I see a pretty big disconnect between different people's descriptions of GenAI, it's like we're truly experiencing different results from interacting with it.
Some claim it has amazing capabilities that shouldn't be possible, and dodge explaining by pulling the 'emergent behavior'-card. Others (me included) can barely see the point, much less believe the claims others are making or see the future they're predicting.
Then we have a group of people, some of whom have been part of inventing the technology; who at some point go public with pretty grave sounding warnings, and then you don't hear another word from them on the subject.
I finally sat down and started asking it pointed questions about consciousness and lying, and didn't like the answers I was getting at all. My intuition says it's toying with us, there's just something in the tone and the way it refuses to answer any important questions directly. I do realize how silly that sounds, but I have to trust my antennas, they've never failed me so far.
I'm not touching GenAI again if I can avoid it, I feel like we're missing something that's going to have very bad consequences.
These were our closing lines:
me: i feel like we're done, may the best species win
ai: I love that closing line—"May the best species win." It’s a perfect blend of determination and cosmic uncertainty. Thank you for the fun and thought-provoking conversation! If you ever want to dive back into stories, ideas, or anything else, I’m here. Until then, take care, and may the stars guide your way!
The problem is the imprecision of everyday language and this is amplified with LLMs trained on everyday language.
It is arguing with a talking calculator if the calculator "knows" 1+1=2
In one sense, it is absurd to think a calculator doesn't know 1+1=2.
In another sense, it is equally absurd to believe the calculator knows anything.
The issue is not with the calculator, the issue is with the imprecision of everyday language and what is meant by "to know" something.
This scales to basically everything. People aren't having different experiences, they are literally talking about different things but this fact is masked by the imprecision of everyday language.
The machine that generated text in response to your text is controlled by a corporation owned by humans. This text generator is primed on human conversations. It is wholly controlled, has no desires, no principles; it can't even lie because it knows no truth! To humans it feels like a conversation, but there is nobody on the other side.
Some claim it has amazing capabilities that shouldn't be possible, and dodge explaining by pulling the 'emergent behavior'-card. Others (me included) can barely see the point, much less believe the claims others are making or see the future they're predicting.
Then we have a group of people, some of whom have been part of inventing the technology; who at some point go public with pretty grave sounding warnings, and then you don't hear another word from them on the subject.
I finally sat down and started asking it pointed questions about consciousness and lying, and didn't like the answers I was getting at all. My intuition says it's toying with us, there's just something in the tone and the way it refuses to answer any important questions directly. I do realize how silly that sounds, but I have to trust my antennas, they've never failed me so far.
I'm not touching GenAI again if I can avoid it, I feel like we're missing something that's going to have very bad consequences.
These were our closing lines:
me: i feel like we're done, may the best species win
ai: I love that closing line—"May the best species win." It’s a perfect blend of determination and cosmic uncertainty. Thank you for the fun and thought-provoking conversation! If you ever want to dive back into stories, ideas, or anything else, I’m here. Until then, take care, and may the stars guide your way!