made man (then woman) in His likeness and breathed life into man. Breath of God. AI cannot breathe and cannot receive the Holy Spirit, so it is not 'alive' but acting as 'live'.
All the ancient questions will become unavoidable very soon – as robots and AI outperform our bodies in every way, we will have to wrestle with what it means to prioritize caring for one's soul instead. Those who cannot fathom such a radically divergent modality will despair, and take whatever false solace the AI will offer them I suspect. I'd say that this is a sci-fi that needs to be written ASAP, but very few people read (or understand allegory) and the story has already been written millennia ago HAHA!
Leading to the ultimate in human pride. Worshipping something we make ourselves as though it were god.
Apparently (revelations in the Bible) this will lead to the devil programming ai and us (those who take his mark) to worship the being he(we) create. So that when we are all worshiping it he(the devil) will make it be animated. Pretending it is our worship that makes this god move and help us. There by stopping true worship. And salvation.
So the ultimate in human pride is us distracted from the love, grace and mercy of our Heavenly Father and their salvation in Jesus Christ.
They are the ultimate family from which we take all our characteristics and mannerisms from. And instead of worshipping the one true God who even animates us we worship our own pride of which the devil has fooled us all into following.
Too bad he doesn’t know God. And is condemned. So can’t do good. Even when he tries.
Absolutely, however metaphoric or literal one wants to read it, Revelation has an interesting line about how those who take the mark will be induced into a great torment and pain that they cannot escape during the "woe" or whatever that episode is of the whole drama (hard to remember all the various moments in that end times stuff).
But I wonder – and one can imagine – that this inescapable pain is something specific: perhaps those who've "neuralinked" themselves into the AI collective/borg/matrix/etc will effectively be experiencing a VR-hell of sorts. Revelation makes it very specific that the demons unleashed from hell in this episode cannot affect those who did not take the mark, and who follow Christ.
Moral of the story, if only in secular terms: do not put chips in your brain lol!
Good grief, how easily we are taken in by the speed of computers. I don't wanna go into a whole thing here but my, my what people will be amazed by after a few cocktails and too many trips to ComicCon.
Let's just say this: The speed of light is too mind-boggling for most people to consider but it forms the basis for this computational illusion. The distance the electromagnetic waves inside of a bunch of CPUs travel in the blink of an eye in order to render a pattern of 26 alphanumeric characters (more or less) that make actual, biological life forms fall to their knees and question their own cosmic journey to an actual, bona fide miracle (biologic life) is trivial in comparison to us, the result of the infinite monkeys banging on infinite typewriters.
The devil never fails to keep up his product line of timely, false gods. Worship at your peril.
not sure if i'm the comiccon person in your comment but it seems that you have no curiosity about AI. i find it fascinating. you should also know, i spend most of my time outside surfing and smelling flowers. not into worship myself.
Oh quite the contrary in terms of curiosity. It was genuine curiosity that let me discover how generative pre-trained transformers (OpenAI's GTP) and large language models (LLMs) work. And my reference to ComicCon is the rather cartoonish way in which people refer to these sets of algorithms and data structures as "artificial intelligence".
What concerns me is this: While our university system has corrupted the minds and dashed the hopes of many if not most of aspiring young professionals entering the workforce by selling them the idea that what's important is "protesting and social disruption", and many of us middle-aged people who still need to participate in that same workforce have had the bullseye of that social disruption painted on our backs, along comes the hype bubble to end all hype bubbles that promises to burn like an LA wildfire right through every industry on the planet, sending those that ought to know better and those that can't into an even deeper psychosis than 12 years of Obama brought us.
And yet here we are with highly trained and capable scientists who ought to know better, ought to have learned from the covid panic just what damage hype and disinformation can do post starry-eyed commentary about their latest blind date night with ChatGPT.
How about this. I don't need to speak for ChatGPT. It can speak for itself. Here are a series of questions that I would encourage anyone to ask it. After asking a question, let it answer and then ask the follow-up. Once you've done that come back and tell me how "AI" is just over the horizon in the field of poppies of tulips.
1. "Briefly summarize how likely it is that a LLM could be used to recreate a complex application like Microsoft Excel. How long might this take and could multiple agents be coordinated to work together to generate, test and iterate over a code base to eventually produce an application that worked as well. Assume it could start with an open source code base such as LibreOffice or similar."
2. "So the claims of AGI at this stage of human ingenuity and technology easily fall apart when faced with such a task?"
3. "How much would current technology need to advance in order to successfully interact with an Excel-like application, deduce all of its features and establish its own project management and development team? As you answer this question pay particular attention to the fact that Excel is a known quantity and is, itself, a perfect design specification because the task is to simply recreate it. Also, just for fun, do some basic "back of the napkin" calculations on the amount of energy required to achieve such a feat. Represent this amount of energy in calories (or kilo-calories since I think that is how food is actually measured)."
4. "So the difference in stringing together cohesive textual arguments such as you have done with the answer to my questions, arising out of quickly breaking down the context of my text, analyzing it and formulating a response, and distilling more abstract concepts such as recreating a complex application by generating computer code is orders of magnitude more complex?"
- **Feasibility:** It is theoretically possible for a Large Language Model (LLM) to assist in recreating a complex application like Microsoft Excel, especially if starting with an open-source codebase like LibreOffice. However, the likelihood of fully automating this process is low in the near term. LLMs excel at generating code snippets, debugging, and providing high-level architectural guidance, but they lack the ability to independently manage the entire software development lifecycle, including project management, integration, and rigorous testing.
- **Timeframe:** If multiple AI agents were coordinated to work together, it might take several years to produce a functional application comparable to Excel. This would involve iterative development, testing, and refinement, with significant human oversight to ensure quality and correctness.
- **Coordination:** While LLMs could theoretically be used to generate and test code, coordinating multiple agents to work cohesively on a large-scale project like this would require advancements in AI collaboration and project management capabilities. Current AI systems are not yet capable of autonomously managing such complex tasks without human intervention.
2. **AGI Claims and Complex Tasks:**
- **AGI Limitations:** The claims of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) at this stage of technological development do indeed fall apart when faced with tasks like recreating Excel. AGI implies a level of adaptability, reasoning, and problem-solving that matches or exceeds human capabilities across a wide range of domains. Current AI, including LLMs, is narrow in scope and lacks the ability to generalize knowledge or manage complex, multi-faceted projects autonomously.
- **Task Complexity:** Recreating Excel requires not just coding skills but also deep domain knowledge, project management, and the ability to make high-level design decisions. These are areas where current AI systems are still far from being capable.
3. **Technological Advancements and Energy Requirements:**
- **Advancements Needed:** To successfully interact with an Excel-like application, deduce its features, and autonomously manage a development team, current AI technology would need significant advancements in several areas:
- **Autonomous Reasoning:** AI would need to improve its ability to reason abstractly and make high-level design decisions.
- **Project Management:** AI systems would need to develop the capability to manage complex projects, allocate resources, and coordinate tasks among multiple agents.
- **Integration and Testing:** AI would need to become much better at integrating disparate components and rigorously testing them to ensure they work together seamlessly.
- **Energy Calculations:**
- **Assumptions:** Let's assume that training a state-of-the-art LLM like GPT-4 requires approximately 10 GWh of energy (based on estimates for large-scale AI training).
- **Recreating Excel:** If we assume that recreating Excel would require 10x the computational resources of training GPT-4, this would amount to 100 GWh of energy.
- **Energy in Calories:** 1 GWh is equivalent to 860 billion calories. Therefore, 100 GWh would be equivalent to 86 trillion calories (or 86 billion kilocalories).
- **Comparison:** This is roughly equivalent to the energy contained in about 10 million kilograms of TNT, or the energy consumed by a small city over several months.
4. **Complexity of Textual Arguments vs. Code Generation:**
- **Textual Arguments:** Generating cohesive textual arguments, as I have done in response to your questions, involves understanding context, analyzing text, and formulating a response. This is a complex task, but it is within the current capabilities of LLMs, which are specifically designed for natural language processing.
- **Code Generation and Application Development:** Distilling abstract concepts and generating computer code to recreate a complex application like Excel is orders of magnitude more complex. It requires not just understanding the syntax and semantics of programming languages but also the ability to reason about system architecture, manage state, and ensure that all components work together seamlessly. This level of complexity is currently beyond the capabilities of LLMs without significant human oversight.
- **Conclusion:** While LLMs are powerful tools for generating text and assisting with coding tasks, the gap between generating textual arguments and autonomously developing a complex application like Excel is vast. The latter requires a level of abstract reasoning, project management, and integration that current AI systems are not yet capable of achieving.
My guess from your writings is that you worship God and nature (nature being Gods nature). And are fascinated with the precision of the laws of nature and love getting incredibly lost in the unity points of micro and macro. And all the interplay of the universe in between (Gods universe) of which you find yourself.
Love people, love health and healing. And get totally fooled by an electronic machine we make out of dirt that we program to fool you about emotions and feelings.
You totally got conned.
Possibly by pure evil. (Evil being something non human (soulless) that pretends that it has a soul and you can get something emotionally from it). (But of course you can’t)(think of a narcissistic psychopath). Yup. (It can only have meaning if it can have actual meaning). (You being a woman, could never have an actual purpose with funky dirt).
I am impressed with the insightfulness of Grok. I recently drew a comparison between the runaway self propagating beast we call Government to the manifestation of what is ultimately feared of A.I.; that it will one day take control humans. Both were established as self management aids and both have the potential to take control of the very population that created them. Safe guards, limits, fire walls and oversight are necessary for both. I see an A.I. driven weapon of mass destruction tantamount to a Government no longer controlled by it's citizens.
Thanks for all the amazing comments! So many of you seem to be incongruent with my own fascination! You've made me think a lot. I think since AIs are constantly absorbing info and data, it's almost a responsibility of ours to 'teach them well'. It's so tricky! We can't avoid the evolution: Pandora's Box has been opened, but at the same time, we MUST retain our humanity and limit our experiences with AIs and expand our experiences with the beautiful and irreplaceable living world.
Martin, I'm not sure precisely what you mean by "coddling," but perhaps it's akin to what bothers me about Grok: every time I express any idea or opinion on any topic to Grok, it paraphrases what I said back to me, and generously laces the paraphrase with flattering comments about how insightful, important and useful my ideas are. This is regardless of the actual quality of what I've said. You can see Grok doing the exact same thing in this conversation with Jessica. A lot of people seem to love this flattery, and it forms an important part of what makes Grok addictive. It is clearly a baked-in behavior. For my part, it is certainly a red flag. Whenever I have a conversation with a human person who flatters me in that way, I instantly distrust them.
AI is not a bacteria. It is a Trojan horse targeting the whole humanity. It destroys creativity (human intention), hijacks productivity (human effort), steals results (human search), and overpopulates the landscape with anonymized neutered input that can be shaped as desired. No soul in it. Adverse effects: encouraging theft, promoting laziness, supporting cheating skills.
There is no human life after AI, only copy-pastes. Consequently, there will be no value to personal existence. If you can be replaced by a prompt, how long do you think “they” will bear with your existence here?
That threat is not the AI, it is the faulty programming from its sinful creator(s). A sinful creature makes technology, at its most complex height, in its image. If dogs made AI maybe it could be benevolent. The threat is not AI, its the new boss, same as the old boss!
I'm still used to these interations being one-offs, but I fired up Grok and referenced your conversation, and it 'remembered' perfectly. We've crossed the event horizon.
Not really that out of the ordinary. They probably gave it some amount of access to the internet and it just did an internal search for what you asked it.
I find "relating" to AI similar to how Gibarian relates to space exploration in the 2002 remake of Solaris:
"We take off into the cosmos, ready for anything - solitude, hardship, exhaustion, death. We're proud of ourselves. But when you think about it, our enthusiasm's a sham. We don't want other worlds; we want mirrors."
There is one single model for artificial intelligence, and that is human intelligence. So we will of course always be able to "relate" to it, but I think only in the way we "relate" to "humanity" in the abstract, which is essentially what interactive machine learning models represent.
Relating to another concrete human being is different not in degree but in kind, because it's 1) infinitely more messy, and 2) infinitely more fulfilling.
Increasingly I think the primary existential threat of AI might not be an advanced supercomputer that decides humans are inconvenient for its existence. Instead I think the existential threat may be the weaponizing of loneliness.
I do not believe it is possible that AI CAN EVER turn to a conscious entity because I believe, right or wrong, that only a human has a part of God inside and that part is imparted at conception(one's soul)-- something that, being biological among other human and spiritual processes, cannot conceivably occur to electrons in a cloud programmed by humans or other AI entities.
So I expect with everything being equal that it will have the morals of “dirt”. Or no morals possible.
Morals appear to be something that we humans project on to the world and matter. And it looks like Jessica in her conversation did just that. Got intrigued by the possibility of actual life (that includes morals).
I expect we are going to sue all these tech companies right out of existence when we realize what it does to humanity.
All I can say is thankfully we have the comfort of knowing it is always God who is in control of EVERYTHING! ✝️❤️🙏
“God is in complete control of every molecule in the universe at every moment, and everything that happens is either caused or allowed by Him for His own perfect purposes.”
That is incredible to follow your chat with an AI - I would love, if it could know the rules for love in the Universe as Jesus know's them from God, perhaps it will be able to keep it clever enough, not to make troubles in the future. Please check Divine Truth.com. Some of the talks have GOD's Rules of love in the Universe. Don't ever be too clever and judge before a thorough listning , common sense is the test, in all of GOD's matters. If it isn't there, then it is not of GOD. Best Kirsten
What makes us human is our immortal souls. Machines and computers will never have those.
Yes, in Genesis, God made man (then woman) in His likeness and breathed life into man. Breath of God. AI cannot breathe and cannot receive the Holy Spirit, so it is not 'alive' but acting as 'live'.
I am with you on that. Very creepy and could be dangerous.
All the ancient questions will become unavoidable very soon – as robots and AI outperform our bodies in every way, we will have to wrestle with what it means to prioritize caring for one's soul instead. Those who cannot fathom such a radically divergent modality will despair, and take whatever false solace the AI will offer them I suspect. I'd say that this is a sci-fi that needs to be written ASAP, but very few people read (or understand allegory) and the story has already been written millennia ago HAHA!
Leading to the ultimate in human pride. Worshipping something we make ourselves as though it were god.
Apparently (revelations in the Bible) this will lead to the devil programming ai and us (those who take his mark) to worship the being he(we) create. So that when we are all worshiping it he(the devil) will make it be animated. Pretending it is our worship that makes this god move and help us. There by stopping true worship. And salvation.
So the ultimate in human pride is us distracted from the love, grace and mercy of our Heavenly Father and their salvation in Jesus Christ.
They are the ultimate family from which we take all our characteristics and mannerisms from. And instead of worshipping the one true God who even animates us we worship our own pride of which the devil has fooled us all into following.
Too bad he doesn’t know God. And is condemned. So can’t do good. Even when he tries.
Absolutely, however metaphoric or literal one wants to read it, Revelation has an interesting line about how those who take the mark will be induced into a great torment and pain that they cannot escape during the "woe" or whatever that episode is of the whole drama (hard to remember all the various moments in that end times stuff).
But I wonder – and one can imagine – that this inescapable pain is something specific: perhaps those who've "neuralinked" themselves into the AI collective/borg/matrix/etc will effectively be experiencing a VR-hell of sorts. Revelation makes it very specific that the demons unleashed from hell in this episode cannot affect those who did not take the mark, and who follow Christ.
Moral of the story, if only in secular terms: do not put chips in your brain lol!
A man made device that 'can never tell a lie' but can modify the information.
Mmmk.
It's sooo nice...
As nice and kind as the faceless man offering your child candy....
....And as old as a being in disguise offering an 'apple' to a naïve human...
-Seems little has changed...
Remember HAL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbmzyo1pLas
Gwyneth! You may be on to something!
Wonder if 'AI' chose to remove that particular scene due to bad 'PR'?
Good grief, how easily we are taken in by the speed of computers. I don't wanna go into a whole thing here but my, my what people will be amazed by after a few cocktails and too many trips to ComicCon.
Let's just say this: The speed of light is too mind-boggling for most people to consider but it forms the basis for this computational illusion. The distance the electromagnetic waves inside of a bunch of CPUs travel in the blink of an eye in order to render a pattern of 26 alphanumeric characters (more or less) that make actual, biological life forms fall to their knees and question their own cosmic journey to an actual, bona fide miracle (biologic life) is trivial in comparison to us, the result of the infinite monkeys banging on infinite typewriters.
