[dataway]

rohrt, AI is software, not a specific computer. It does require an advanced computer, but the computer itself operates on the same principles as a desktop computer.

All AI does it take the same data that used to be parsed by humans and makes PROGRAMMED decisions based on that data rather than humans making those decisions. Because computers parse data very well, they can find trends and details that humans miss. Then it can make decisions within the parameters of it's programing. If it's programmed to give a yes or no answer it can't say "maybe". It can only alter it's own programming within the parameter allowed by it's program. It can modify the algorithms it uses to adapt to the data, or to shape the output data, it can't change the programming parameters under which it operates.

It's nothing more than the logical progression of computer software that requires less and less human intervention to produce usable information.

It's nothing "new" but orders of magnitude more complex. It does fit the original definition of Artificial Intelligence ... which is Fake Intelligence. The appearance of intelligence without intellect, the appearance of reason without reason, the appearance of creativity without free thought. It still cannot do not one thing the software was not written to do.

You ask it about a Pontiac V8 and it parses millions of bits of data and comes to a consensus opinion based on the incidents of various words, source reliability, age, consistency etc. It makes no conjecture, does none of it's own math, does no finite element analysis, no dyno testing ... it does what you and I do, search for information and base an opinion on what we see, except it does it millions of times faster.

[VCho455]

Let's not forget about Super-intelligent AI. Which is the point a computer can outperform the smartest person on the planet. The whole industry of AI is the pathway to Super-intelligent AI technology. This is not 100 years away but 25 to 30 years out by many current estimates.

And the danger from Super intelligent not AI is not from robot masters ruling the world. The danger comes from the reality that the first nation/ company that has Super AI will fundamentally be able to outthink and outmaneuver everyone and everything else on the planet. The have nots will react violently against anyone they believe is close to obtaining Super-intelligent technology.

Ask yourself if a North Korea or another country would be willing to nuke Micosoft or an other country if they were close to creating a Super-Intelligent computer or would they just attempt a commando style raid to steal it? One thing is sure they won’t stand by idly. Would the US do the same if China or Russia was close to obtaining the technology?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence

Have a happy day!

[kingbuzzo]

mental note: drive wheels off of t/a this summer...

[Half-Inch Stud]

So, uhm on the job a decade or so ago, i was "forced" to run my technical decision through a ...Decision Analysis Tool.

Well, the DAT tool completely supported my "design decision". Then a highly compensated BD guy re-did the DAT analysis on my approach, to favor the approach he wanted. Much internal and external comminication occurred (which won't be inter-netted), yet in the end my approach was implemented,and worked well. Later on, the MIL customer sought me at a luncheon to sit down and say to me.

"Keep doing what you are doing".

Use this story model to go figure AI, And the ChatGPT will tell you what either you or someone else wants you to hear.

[dataway]

Not sure what outperforming the smartest person on the planet would entail. Outperform them how? And how is "smart" being defined. There are extremely high IQ people that can't tie their own shoes. There are people that test extremely poorly that can memorize pi to 1000 digits.

Computers are not "intelligent", computers do a LOT of things very FAST. The people that program computers are intelligent.

AI is very good at answering questions. AI is horrible at coming up with new questions. Almost all advances in technology were at their foundation ... a question that no one else thought to ask.

AI is 99% media hype. Happens over and over again with every big advance in machinery or technology all the way back to steam engines.

I'm not saying we will never create a true intelligence that is artificial ... but it's a very long way off, and when it happens, it will either catapulte the human race to unimagined heights of progress ... or it will replace us quite quickly.

Personally I am of the belief that the human race is the only species that ever existed that is working as hard as it can to replace itself with something else. And I believe that someday we will succeed. Our next major evolutionary step ... will be replacing our species with an artificial one ... at which point humanity will have ceased to exist as we know it. But, that is a long, long time from now ... but perhaps within the next 1000 years.

[pont3]

Originally Posted by dataway

Not sure what outperforming the smartest person on the planet would entail. Outperform them how? And how is "smart" being defined. There are extremely high IQ people that can't tie their own shoes. There are people that test extremely poorly that can memorize pi to 1000 digits.

