Comment on James Cameron on AI: "I warned you guys in 1984 and you didn't listen"

orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• adeoxymus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  That type of reductionism isn’t really helpful. You can describe the human brain to also just be pattern recognition algorithms. But doing that many times, at different levels, apparently gets you functional brains.

  source

  • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    But his statement isn’t reductionism.

    source
• raltoid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The replies annoy me. It’s just the same thing all over again— everything I said seems to have went right over most peoples’ heads.

  Not at all.

  They just don’t like being told they’re wrong and will attack you instead of learning something.

  source
• Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I really think the only thing to be concerned of is human bad actors with AI and not AI. AI alignment will be significantly easier than human alignment as we are for sure not aligned and it is not even our nature to be aligned.

  source

  • PopShark@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’ve had this same thought for decades now ever since I first heard of ai takeover scifi stuff as a kid. Bots just preform set functions. People in control of bots can create mayhem.

    source
• jeffw@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Strong AI vs weak AI.

  We’re a far cry from real AI

  source

  • Homo_Stupidus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Isn’t that also referred to as Virtual Intelligence vs Artificial Intelligence? What we have now I’d just very well trained VI. It’s not AI because it only outputs variations of what’s it been trained using algorithms, right? Actual AI would be capable of generating information entirely distinct from any inputs.

    source
• pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I just listened to 2 different takes on AI by true experts and it’s way more than what you’re saying. If the AI doesn’t have good goals programmed in, we’re fucked.It’s also being controlled by huge corporations that decide what those goals are. Judging from the past, this is not good.

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You seem to have completely missed the point of my post.

    source

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Could you explain to me how?

      source

      • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        explain to me

        It isn’t AI. It’s just a digital parrot. It just paints up text or images based on things it already saw. It has no understanding, knowledge, or context. Therefore it doesn’t matter how much data you feed it, it won’t be able to put together a poem that doesn’t sound hokey, or digital art where characters don’t have seven fingers or three feet. It doesn’t even understand what objects are and therefore how many of them there should be.

        This technology will not be able to guide a robot to “think” and take actions accordingly. It’s just not the right technology— it’s not actually AI.

        source
  • MrMonkey@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    If the AI doesn’t have good goals programmed in, we’re fucked

    When they built a new building at my college they decided to to use “AI” (back when SunOS ruled the world) to determine the most efficient route for the elevator to take.

    The parameter they gave it to measure was “how long does each wait to get to their floor”. So it optimized for that and found it could get it down to 0 by never letting anyone get on, so they never got to their floor, so their wait time was unset (which = 0).

    They tweaked the parameters to ensure everyone got to their floor and as far as I can tell it worked well. I never had to wait much for an elevator.

    source
  • Spaniard@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    An AI can’t be controlled by corporations, an AI will control corporations.

    source
• PotjiePig@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Mate, a bad actor could put today’s LLM, face recognition softwares and functionality into an armed drone, show it a picture of Sara Connor and tell it to go hunting and it would be able to handle the rest. We are just about there. Call it what you want.

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That sure sounds nice in your head.

    source
  • ours@lemmy.film ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    LLM stands for Large Language Model. I don’t see how a model to process text is going to match faces out in the field. And either that drone is flying chest-hight, it better recognize people’s hair patterns (balding Sarah Connors beware or wear hats!).

    source
• Synchrome@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  [deleted]

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Not much, because it turns out there’s more to AI than a hypothetical sum of what we already created.

    source
• stooovie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  True but that doesn’t keep it from screwing a lot of things up.

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’m not saying there’s nothing to be afraid of concerning today’s “AI”, but it’s not comparable to movie/book AI.

    source

    • stooovie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yes, sure

      source
• Einstein@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Sounds like you described a baby.

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah, I think there’s a little bit more to consciousness and learning than that. Today’s AI doesn’t even recognize objects, it just paints patterns.

    source
• terminhell@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  GAI - General Artificial Intelligence is what most people jump too. And, for those wondering, that’s the beginning of the end game type. That’s the kind that will understand context. The ability to ‘think’ on its own with little to no input from humans. What we have now is basically autocorrect on super steroids.

  source
• ButtholeAnnihilator@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Regardless of if its true AI or not (I understand its just machine learning) Cameron’s sentiment is still mostly true. The Terminator in the original film wasn’t some digital being with true intelligence, it was just a machine designed with a single goal. There was no reasoning or planning really, just an algorithm that said "get weapons, kill Sarah Connor. It wasn’t far off from an Boston Dynamics robot using machine learning to complete a task.

  source

  • orphiebaby@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You don’t understand. Our current AI? Doesn’t know the difference between an object and a painting. Furthermore, everything it perceives is “normal and true”. You give it bad data and suddenly it’s broken. And “giving it bad data” is way easier than it sounds. A “functioning” AI (like a Terminator) requires the ability to “understand” and scrutinize, not just copy what others tell it and combine results.

    source