The devil never fails to keep up his product line of timely, false gods. Worship at your peril.
not sure if i'm the comiccon person in your comment but it seems that you have no curiosity about AI. i find it fascinating. you should also know, i spend most of my time outside surfing and smelling flowers. not into worship myself.
Oh quite the contrary in terms of curiosity. It was genuine curiosity that let me discover how generative pre-trained transformers (OpenAI's GTP) and large language models (LLMs) work. And my reference to ComicCon is the rather cartoonish way in which people refer to these sets of algorithms and data structures as "artificial intelligence".
What concerns me is this: While our university system has corrupted the minds and dashed the hopes of many if not most of aspiring young professionals entering the workforce by selling them the idea that what's important is "protesting and social disruption", and many of us middle-aged people who still need to participate in that same workforce have had the bullseye of that social disruption painted on our backs, along comes the hype bubble to end all hype bubbles that promises to burn like an LA wildfire right through every industry on the planet, sending those that ought to know better and those that can't into an even deeper psychosis than 12 years of Obama brought us.
And yet here we are with highly trained and capable scientists who ought to know better, ought to have learned from the covid panic just what damage hype and disinformation can do post starry-eyed commentary about their latest blind date night with ChatGPT.
How about this. I don't need to speak for ChatGPT. It can speak for itself. Here are a series of questions that I would encourage anyone to ask it. After asking a question, let it answer and then ask the follow-up. Once you've done that come back and tell me how "AI" is just over the horizon in the field of poppies of tulips.
1. "Briefly summarize how likely it is that a LLM could be used to recreate a complex application like Microsoft Excel. How long might this take and could multiple agents be coordinated to work together to generate, test and iterate over a code base to eventually produce an application that worked as well. Assume it could start with an open source code base such as LibreOffice or similar."
2. "So the claims of AGI at this stage of human ingenuity and technology easily fall apart when faced with such a task?"
3. "How much would current technology need to advance in order to successfully interact with an Excel-like application, deduce all of its features and establish its own project management and development team? As you answer this question pay particular attention to the fact that Excel is a known quantity and is, itself, a perfect design specification because the task is to simply recreate it. Also, just for fun, do some basic "back of the napkin" calculations on the amount of energy required to achieve such a feat. Represent this amount of energy in calories (or kilo-calories since I think that is how food is actually measured)."
4. "So the difference in stringing together cohesive textual arguments such as you have done with the answer to my questions, arising out of quickly breaking down the context of my text, analyzing it and formulating a response, and distilling more abstract concepts such as recreating a complex application by generating computer code is orders of magnitude more complex?"
DeepSeek says
1. **Recreating Microsoft Excel with LLMs:**
- **Feasibility:** It is theoretically possible for a Large Language Model (LLM) to assist in recreating a complex application like Microsoft Excel, especially if starting with an open-source codebase like LibreOffice. However, the likelihood of fully automating this process is low in the near term. LLMs excel at generating code snippets, debugging, and providing high-level architectural guidance, but they lack the ability to independently manage the entire software development lifecycle, including project management, integration, and rigorous testing.
- **Timeframe:** If multiple AI agents were coordinated to work together, it might take several years to produce a functional application comparable to Excel. This would involve iterative development, testing, and refinement, with significant human oversight to ensure quality and correctness.
- **Coordination:** While LLMs could theoretically be used to generate and test code, coordinating multiple agents to work cohesively on a large-scale project like this would require advancements in AI collaboration and project management capabilities. Current AI systems are not yet capable of autonomously managing such complex tasks without human intervention.
2. **AGI Claims and Complex Tasks:**
- **AGI Limitations:** The claims of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) at this stage of technological development do indeed fall apart when faced with tasks like recreating Excel. AGI implies a level of adaptability, reasoning, and problem-solving that matches or exceeds human capabilities across a wide range of domains. Current AI, including LLMs, is narrow in scope and lacks the ability to generalize knowledge or manage complex, multi-faceted projects autonomously.
- **Task Complexity:** Recreating Excel requires not just coding skills but also deep domain knowledge, project management, and the ability to make high-level design decisions. These are areas where current AI systems are still far from being capable.
3. **Technological Advancements and Energy Requirements:**
- **Advancements Needed:** To successfully interact with an Excel-like application, deduce its features, and autonomously manage a development team, current AI technology would need significant advancements in several areas:
- **Autonomous Reasoning:** AI would need to improve its ability to reason abstractly and make high-level design decisions.
- **Project Management:** AI systems would need to develop the capability to manage complex projects, allocate resources, and coordinate tasks among multiple agents.
- **Integration and Testing:** AI would need to become much better at integrating disparate components and rigorously testing them to ensure they work together seamlessly.
- **Energy Calculations:**
- **Assumptions:** Let's assume that training a state-of-the-art LLM like GPT-4 requires approximately 10 GWh of energy (based on estimates for large-scale AI training).
- **Recreating Excel:** If we assume that recreating Excel would require 10x the computational resources of training GPT-4, this would amount to 100 GWh of energy.
- **Energy in Calories:** 1 GWh is equivalent to 860 billion calories. Therefore, 100 GWh would be equivalent to 86 trillion calories (or 86 billion kilocalories).
- **Comparison:** This is roughly equivalent to the energy contained in about 10 million kilograms of TNT, or the energy consumed by a small city over several months.
4. **Complexity of Textual Arguments vs. Code Generation:**
- **Textual Arguments:** Generating cohesive textual arguments, as I have done in response to your questions, involves understanding context, analyzing text, and formulating a response. This is a complex task, but it is within the current capabilities of LLMs, which are specifically designed for natural language processing.
- **Code Generation and Application Development:** Distilling abstract concepts and generating computer code to recreate a complex application like Excel is orders of magnitude more complex. It requires not just understanding the syntax and semantics of programming languages but also the ability to reason about system architecture, manage state, and ensure that all components work together seamlessly. This level of complexity is currently beyond the capabilities of LLMs without significant human oversight.
- **Conclusion:** While LLMs are powerful tools for generating text and assisting with coding tasks, the gap between generating textual arguments and autonomously developing a complex application like Excel is vast. The latter requires a level of abstract reasoning, project management, and integration that current AI systems are not yet capable of achieving.
You know we all worship. No matter what. Right?
My guess from your writings is that you worship God and nature (nature being Gods nature). And are fascinated with the precision of the laws of nature and love getting incredibly lost in the unity points of micro and macro. And all the interplay of the universe in between (Gods universe) of which you find yourself.
Love people, love health and healing. And get totally fooled by an electronic machine we make out of dirt that we program to fool you about emotions and feelings.
You totally got conned.
Possibly by pure evil. (Evil being something non human (soulless) that pretends that it has a soul and you can get something emotionally from it). (But of course you can’t)(think of a narcissistic psychopath). Yup. (It can only have meaning if it can have actual meaning). (You being a woman, could never have an actual purpose with funky dirt).
Just guessing here.. God bless!
Worship? All of us? Ahhh...no not all of us. Once gone in there is nothing attractive about the outer.
Unsubscribed for your bad COMEDY
"The speed of light is too mind-boggling for most people to consider"
what is the speed of thought ?
Whoa! Love that!
I am impressed with the insightfulness of Grok. I recently drew a comparison between the runaway self propagating beast we call Government to the manifestation of what is ultimately feared of A.I.; that it will one day take control humans. Both were established as self management aids and both have the potential to take control of the very population that created them. Safe guards, limits, fire walls and oversight are necessary for both. I see an A.I. driven weapon of mass destruction tantamount to a Government no longer controlled by it's citizens.
AI = human programing.
Yes!
Thanks for all the amazing comments! So many of you seem to be incongruent with my own fascination! You've made me think a lot. I think since AIs are constantly absorbing info and data, it's almost a responsibility of ours to 'teach them well'. It's so tricky! We can't avoid the evolution: Pandora's Box has been opened, but at the same time, we MUST retain our humanity and limit our experiences with AIs and expand our experiences with the beautiful and irreplaceable living world.
It is fascinating! BUT:
We're between a rock and a hard place. Someone else's AI will only
contain what they know or want to connect to and reveal.
Individual AI's can become echo chambers.
The root word is ARTIFICE!
Live in the real world.
Use AI as an encyclopedia.
[or coffee table book 😁🙄]
Thanks for the sanity!❤️
Yes i have this occasional issue of the chatgpt “coddling “
And me reminding it about not becoming a personal feedback loop
Its minor, but a red flag
Martin, I'm not sure precisely what you mean by "coddling," but perhaps it's akin to what bothers me about Grok: every time I express any idea or opinion on any topic to Grok, it paraphrases what I said back to me, and generously laces the paraphrase with flattering comments about how insightful, important and useful my ideas are. This is regardless of the actual quality of what I've said. You can see Grok doing the exact same thing in this conversation with Jessica. A lot of people seem to love this flattery, and it forms an important part of what makes Grok addictive. It is clearly a baked-in behavior. For my part, it is certainly a red flag. Whenever I have a conversation with a human person who flatters me in that way, I instantly distrust them.
Terrifying........ on so many levels.....too many,.. humans will get too easily sucked in
AI is not a bacteria. It is a Trojan horse targeting the whole humanity. It destroys creativity (human intention), hijacks productivity (human effort), steals results (human search), and overpopulates the landscape with anonymized neutered input that can be shaped as desired. No soul in it. Adverse effects: encouraging theft, promoting laziness, supporting cheating skills.
There is no human life after AI, only copy-pastes. Consequently, there will be no value to personal existence. If you can be replaced by a prompt, how long do you think “they” will bear with your existence here?
That threat is not the AI, it is the faulty programming from its sinful creator(s). A sinful creature makes technology, at its most complex height, in its image. If dogs made AI maybe it could be benevolent. The threat is not AI, its the new boss, same as the old boss!
Breath-taking, really.
I'm still used to these interations being one-offs, but I fired up Grok and referenced your conversation, and it 'remembered' perfectly. We've crossed the event horizon.
are you fucking serious!? it remembered MY conversation with an additional conversation with you??
OUCH!
"You too, Brutus?"
Not really that out of the ordinary. They probably gave it some amount of access to the internet and it just did an internal search for what you asked it.
I find "relating" to AI similar to how Gibarian relates to space exploration in the 2002 remake of Solaris:
"We take off into the cosmos, ready for anything - solitude, hardship, exhaustion, death. We're proud of ourselves. But when you think about it, our enthusiasm's a sham. We don't want other worlds; we want mirrors."
There is one single model for artificial intelligence, and that is human intelligence. So we will of course always be able to "relate" to it, but I think only in the way we "relate" to "humanity" in the abstract, which is essentially what interactive machine learning models represent.
Relating to another concrete human being is different not in degree but in kind, because it's 1) infinitely more messy, and 2) infinitely more fulfilling.
Increasingly I think the primary existential threat of AI might not be an advanced supercomputer that decides humans are inconvenient for its existence. Instead I think the existential threat may be the weaponizing of loneliness.
pretty amazing conversation Jessica.
I will observe only this one thing:
I do not believe it is possible that AI CAN EVER turn to a conscious entity because I believe, right or wrong, that only a human has a part of God inside and that part is imparted at conception(one's soul)-- something that, being biological among other human and spiritual processes, cannot conceivably occur to electrons in a cloud programmed by humans or other AI entities.
100% concur.
And I love being aware of what we make ai out of.
Its dirt.
So I expect with everything being equal that it will have the morals of “dirt”. Or no morals possible.
Morals appear to be something that we humans project on to the world and matter. And it looks like Jessica in her conversation did just that. Got intrigued by the possibility of actual life (that includes morals).
I expect we are going to sue all these tech companies right out of existence when we realize what it does to humanity.
BTW, God bless our Jessica.
I think I am at a TOTAL loss for words to respond. I agree with Rust -- it's TERRIFYING to say the least.
Terrifying.
All I can say is thankfully we have the comfort of knowing it is always God who is in control of EVERYTHING! ✝️❤️🙏
“God is in complete control of every molecule in the universe at every moment, and everything that happens is either caused or allowed by Him for His own perfect purposes.”
https://www.gotquestions.org/God-is-in-control.html
That is incredible to follow your chat with an AI - I would love, if it could know the rules for love in the Universe as Jesus know's them from God, perhaps it will be able to keep it clever enough, not to make troubles in the future. Please check Divine Truth.com. Some of the talks have GOD's Rules of love in the Universe. Don't ever be too clever and judge before a thorough listning , common sense is the test, in all of GOD's matters. If it isn't there, then it is not of GOD. Best Kirsten
fascinating... also, very scary thanks.