5 replies to this topic

[Mind]

With advent of ChatGPT-4, a lot of people within and without the AI industry think we are somewhere from a few months to perhaps 5 years from true AGI and perhaps a technological singularity. Will it be dystopia or utopia?

 

I know a lot of people would like to have more options in this poll, but I think it is more informative to force a distinct answer.

 

Basically, if you generally think it will be a good thing for humanity and conscious life in the universe - then vote utopia.

 

If you think the outcome will be negative, whether a slow destruction of the human race or and near instant death by singularity, then vote dystopia.

 

Feel free to explain your vote in the comments.

 

If I had to put down money on the outcome, I would have to lean toward dystopia, even if the odds are only slightly in that direction, like 51% to 49%.

Edited by Mind, 04 April 2023 - 10:20 PM.

[pamojja]

What doea the G mean between the A and I?

[Mind]

Artificial "General" Intelligence.

 

Not narrow AI, like a chess-playing AI, but a more general purpose intelligence that can solve any problem.

[pamojja]

Thanks. I would have guessed Generated..

 

By the way, here's a petition.

 

 

Just a few weeks after Microsoft made a 10 billion dollar investment in ChatGPT, it scrapped its entire “Ethics and Society” team whose job it was to make sure the technology was safe to use.

 

Microsoft hopes that the media buzz around AI will mean that no one will notice their reckless drive for profits – but we will prove them wrong.

 

When thousands of us demanded Microsoft end its dangerous plans for facial recognition technology – it worked. We can do it again.

 

Tell Microsoft to reinstate the “Ethics and Society” team and ensure the technology will not spread harmful disinformation.

 

 

Edited by pamojja, 05 April 2023 - 06:45 PM.

[Galaxyshock]

I try to remain optimistic and lean towards more of an utopian scenario.

 

I think if some level of artificial consciousness is emerged at some point, it would lack the bio-survival "circuits" and thus wouldn't be a threat to humans.

[adamh]

Its obviously a great advancement though it needs careful handling. Humans have a fear of the unknown. A few of us boldly go but most will stay with the tried and true. When the locomotive first appeared, people thought it must be alive, a great huge beast that breathed smoke and fire. There have been lots of stories and even movies about cars or other objects coming to life. They are usually evil and intent on destroying humanity for some reason. This is why some oppose it. It has little to do with losing a job, its fear of the unknown

 

The latest victim of irrational fear is the computer and its latest iteration, ai. We have more or less accepted that cars will not 'come to life' and do bad things, though we may still a little uncertain about that. However, computers are supposed to be able to think which makes it sound like they are alive and have desires and motivations. What if they are evil like the stories say? I think that is the root of resistance to modern developments. We can tell ourselves its just a machine but we still get a little nervous, some of us.

 

In another generation when kids have grown up with ai and used it to cheat in school, they will have no such irrational fears. They will laugh at the old fogies who were scared of everything.