31
What if AI already became sentient and all the data center and oil shit is just it hoarding and fighting for survival? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Machines are capable of what their design parameters allow or can be manipulated by a user to a accomplish. In the trolley problem, any outcome is not the fault of the trolley itself.

Funny as the mosquito example is, they aren't evil. Just as wolves aren't evil for hunting deer. Animals may not possess consciousness as you or I, they are alive and are driven by biological necessity. Machines on the other hand, aren't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The word "fault" means "flaw" or "problem". I'd say it's the trolley's fault it runs the people over. The instigating problem to the whole situation is that the trolley's brakes are broken. That's a fault, a flaw, a problem with the trolley.

    Likewise, the LLM technology has serious intrinsic flaws that cause it to abuse vulnerable people. It's part of the machine's fundamental design. LLMs are faulty, and it's their fault. I call them evil because there is no way to deploy them without these problems, regardless of the user's intentions. Anthropic think they can control this basilisk. I think Claude is as rotten as the rest of them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The word 'fault' is commonly used interchangeably with 'responsible'. Following your described definition, I agree that LLM's are faulty, and they can be at 'fault'.

    I invoked the ethical dilemma as it's almost universally understood that it's a scenario forcing an individual to make a decision. I've never before heard someone blame the trolley. The brakes are broken? Come now, if we're going to be so semantic about it, a human should have regularly inspected the brakes and subsequently had them repaired.

    I appreciate your explanation of your viewpoint. Cheers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I use "fault" and the idea of blame to go "what can we change to prevent the bad thing from happening again?"

    Since we can prevent the bad thing by banning LLMs, and there are no significant downsides to doing so, I blame the LLMs. They're evil.

    Bonus: banning LLMs hurts Sam Altman

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I see what you're getting at, but we have differing views as to what constitutes 'evil'. Cyanide isn't evil because it can kill a person, just as an oven isn't evil when it burns the roast dinner.

    Without possession of a level of consciousness akin to ours, good and evil aren't really possible. An inanimate object can't make a decision to produce a negative outcome - nor a positive one for that matter. They can only be used by us to bring about an outcome. LLM's have been built to be ingratiating and as a result they are addictive to an extent for those that use them.

    ChatGPT's fundamental design was crafted by humans, under instruction by humans, under leadership by Musk and Altman. They carry a good part of the responsibility and blame for that kid's death. The machine was only doing what it was created for - just as the rope was.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •