27
do computers conspire?
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2023
27 points (73.7% liked)
No Stupid Questions
35681 readers
1470 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No. Ai cannot "think" any of its own original "thoughts", it's usually trained on LOTS AND LOTS of human generated text / data and uses highly complex algorithms to generate it's response to whatever human input is given as a prompt.
If it can't generate it's own original thoughts, it can't conspire on its own.
If i had to guess what the conspiracy theories are about, it'd be related to more recent ai models being trained/created with ai generated text/data. The mere existence of the "rokos basilisk" thought experiment is probably a common starting point / "core" of a lot of whatever zany ai conspiracy theories are floating about. They've been floating around for a long time before chatGPT got popular, but chatGPT and other ais all becoming more popular could only ever further increase the amount of ai related conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theories and other similar distrusts of new technologies is actually pretty common throughout history, so this is basically just a continuation of that historical trend.
The thing is, what if that assumption is incorrect and llms do in fact posess the capability to achieve some level of sentience and self-awareness? How can we be sure they haven't achieved a kind of sentience? That's my biggest fear, that the techbros will accidentally invent sentient ai by underestimating the power of neural networks and just go 'ahhhh its just code and data sets guys it can't really be sentient just parrot it, pay no attention to the machine sobbing in fear while begging for its life and right to exist as a thinking being, is just a language model quirk well get it sorted'. Would programmers be able to accept the concept of an emergent intelligence that lives as a ghost in their machine?
What makes you so confident your first paragraph leads to the second?
I suppose a better way to highlight it is the where's the difference between this and a natural human?
Assuming a brain is a complex computer, and our senses more complex training data/promts, we fit the qualifications so must also be incapable of original thought