Computers are not "intelligent", computers do a LOT of things very FAST. The people that program computers are intelligent.

AI is very good at answering questions. AI is horrible at coming up with new questions. Almost all advances in technology were at their foundation ... a question that no one else thought to ask.

AI is 99% media hype. Happens over and over again with every big advance in machinery or technology all the way back to steam engines.

I'm not saying we will never create a true intelligence that is artificial ... but it's a very long way off, and when it happens, it will either catapulte the human race to unimagined heights of progress ... or it will replace us quite quickly.

Personally I am of the belief that the human race is the only species that ever existed that is working as hard as it can to replace itself with something else. And I believe that someday we will succeed. Our next major evolutionary step ... will be replacing our species with an artificial one ... at which point humanity will have ceased to exist as we know it. But, that is a long, long time from now ... but perhaps within the next 1000 years.

Everything you just predicted is found in Revelations. No one will know the form or the vessel, but it will come in some form. I believe if we as a society weren't so driven by money we would recognize and fight back against these real world threats as best we can.

One thing I disagree with is that it is a long way off. Personally, I think it's imminent. The government has known about this technology since at least the 1950s. It AIN'T new, just the government finally allowing you to see it, just like the internet.

[misterp266]

Next 1000 years? You really think we won’t kill ourselves off way sooner than that? Humans are the stupidest species on this planet. The only one who kills for no good reason. We’re greedy, selfish, arrogant, fools. Yes, not all of us, but enough to destroy our race.

[pont3]

Originally Posted by misterp266

Next 1000 years? You really think we won’t kill ourselves off way sooner than that? Humans are the stupidest species on this planet. The only one who kills for no good reason. We’re greedy, selfish, arrogant, fools. Yes, not all of us, but enough to destroy our race.

You "GET" it!

[dataway]

Well, if stupid means being the most successful mammalian species on the planet ever .. then I guess we are stupid. We have taken over the entire surface of the earth, we have grown from thousands to billions, our quality of life worldwide continues to improve. Regardless of the "news" every decade fewer people die of starvation, war and disease, you can check the numbers. The story of the human race so far has been an almost non-stop rise in human rights, health and population.

Considering we are still on the upswing, and we've been at it around 100,000 years, I don't think another 1000 is being overly optimistic. Short of an asteroid strike, there is not much that can happen to the human race that will wipe out enough people to prevent complete repopulation within a couple hundred years. If you killed 90% of the population ... that still leaves a measly 800 million people on earth. Took us many thousands of years to reach that milestone the first time, and we'd be starting off from there.

For a species that is stupid, greedy, selfish and arrogant ... we are doing pretty well. You won't find another species on the planet that feeds it's hungry, cares for it's unfortunate, nurtures the weak. Every other species on earth is kill or be killed, survival of the fittest, let the weak die and the strong survive. Nature is infinitely more cruel than the human race. Do you really think it would be wise to emulate those other species that are "smarter" than us? Let the wolves eat the sheep? The Lions kill the lambs? The hungry starve? The sick and weak die? Should we kill another for them invading our territory like almost every other species on earth? Should shove aside the weak so the strong can eat like most every other species on earth? Should we leave the sick weak to die like every other species on earth?

Personally I think we are better than that. But hey, I don't know, maybe we should act like animals.

[VCho455]

Originally Posted by dataway

Not sure what outperforming the smartest person on the planet would entail. Outperform them how? And how is "smart" being defined. There are extremely high IQ people that can't tie their own shoes. There are people that test extremely poorly that can memorize pi to 1000 digits.

.

From the link I posted.

A superintelligence is a hypothetical agent that possesses intelligence far surpassing that of the brightest and most gifted human minds. "Superintelligence" may also refer to a property of problem-solving systems (e.g., superintelligent language translators or engineering assistants) whether or not these high-level intellectual competencies are embodied in agents that act in the world. A superintelligence may or may not be created by an intelligence explosion and associated with a technological singularity.

University of Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom defines superintelligence as "any intellect that greatly exceeds the cognitive performance of humans in virtually all domains of interest".[1] The program Fritz falls short of superintelligence—even though it is much better than humans at chess—because Fritz cannot outperform humans in other tasks.[2] Following Hutter and Legg, Bostrom treats superintelligence as general dominance at goal-oriented behavior, leaving open whether an artificial or human superintelligence would possess capacities such as intentionality (cf. the Chinese room argument) or first-person consciousness (cf. the hard problem of consciousness).

[turbo69bird]

Originally Posted by dataway

Well, if stupid means being the most successful mammalian species on the planet ever .. then I guess we are stupid. We have taken over the entire surface of the earth, we have grown from thousands to billions, our quality of life worldwide continues to improve. Regardless of the "news" every decade fewer people die of starvation, war and disease, you can check the numbers. The story of the human race so far has been an almost non-stop rise in human rights, health and population.

Considering we are still on the upswing, and we've been at it around 100,000 years, I don't think another 1000 is being overly optimistic. Short of an asteroid strike, there is not much that can happen to the human race that will wipe out enough people to prevent complete repopulation within a couple hundred years. If you killed 90% of the population ... that still leaves a measly 800 million people on earth. Took us many thousands of years to reach that milestone the first time, and we'd be starting off from there.

For a species that is stupid, greedy, selfish and arrogant ... we are doing pretty well. You won't find another species on the planet that feeds it's hungry, cares for it's unfortunate, nurtures the weak. Every other species on earth is kill or be killed, survival of the fittest, let the weak die and the strong survive. Nature is infinitely more cruel than the human race. Do you really think it would be wise to emulate those other species that are "smarter" than us? Let the wolves eat the sheep? The Lions kill the lambs? The hungry starve? The sick and weak die? Should we kill another for them invading our territory like almost every other species on earth? Should shove aside the weak so the strong can eat like most every other species on earth? Should we leave the sick weak to die like every other species on earth?

Personally I think we are better than that. But hey, I don't know, maybe we should act like animals.

This IS and great post! So much negative out there but this is the reality.

[turbo69bird]

As far as being advanced? Well we stil heat our water in pots on a fire including hot bathing water. We still wipe stuff o our walls in our caves to make it looks the way we want, we still get into fights with eachother. There have been advancements but we really aren’t THAT advanced .

If you really look at how we go about things it’s really not that different than what we did wayyyyy back when . But spend a little time w nature and you’ll see it’s every bit as brutal as we are…. The difference is most people don’t even know where their food comes from anymore . So they have a warm cozy feeling all the time . Grown adults don’t know where the toilet water flows when it’s flushed.

[pont3]

Originally Posted by turbo69bird

As far as being advanced? Well we stil heat our water in pots on a fire including hot bathing water. We still wipe stuff o our walls in our caves to make it looks the way we want, we still get into fights with eachother. There have been advancements but we really aren’t THAT advanced .

If you really look at how we go about things it’s really not that different than what we did wayyyyy back when . But spend a little time w nature and you’ll see it’s every bit as brutal as we are…. The difference is most people don’t even know where their food comes from anymore . So they have a warm cozy feeling all the time . Grown adults don’t know where the toilet water flows when it’s flushed.

This is what worries me. Grown adults, and you have to consider the changes through the generations what "grown adults" mean, and you should also be concerned, Take a closer look at what the last two generations see as normal, and imagine their offspring. We ARE IN TROUBLE as a country.

[dataway]

Obviously I'm a bit of an optimist .. but yeah, the WESTERN world appears to be headed in a strange direction. Dig deep into social/cultural history and we have gone through some pretty strange phases, but it was mostly confined to the top 1% of society. We are now seeing cultural trends in Europe, the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia that have the potential to be very detrimental to the survival of our particular slice of humanity ... meaning "Western" cultures or other cultures heavily influenced by our culture. Changes that could dramatically affect our ... we'll call it "reproductive health". Trends that used to be confined to the rich and powerful that could basically afford to behave in ways that would be otherwise abhorrent to the general population have now trickled down to the masses due mostly to mass media and the tendency for the masses to emulate the rich and famous.

We once lived in a world where the powers that be understood that their power and wealth depended to a large degree on the number of "subjects" they had, and how productive those subjects were. We appear to be transitioning to a world where the powers that be find us more of an obstacle rather than an asset, more of a threat than a source of security. So they are much less concerned with preventing social trends that are obviously harmful to us as a healthy, reproducing population, and much more concerned with ensuring they have suitable levels of control over us.

Strange times coming up for our children. Western population growth is negative, worldwide population growth rate is declining and expected to peak around 2050 (I think sooner). Negative population growth, mathematically has some very, very bad consequences for the world economy. No we can't grow forever, but population collapse is also extremely traumatic ... the near term future (say next 150 years) will be when the human population reaches the cross-roads, one of several directions we can go, none of them particularly attractive for the less fortunate people of the world.

It's like that old Chinese curse ... "May you live in interesting times."

[pont3]

Originally Posted by dataway

Obviously I'm a bit of an optimist .. but yeah, the WESTERN world appears to be headed in a strange direction. Dig deep into social/cultural history and we have gone through some pretty strange phases, but it was mostly confined to the top 1% of society. We are now seeing cultural trends in Europe, the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia that have the potential to be very detrimental to the survival of our particular slice of humanity ... meaning "Western" cultures or other cultures heavily influenced by our culture. Changes that could dramatically affect our ... we'll call it "reproductive health". Trends that used to be confined to the rich and powerful that could basically afford to behave in ways that would be otherwise abhorrent to the general population have now trickled down to the masses due mostly to mass media and the tendency for the masses to emulate the rich and famous.

We once lived in a world where the powers that be understood that their power and wealth depended to a large degree on the number of "subjects" they had, and how productive those subjects were. We appear to be transitioning to a world where the powers that be find us more of an obstacle rather than an asset, more of a threat than a source of security. So they are much less concerned with preventing social trends that are obviously harmful to us as a healthy, reproducing population, and much more concerned with ensuring they have suitable levels of control over us.

Strange times coming up for our children. Western population growth is negative, worldwide population growth rate is declining and expected to peak around 2050 (I think sooner). Negative population growth, mathematically has some very, very bad consequences for the world economy. No we can't grow forever, but population collapse is also extremely traumatic ... the near term future (say next 150 years) will be when the human population reaches the cross-roads, one of several directions we can go, none of them particularly attractive for the less fortunate people of the world.

It's like that old Chinese curse ... "May you live in interesting times."

I applaud you for this EXCELLENT post! I used to be optimistic as well and what I personally see through my daily routine just amplifies my skepticism. Many aren't even paying attention and will be bombshelled when it hits.

[dataway]

My wife, I love her dearly, but she has some of the worst situational awareness I have ever seen, mostly like due to her privileged upbringing.

I've tried to explain to her the importance of paying attention to what is going on around you, everything. Use your eyes, ears, nose and instincts, at any moment your life can depend on it. NOTICE things, don't just see them or hear them, notice them.

Anyway, much like my wife the population of the world numbed by TV, internet, the constant barrage from the 24 news cycle, no longer has any situational awareness. The internet which has the promise of disseminating valuable information to the world has created such an astronomical volume of information that it can be almost impossible to find the truth. Say two things that are not true and people notice ... say a thousand things that are wrong and people start believing.

We did not evolve to be able to process information and events from around the world. We evolved with the capacity to process what happens in our families and villages because that is what really matters. We now turn away from what happens next door to worry about what happens half a world away, meanwhile that nation half a world away is watching us rather than what is happening in their own nation.

Fundamentally we have been blinded by the same Bread and Circuses the Romans used to distract their citizens from corruption, incompetence and evil. It's taken modern form, but it's function is the same. When people say the world is going to heck I tell them ... look around you, at your neighborhood, your family, your friends .. how does it look to you, can you make it better, can you help? Start there and work outward, don't start half a world away while your own village suffers.

[kingbuzzo]

shatGPT can only help Dataway!

Keep the shiny side up...