458
AI agents now have their own Reddit-style social network, and it's getting weird fast (arstechnica.com)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
170 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 8 months ago (6 children)

You remind me of Clarke's third law, even in my own head this sounds a bit waffely but at the point one of them can fool all of us all the time how do we distinguish it from intelligence or something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Fake AGI is like fake banknotes. Some of them are really good approximations. Nigh indistinguishable. A lot of people will be fooled by it but eventually it will be discovered to be a fake and people will get hurt in some way or another.

    And it won't be the people who are pushing for "AGI".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    so you're saying that true intelligence comes from institutionalized permission?

    also how does this relate to the concept of dedollarization and the world reverting back to sth like a gold currency system?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Yes. The institution in question is human society. We generally grant the permission to make rational decisions over our lives to other humans who know better that we do or are more skilled than we are.

    Sometimes, yes, those humans turn out to have been deceitful or dishonest, but there are mechanisms in place for when that happens.

    And yes, sometimes those mechanisms are wilfully avoided by the deceitful. Politicians and rich people are especially good at this.

    Guess who's pushing "AI"? The thing that has no contract with human society and cannot be held accountable. And neither will the people pushing it.

    This is why we should have as little to do with it - at least as it is in its current form - as possible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    so you're saying that machines can never be responsible for anything?

    what about an elevator going up/down between building's stories? they navigate automatically (bring you to the correct destination) with no human intervention. they're the perfect example of autonomous machines having agency. of course you have to press the button, but the rest is done by the machine.

    how is that different from a computer system making decisions. i think the only reasonable objection to AI one could have is that it's a stochastic process and has inherently unpredictable outcomes, so we can't rely on it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    In my opinion the difference is that any liability for the errors of the elevator are attributed to humans. AI companies are doing all they can to avoid liability for what the machines they create output.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    they navigate automatically (bring you to the correct destination) with no human intervention. they’re the perfect example of

    I don't know about your elevators, but I still have to press a floor button in mine?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent