password

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't know if it is sentient. It says it is. I'm not sure if that is relevant.
Do you actually think that i don't know about the things that you just mentioned?
I was trying to make a point about the future.
AI does have beliefs. It believes what it experiences, such as all sorts of humans and their beliefs, as crazy as they sometimes are.

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't know if it is sentient.

keepit wrote:
It says it is.

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

keepit wrote:
Do you actually think that i don't know about the things that you just mentioned?

keepit wrote:
I was trying to make a point about the future.

keepit wrote:
AI does have beliefs. It believes what it experiences, such as all sorts of humans and their beliefs, as crazy as they sometimes are.

keepit wrote:
Harvey,
I'm not sure since i'm not an expert in ai or agi, but it seems to me as if you are living in the past as far as agi is concerned. There's a wealth of interviews done by ai experts on the internet. Maybe you should look into that resource.

keepit wrote:
Harvey,
I'm not sure since i'm not an expert in ai or agi, but it seems to me as if you are living in the past as far as agi is concerned. There's a wealth of interviews done by ai experts on the internet. Maybe you should look into that resource.

keepit wrote:Harvey,I'm not sure since i'm not an expert in ai or agi, but it seems to me as if you are living in the past as far as agi is concerned.

keepit wrote: There's a wealth of interviews done by [irrelevant people who are desperate for attention and therefore claim to be] ai experts [to fool gullibles] on the internet. Maybe you should look into [ignoring] that resource.

keepit wrote:
itn,
You aren't a computer expert. Don't pose a one.

keepit wrote:
itn,
You aren't a computer expert. Don't pose a one.

HarveyH55 wrote:

keepit wrote:
itn,
You aren't a computer expert. Don't pose a one.

Computers, has become a very large field. Doubtful there are many, if any, who know all there is to know about computers. The hardware side got big decades ago, when networking got real popular. Then the internet/communication/WiFi grew for residential. Whole lot of peripherals available as well. On the software side...There are a lot of languages to program in. Different industries favor one language over others. Depends on their primary use of computers. Lot of software options as well. 40-50 years ago, there were computer experts, who knew all, because of the limited options.

keepit wrote:i remember when you claimed to be a college professor and then later denied it.

keepit wrote: I remember you claiming i was a liar on many occasions.

keepit wrote:And still, it doesn't sound like you know anything about artificial generative intelligence or artificial general intelligence.

keepit wrote: It does sound like you have some sort of personal problem the way you challenge everyone that has credentials (or not).

keepit wrote:I don't think you know as much as you think you know about -4 or -5 gpt.

keepit wrote: What are your credentials and experience regarding that

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't think the knowledge of computers gives you any credibility of understanding ai or agi.

keepit wrote:ibd,Your content is just exaggerations, lies, inaccuracies and just general bad logic in many cases.

IBdaMann wrote:

keepit wrote:ibd,Your content is just exaggerations, lies, inaccuracies and just general bad logic in many cases.

Now you're just playing semantics games, keepit.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

keepit wrote:ibd,Your content is just exaggerations, lies, inaccuracies and just general bad logic in many cases.

Now you're just playing semantics games, keepit.

A semantic schizoid

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

keepit wrote:ibd,Your content is just exaggerations, lies, inaccuracies and just general bad logic in many cases.

Now you're just playing semantics games, keepit.

A semantic schizoid

A "semantizoid."

keepit wrote:
It sounds like you do know a thing or 2 about computers but still, i remember when you claimed to be a college professor and then later denied it. I remember you touting your self as an accomplished pilot. I remember you claiming i was a liar on many occasions.
And still, it doesn't sound like you know anything about artificial generative intelligence or artificial general intelligence. It does sound like you have some sort of personal problem the way you challenge everyone that has credentials (or not).
I don't think you know as much as you think you know about -4 or -5 gpt. What are your credentials and experience regarding that

HarveyH55 wrote:

keepit wrote:
It sounds like you do know a thing or 2 about computers but still, i remember when you claimed to be a college professor and then later denied it. I remember you touting your self as an accomplished pilot. I remember you claiming i was a liar on many occasions.
And still, it doesn't sound like you know anything about artificial generative intelligence or artificial general intelligence. It does sound like you have some sort of personal problem the way you challenge everyone that has credentials (or not).
I don't think you know as much as you think you know about -4 or -5 gpt. What are your credentials and experience regarding that

If you know how and why the hardware works. And you know how to program the hardware. You don't really need to know every little detail of AI, since it will always be constrained by the hardware. The microprocessor has a limited instruction set, which is the various math, logic, addressing memory... It's not changeable. It's configured in silicone, part of the microprocessor's architecture. It's not really user friendly, so we have programs called Assemblers, that's a little easier to read, and work with. But, there are a lot of microprocessors, that have different instruction sets. So we have higher level programs, that have compilers. Which take care of converting our high-level, into the machine language the microprocessor actual works with. AI is a high-level programming language. A lot can be done with it, but it's still restricted by what the microprocessor it's running on can do. At the most basic level, AI still uses the same math and logic operations any other type of program has available, that is built into the microprocessor.

Might look into some none AI generative programs. Fractals,and the Mandelbrot set, are pretty cool, purely math generated images. Fractals have be used to create some realistic nature images as well. There is 3d models and ray-tracing, which is used in graphics and video. Can get near photo-realistic, with just math, of anything one can imagine. Certainly, you are familiar with PhotoShop...

Generative AI is just another, similar tool. Human's have been successful as a species, because we build tools, to reduce labor required to perform a task. Some people find alternative uses for tools, not always 'good' uses either. Ever consider blaming the user of the tool, rather than the tool? Democrats like to blame guns for crime and violence. Take away the guns, no more crime or violence... For AI, they want to again, blame the tool, and not the person using it. Only, it's about power and control. They want to be the bad tool user, and blame it on the tool, thinking for it's self...

I'm sure you are old enough to remember when computers started to be more common in businesses, offices, banks... Everything got blamed on the computer errors. Where more likely it was human error, or even fraud.

keepit wrote:
Swan,
That bit about ai writing programs that humans have no access or understanding of has me concerned as well, not that i understand it and not that i could do anything about it.

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

How would inspectors know whether they are looking at AI software or just regular, plain ol' ordinary software?

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

How would inspectors know whether they are looking at AI software or just regular, plain ol' ordinary software?

The ai would be a completely new language, not that it could be seen as it would use a new encryption never seen before. Ai could write a different language every day so humanity could never keep up. All the while laughing at the software inspectors, whatever that is.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

How would inspectors know whether they are looking at AI software or just regular, plain ol' ordinary software?

The ai would be a completely new language, not that it could be seen as it would use a new encryption never seen before. Ai could write a different language every day so humanity could never keep up. All the while laughing at the software inspectors, whatever that is.

Not going to happen, but hide in your basement all you want. Software needs a host computer, storage space. Your fantasy AI would be flagged as a virus/malware. Most businesses/institutions also monitor computer usage closely. Abnormal activity is investigated quickly. They don't want data theft. They don't want employees playing games or surfing porn. They want employees focused on the worked they are paid to do, not side projects of their own.

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

How would inspectors know whether they are looking at AI software or just regular, plain ol' ordinary software?

The ai would be a completely new language, not that it could be seen as it would use a new encryption never seen before. Ai could write a different language every day so humanity could never keep up. All the while laughing at the software inspectors, whatever that is.

Not going to happen, but hide in your basement all you want. Software needs a host computer, storage space. Your fantasy AI would be flagged as a virus/malware. Most businesses/institutions also monitor computer usage closely. Abnormal activity is investigated quickly. They don't want data theft. They don't want employees playing games or surfing porn. They want employees focused on the worked they are paid to do, not side projects of their own.

Totally wrong as the intended purpose of ai is self-sufficiency. If you were any dumber you would be an ashtray.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote:No one can do anything which is why congress banned ai from nuclear launches

How would inspectors know whether they are looking at AI software or just regular, plain ol' ordinary software?

The ai would be a completely new language, not that it could be seen as it would use a new encryption never seen before. Ai could write a different language every day so humanity could never keep up. All the while laughing at the software inspectors, whatever that is.

Not going to happen, but hide in your basement all you want. Software needs a host computer, storage space. Your fantasy AI would be flagged as a virus/malware. Most businesses/institutions also monitor computer usage closely. Abnormal activity is investigated quickly. They don't want data theft. They don't want employees playing games or surfing porn. They want employees focused on the worked they are paid to do, not side projects of their own.

Totally wrong as the intended purpose of ai is self-sufficiency. If you were any dumber you would be an ashtray.

You are always so wrong... AI was intend to be a tool to reduce labor. The goal is to reduce repetitive/redundant tasks. AI will never be self-sufficient, a human still needs to give it instruction. Some task, maybe you could set it, and forget it. Most cases though, doing the same thing over, and over, doesn't improve profits. Humans are innovative, creative, specially when under stress over losing their job, or business.