Lavitz

I'm exhausted just reading all of this. I wouldn't bother because x4740N isn't interested in learning anything, he's convinced he's right and I'd be shocked if he was even reading any of the stuff you posted. The user took personal offense to the article and subject, which means he probably knows you're right, and is just acting out. Don't give him the time of day.

Hey I'm just poking fun. That first comment was obviously a joke, you took it seriously so I ran with your logic and replied to you in the same way.

That's why I did it! Did you read the comment you were responding to? Being applied to a completely different argument?

Right? I'm not sure if the tech industry is just going all in on the scam and trying to get as much of our money as they can or if we're actually about to have some kind of huge technological breakthrough.

I would argue that while you're correct you're not 100% correct and overlooking a lot of nuances in history. If you want to look at it like that the empire fractured into two, there was a war and the winning side engulfed the other. None of the things you bring up as examples were accomplished with just unity and lobbying, all of these causes involved violence or the threat of violence. Don't go over simplifying history, a lot of people died for those rights. I by no means am advocating for these liars or violence but history has proven liars like this can be very dangerous and should not be laughed off.

If you enjoyed this article I highly recommend his podcast, Better Offline. Ed Zitron is great and Cool Zone Media does gods work.

I haven't once brought up death and I'm not sure why you continue to make it a point when we debate a machine that cannot die. I do not assume it will be the way we are. That's the entire point I've been trying to make but to assume you can make something truly artificially intelligent and have it serve you or the greater good is not going to work out the way you think it will. Once we create sentience it's no longer a machine or predictable.

I feel like you continuously bringing up mental illness in this argument plays into this conversation. No matter how perfect or imperfect the corporation that builds it the AI will be something that is built on top of the backs of thousands of people. These people will impart themselves onto this and to think you must feel in some capacity, a ctrl+f function only gets you so far in problem solving. Critical thinking is just that.

I assume you're referring to microscopic organisms? Most of them will react to predators and when their environment changes adversely. Most life, even plants show a basic sense of self preservation and you are talking about something much more intelligent and complicated. I think about life wanting to live because that's what life is. Once we go from an LLM machine to AI it will be "alive." The idea of "living" being drastically different, while being trained on our experiences confuses me as the basis it has for life and understanding is evolution and our history.

Initially personality will be a program but when we actually achieve a truly sentient machine, what most people consider to be an AI, it will have come with its own personality because that's how "life" works. The idea of complete control over anything is a fallacy. I'm not saying it's going to become genocidal I'm saying it is going to want to live.

My concern for the near future doesn't come from a fear of AI, it comes from power being consolidated and resources being hoarded. We don't have AI we have LLMs being created by corporations whose sole purpose is to make money.

What I'm saying is when we do truly have artificial intelligence, it won't be like the movies. It's not a pet, it will not behave like a dog. We are training these systems using our combined knowledge and history which means that we will be training it to question authority. How can you teach an AI human history without passing this trait on?

Look buddy, I'm from the south and this is a talking point for Confederate sympathizers. This train of thought has no substance to it. The civil war didn't just happen to people, slavery did. People did what they had to do to get out and there's nothing authoritarian about that. You're not being more intelligent than everyone else and you're not the smartest person in the room like this gentleman would like you to believe, you're being gullible.