Generative AI and area 51

keepit wrote:
Too much Isaac Asimov as a 20 something (not terminator). So now i liken area 51 research to generative ai research. I don't know what is going on in area 51 any more than i know what's going on in generative ai research facilities. Neither do any of the posters here. I do have a feel for the general principles of gen ai though. I think gen ai has the capacity for accumulating a huge amount of information. It doesn't make moral judgement as to what it sees, so every thing is on even ground and that might make some people uncomfortable. I certainly makes me uncomfortable.
So, with all that info agi then connects the MANY dots and comes up with many conclusions. It's kind of like evolution theory - whatever works, perpetuates. And that doesn't necessarily need to be a conscious decision. But decisions will be made, just the roulette wheel makes decisions as to what number comes up. Personally, i like to have hand in decisions though.

keepit wrote: I don't know what is going on in area 51 any more than i know what's going on in generative ai research facilities.

keepit wrote: Neither do any of the posters here.

keepit wrote: I do have a feel for the general principles of gen ai though.

keepit wrote: I think gen ai has the capacity for accumulating a huge amount of information.

keepit wrote: It doesn't make moral judgement as to what it sees,

ChatGPT's view: It is crucial to stand against racism, hate, and discrimination in all their forms and to promote a society that values diversity, inclusivity, and mutual respect.

IBDaMann asked ChatGPT:What acts of racism or violence have the KKK committed within the last twenty years?

ChatGPT responded: The KKK has had a significant decline in membership and influence over the past several decades, and their activities have become much less prevalent.

However, it is important to note that some incidents attributed to individuals or small groups claiming affiliation with the KKK have occurred in recent years. While these incidents are not representative of the entire organization, they demonstrate the persistence of racial prejudice and extremist ideologies within society.

Here are a few notable incidents involving individuals or groups claiming association with the KKK within the last twenty years:

In 2005, two members of the KKK in Kentucky were found guilty of plotting to bomb a local NAACP office and murder an African American individual. They were convicted on charges of conspiring to violate civil rights and possessing illegal weapons.

In 2012, a KKK member in Missouri shot and killed three people at a Jewish Community Center and a retirement community. Although this individual acted alone, his ties to white supremacist organizations, including the KKK, were discovered.

In 2015, a KKK group organized a rally in South Carolina, protesting the removal of the Confederate flag from the statehouse grounds after the Charleston church shooting, where a white supremacist killed nine African American churchgoers.

In 2017, the Charlottesville rally took place, organized by various white supremacist groups, including some individuals associated with the KKK. The rally led to violent clashes between white nationalists and counter-protesters, resulting in the death of a young woman and injuries to many others.

It is important to emphasize that these incidents represent isolated actions carried out by individuals or small factions claiming affiliation with the KKK. The broader public and legal system widely condemn and reject these acts of racism and violence.

keepit wrote: I certainly makes me uncomfortable.

keepit wrote: So, with all that [data], agi then connects the MANY dots and comes up with many conclusions.

keepit wrote: It's kind of like evolution theory

keepit wrote: But decisions will be made,

keepit wrote:
ibd,

You're way too argumentative....i think free will is really free won't

keepit wrote:ibd,I don't know whether or not generative ai will be sentient.

keepit wrote: I'm not even sure if that is relevant.

keepit wrote: You're way too argumentative.

keepit wrote:Mankind can't make what God has made,

keepit wrote:By the way, i think free will is really free won't.

IBdaMann wrote:
I will be experimenting with that image generator for new keepit avatars.

keepit wrote:ibd, For starters i didn't claim that software can develop consciousness and then sentience.

keepit wrote:AI hallucinates, lies, makes mistakes, makes up stories, etc. Ask yourself if these are things that humans programmed for them.
Well, i don't think they were programmed to do these things. As a matter of fact ai creators are struggling to understand how these things come about.

It begs the question - can ai do things that weren't programmed for them.

Answer - ai studies all the things that humans do. And humans do all the aforementioned things on a regular basis. I think ai is just doing what we do.

keepit wrote:
Too much Isaac Asimov as a 20 something (not terminator). So now i liken area 51 research to generative ai research. I don't know what is going on in area 51 any more than i know what's going on in generative ai research facilities. Neither do any of the posters here. I do have a feel for the general principles of gen ai though. I think gen ai has the capacity for accumulating a huge amount of information. It doesn't make moral judgement as to what it sees, so every thing is on even ground and that might make some people uncomfortable. I certainly makes me uncomfortable.
So, with all that info agi then connects the MANY dots and comes up with many conclusions. It's kind of like evolution theory - whatever works, perpetuates. And that doesn't necessarily need to be a conscious decision. But decisions will be made, just the roulette wheel makes decisions as to what number comes up. Personally, i like to have hand in decisions though.

keepit wrote:
ibd,
For starters i didn't claim that software can develop consciousness and then sentience.

keepit wrote:
You get so much wrong that it just isn't worth arguing about every thing.
I don't have a clue about sentience and furniture.
You're full of beans.

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
ibd,
For starters i didn't claim that software can develop consciousness and then sentience.

Blatant lie.

keepit wrote:
You get so much wrong that it just isn't worth arguing about every thing.
I don't have a clue about sentience and furniture.
You're full of beans.

Trying to use a semantics fallacy to get out of your lie won't work.

keepit wrote:
itn,
i don't remember saying that. If i did, post it. Otherwise shut up. I did say ai can make choices but so does a bacteria. So what?

keepit wrote:
itn,
i don't remember saying that. If i did, post it. Otherwise shut up. I did say ai can make choices but so does a bacteria. So what?

keepit wrote:
Setting aside the issue of choices, could you explain the difference in programming technique between old style computers and generative ai. I don't have experience with computers other than internet and email and word processing.
For example, what's the difference between "machine learning" and "programming"?

keepit wrote:
Setting aside the issue of choices, could you explain the difference in programming technique between old style computers and generative ai.

keepit wrote:
I don't have experience with computers other than internet and email and word processing.
For example, what's the difference between "machine learning" and "programming"?

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
Setting aside the issue of choices, could you explain the difference in programming technique between old style computers and generative ai.

What do you consider an 'old style computer'? Can you state a model number and manufacturer as an example?

The age of a computer is irrelevant.
AI is not 'generative'. It is a programming technique.

keepit wrote:
I don't have experience with computers other than internet and email and word processing.
For example, what's the difference between "machine learning" and "programming"?

'Machine learning' simply refers to the feedback loop used for a particular AI technique.
For example:
The voice recognition dictionary for the Alexa service is given an initial coding so the system can recognize a limited set of syllables or words. This happens every time the Alexa system is ported to a new language, such as Japanese. This dictionary is built by the programmers themselves. It is a hunk of data, not the program.

As people use the Alexa system in that language and correct Alexa in some way (Alexa will sometimes ask if it understood you correctly...a yes/no question), that dictionary becomes more refined and capable of handling several dialects and accents.

Further, people that write skills for Alexa (which are just programs) include a dictionary of commands and data values used by that skill. These dictionaries wind up getting incorporated into the general dictionary over time, expanding it. This gives the Alexa service the excellent recognition capability that it has.

The program itself hasn't changed. The only thing that has changed is data.

Alexa is not sentient. It cannot do anything that someone has written a program for. Whether you call one of these programs a 'skill' the way AWS does means nothing. It's still just a program.

Alexa skills typically use Lambda functions to run the skill, often in Java, but also in Python3, which is becoming more popular among cloud developers.

'Programming' is writing a series of instructions for a computer. Because computers normally only understand machine language (often represented as hex values), we use 'pidgin english' type languages to describe these instructions. A compiler or interpreter converts these instructions to something executing in machine language.

Programming languages are available in two classes and three constructs. The two classes are procedure oriented and list oriented. Most programming languages are procedure oriented.

The three constructs are compilers (including assemblers), interpreters, and condensers.

A compiler converts the language into it's machine language equivalent, and produces an image that can be directly copied into memory and given control. Examples are assembly language, C, C++, FORTRAN, COBOL, PL/1 or PL/C.

In interpreter runs the program line by line, interpreting the text as it goes, executing machine instruction subroutines to match the text. Examples are BASH, and some forms of BASIC (particularly older versions).

A condenser is a bit of both. A 'compile' is done, but not to machine code. Instead it is to an intermediate language (sort of a generic and condensed representation of the statements). This in turn is handed to an interpreter. This is faster because the line does not have to be interpreted multiple times during execution. Examples of languages like these are Java, Python, Ruby, Perl, Rust, Smalltalk, AWK, etc.

Programming in interpreted or condenser languages takes the form of a 'script' written in the language of choice.
Programming in compiled languages takes the form of a 'source file' containing the text of the program. The compiler produces an 'object file', which, when combined with other object files and libraries, for a completed image of machine instructions, read to copy into memory and hand control to. Combining object files and libraries is said to be 'linking' them.

Compilers are a bit more awkward to code in, but they are the fastest programs since no interpreter is necessary to run the program. Most system kernels and commands are written in C or C++ for this reason.

Programming is only one part of AI. The other part is the data, or 'matrix' containing the 'learned' material coming from the feedback loop.

AI is NOT sentient. It never can be. It's just data, and how the program builds and uses it.
AI programming technique makes use of a feedback loop, which is some criteria for refining the data that the program is using.

Alexa, for example, may respond to you when you talk to it, so it seems sentient, but it will never become sentient.

ChatGPT is no different. It's just a different dictionary, making use of search engines to drive the feedback loop. Think of it as an improved version of the Google indexing service. It's still the same old websites, just presented a different way.

keepit wrote:
itn,
That was quite an explanation and i would guess that a computer specialist could understand it. I'm not one of those however, and i don't know if sentience is an issue here. I don't see it as an issue.
Anyway, i searched your post for the key parts that would explain the difference but i couldn't find any. A computer specialist could probably see key points but i didn't. Could you condense the explanation into the key points in terms that a non professional would be familiar with.

There are a lot of professionals in ai that use the term "generative ai".

keepit wrote:
itn,
That was quite an explanation and i would guess that a computer specialist could understand it. I'm not one of those however, and i don't know if sentience is an issue here. I don't see it as an issue.

keepit wrote:
Anyway, i searched your post for the key parts that would explain the difference but i couldn't find any. A computer specialist could probably see key points but i didn't. Could you condense the explanation into the key points in terms that a non professional would be familiar with.

keepit wrote:
There are a lot of professionals in ai that use the term "generative ai".

keepit wrote:
Swan,
I'm not even close to being a programmer. I always call myself a low tech person.
I used to call myself an amateur scientist but nowadays i'm just falling behind in just about everything.

keepit wrote:
Thanks itn.

keepit wrote:
Swan,
I'm not even close to being a programmer. I always call myself a low tech person.
I used to call myself an amateur scientist but nowadays i'm just falling behind in just about everything.

Swan wrote:

keepit wrote:
Swan,
I'm not even close to being a programmer. I always call myself a low tech person.
I used to call myself an amateur scientist but nowadays i'm just falling behind in just about everything.

Actually, what you are is a very low-grade unaccomplished bullshit artist, who enjoys embarrassing themselves on the internet.

Feel free to continue, as it is amusing in a pathetic sort of way.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

keepit wrote:
Swan,
I'm not even close to being a programmer. I always call myself a low tech person.
I used to call myself an amateur scientist but nowadays i'm just falling behind in just about everything.

Actually, what you are is a very low-grade unaccomplished bullshit artist, who enjoys embarrassing themselves on the internet.

Feel free to continue, as it is amusing in a pathetic sort of way.

And you are the 'expert'-grade?

keepit wrote:
Learning through experience sounds like a different thing that programming.

keepit wrote:
Learning through experience sounds like a different thing that programming.

Swan wrote:

keepit wrote:
Learning through experience sounds like a different thing that programming.

Screwing up your grammar on purpose does not help Sherlock

keepit wrote:
I still don't understand the difference between run of the mill AI and generative AI.

keepit wrote:
Probably the reason is that i don't have any background in computers.

keepit wrote:
However, the terms programming and learning from experience regarding generative ai sound like two different methods of machine learning.

keepit wrote:
The experts are certainly sounding off on the subject.

keepit wrote:
Pronouncements of "just different terminology" and motivations of financial gain. and "there is no free will" don't cut it as an explanation for the different terminology.

keepit wrote:
Blaming hunter biden won't cut it either. I already know he uses drugs.

keepit wrote:
itn,
I appreciate your attempts to explain the differences.
However, a fixation on sentience and free will isn't the answer.
Also, i don't claim to speak for others. I do quote sometimes but that isn't the same as me trying to speak for others. I just don't speak for others.
Get over it.
Claiming there isn't a difference between programming and learning from experience really only says that you don't understand the difference.

keepit wrote:
itn,
I appreciate your attempts to explain the differences.
However, a fixation on sentience and free will isn't the answer.

keepit wrote:
Also, i don't claim to speak for others.

keepit wrote:
I do quote sometimes but that isn't the same as me trying to speak for others. I just don't speak for others.

keepit wrote:
Get over it.
Claiming there isn't a difference between programming and learning from experience really only says that you don't understand the difference.

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
itn,
I appreciate your attempts to explain the differences.
However, a fixation on sentience and free will isn't the answer.

Fixation on sentience is YOURS.

keepit wrote:
Also, i don't claim to speak for others.

Blatant lie.

keepit wrote:
I do quote sometimes but that isn't the same as me trying to speak for others. I just don't speak for others.

You are not quoting. You are attempting to speak for others. That's a fallacy, dude.

keepit wrote:
Get over it.
Claiming there isn't a difference between programming and learning from experience really only says that you don't understand the difference.

Word stuffing. I never made any such statement.