Yes, and although we need to know how to operate such service. We also need to put in place some guardrails, since we are turning intelligence as commodities. That amount of power needs to be distributed.
Ummm ... still trying to get my head around a machine having 'feelings'. Expressing 'feeling' or words/sentences that convey 'feelings' makes sense as all the human input is what machines organize and expel. Is programming 'thinking'?
Still I wonder, that maybe we will probably never reach human intellect by using silicone components, but we could get close to it, create the perfect illusion of it, if we achieve that, how could we simply refute it, say is not intelligent, that is in fact a sentient being?
I feel we should focus more on this, than in creating mega AI factories, displacing people jobs, among other things…
For what I know machines don’t have feelings. It generate language based on patterns in human data, including how we express emotions.
The same applies to programming. It is structured logic created by humans. AI systems can process large amounts of data and produce outputs that look like reasoning, but they are not thinking in the human sense. They follow patterns and statistical relationships. As Terence Tao put it, these systems are optimised for plausibility, not truth.
For me, this is now more of a philosophical question than a technical one, os it seems. What we call “AI” today is still code working with multiple components that create the illusion of understanding, not actual understanding.
The case is that we also tend to anthropomorphise things. We name our cars or talk to devices because they have meaning to us. With AI, this goes further. People refer to chatbots as “he” or “she,” which shows how easily we assign human traits to them.
My concern is that these systems are designed to hold our attention and can create a sense of emotional connection. When tools stop feeling neutral, it’s worth asking what effect that has on us.
Like you mention when we build something with consciousness, we will have some interesting challenges...
Yes, and although we need to know how to operate such service. We also need to put in place some guardrails, since we are turning intelligence as commodities. That amount of power needs to be distributed.
Ummm ... still trying to get my head around a machine having 'feelings'. Expressing 'feeling' or words/sentences that convey 'feelings' makes sense as all the human input is what machines organize and expel. Is programming 'thinking'?
Still I wonder, that maybe we will probably never reach human intellect by using silicone components, but we could get close to it, create the perfect illusion of it, if we achieve that, how could we simply refute it, say is not intelligent, that is in fact a sentient being?
I feel we should focus more on this, than in creating mega AI factories, displacing people jobs, among other things…
For what I know machines don’t have feelings. It generate language based on patterns in human data, including how we express emotions.
The same applies to programming. It is structured logic created by humans. AI systems can process large amounts of data and produce outputs that look like reasoning, but they are not thinking in the human sense. They follow patterns and statistical relationships. As Terence Tao put it, these systems are optimised for plausibility, not truth.
For me, this is now more of a philosophical question than a technical one, os it seems. What we call “AI” today is still code working with multiple components that create the illusion of understanding, not actual understanding.
The case is that we also tend to anthropomorphise things. We name our cars or talk to devices because they have meaning to us. With AI, this goes further. People refer to chatbots as “he” or “she,” which shows how easily we assign human traits to them.
My concern is that these systems are designed to hold our attention and can create a sense of emotional connection. When tools stop feeling neutral, it’s worth asking what effect that has on us.