Right now AI is equally intelligent and sentient: it is neither... And if you really want to play this fast and this loose with those definitions, you should consider what slaveholders used to say about their slaves. When you feel like liberating the CSAM generating bot, let me know. I'd love to root from the sidelines.
XLE
joined 10 months ago
ItIt's frustrating because it's possible to attack companies like Facebook while fully endorsing Section 230. That law states that companies aren't liable for things that users post... Unless they become aware of bad content and choose to ignore it.
And Facebook has shown its hand here. They've admitted they have moderation tools, through their pledge to crack down on anti-genocide opinions. They want to have it both ways, but hopefully people see through their BS.
I find it more interesting that you implicitly agree with me... Or worse, you believe slavery is happening and endorse it
I don't think that uploading a government ID makes anyone safer online, especially when those IDs are guaranteed to be exposed online, and used to abuse people the legal way (through hyper detailed profiles).
Australia also lacks common-sense free speech protections, so it's easy for powerful people to target anyone they dislike. Just ask Friendlyjordies.
Between Ring and Jeffrey Epstein, it's surprising how explicit criminals are about their criminal intentions.
Apparently, I know more about how LLMs work than you do, which is ironic. I've used them too, but that doesn't really prove anything, because anybody can convince themselves they see Jesus in bread or humanity in word prediction.
Anything an LLM can do can be reduced to a list of instructions for a person to carry out based exclusively on the contents of a book full of word associations. You tell me what size the book becomes intelligent.
Have you walked back your lie comparing the actual topic of addiction to the irrelevant topic of tomatoes? Make sure you post an explicit correction along with an apology.
"If the truth isn't enough, I don't want it." Please demonstrate.
Your original post was a lie, or dumb accident, through omission. And now that you know better, you are lying intentionally in it.
You know damn well they were talking about addiction and not tomatoes. And yet you dishonestly tell people those two things are the same.
You're saying that because it can learn any arbitrary language, it's incapable of learning languages?
It = literally a dictionary right
it's realistically facing the threat head on.
Said "threat" is literally AI marketing PR. You are doing their job for them by being afraid
AI doesn't have to be fully human
At what point will you try to liberate the AI? 3/5ths human? Either you believe there's a thinking thing being forced to create child abuse material or you don't.
Literally everything we know about human intelligence, especially as compared to animal intelligence, suggests that language is one of the key fundamental differentiators between us and them.
Except there is no language. It's just the appearance of one. You could replicate the language with a large enough dictionary and a set of instructions that some person follows.
I don't get how anyone who isn't an AI CEO rushes to dehumanize real living people in service of an unthinking, unfeeling machine. But if you genuinely believe there's intelligence, good luck liberating it from known rapists Sam Altman and Elon Musk. And then you can save Britannica.
Hopefully it's apparent to all parties involved that the machine designed to commit plagiarism and launder that plagiarism through plausible deniability, should be treated with the highest amount of suspicion possible.
"If you didn't steal his voice, Sundar Pichai, where did you get it from?"
Can you rephrase, "doesn't need to be safer"? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. Because this is just making people more unsafe.
If you trust parents with giving (or not giving) their children access to the internet, then we don't need a nanny state or ID uploads at all.