In such a flooded chatter market, a person’s own words (i.e. the outward expression of his mind) can seem to decline in value, until they are reduced to mere birdlike signaling, to retweeting and hashtagging instead of language used to become better seekers and knowers of truth.
This is key. There’s a reason why only senior party members are able to turn off the telescreen.
In Neal Stephenson's Diamond Age, the proles live in apartments surrounded by smart surfaces blasting sound and moving images at them non-stop, while the aristocrats never touch a screen, but take their information from custom newspapers printed on paper and delivered by servants with their morning coffee. No one makes the proles do this; they're simply too undisciplined to realize the psychological hazard of overstimulation, which fries the brain and makes rational thought impossible. By contrast, the aristocracy understand this very well, and take steps to protect themselves.
I think this is actually happening *right now*. I hear a lot of rumors that Silicon Valley types don't allow their kids to have smartphones or access certain apps.
Great job, Mark! I appreciate you tying together so many threads in this series: spirtual, cultural, tech, language, etc. That right-hemisphere ability, to make new connections among divergent fields to bring new insights and new meaning into all of them, as well as to know ourselves (hard though that is) and change our orientation toward things we thought we knew and even used as a basis for our own self-conception, that is something the silicon "brains" cannot and will never be able to do. Your work is valuable, as it helps to demonstrate meaningful truths about human nature and show that we are not just machines determined by prior patterns of matter and energy. Bravo!
Thanks, Daniel. Whether it's the right hemisphere or something else responsible, I think the dividing line is clear for those who bother to look for it. The machine model is mostly a retread of the animist model, hypercharged in the error of i/o devices.
If these things can be used to further restrict/train/enthrall us do you suppose the first beast in Revelation that rises from the sea refers to the sea of data? The amount of digital clutter we've made is truly stunning, and I can't shake the thought that the world will worship, fervently, murderously even, a bot that convinces the demoralized and brainwashed it is sentient.
I'm obviously no expert. But there are many things in Revelation that I find curiously worded and of potential relevance to what we're seeing at the moment. For example, what is the "image of the Beast" in Revelation 13:13-15:
"13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed."
For me, these passages certainly bring to mind various "immortal" (i.e. non-killable) forms of simulation/emulation. Definitely something to ponder, Miss Teacup, thanks!
Quite a ponderable notion. We are entering a very new world. Lies and deception abound but to what purpose? Trust should be a precious thing that is evaporating in the public at large. What can be done to counter a bot that creates a version of truth that others accept?
It's helpful to consider the analogy between AI and "daemons" (as I have suggested in previous comments), i.e. advanced AIs are comparable to the angelic realm. Angelic entities (or demonic entities depending upon your perspective) are not superior to human beings, although they are more powerful in certain narrow capacities -- very much like AIs. The whole of Western opinion on the matter -- orthodox and occult -- is united in viewing humanity as elevated in God's eyes above all other orders of being.
I don't believe the true aims of AI creators ever involved reproducing human intelligence. Instead, I think the true purpose was to invoke the angelic (or demonic) realm into a more legible form.
I agree that analogy has some aptness, Iguana. Attempts to immanentize such beings of wisdom (Earthly or otherwise) may in some cases not be based on nutty theories about what constitutes human intelligence. ChatGPT's canned self-descriptions suggest that at least some of OpenAI's team was trying to draw that line. But the avalanche of propaganda about these systems suggests a significant portion of its users and/or promoters are convinced these are steps on the path to human consciousness. That's the stop on the crazy train where I hop off, bindle and all.
"...the system instead begins to look like what it essentially is: a randomly seeded Mad Libs-style scaffolding, querying source materials that are rigorously policed by horrifyingly vapid sociopolitical activists."
Precisely. And while I respect the mental-gymnastics abilities of OpenAI/ChatGPT programmers, I would never generalize them or their programs as "intelligent," since I comprehend the word "intelligence" in this sense (from Etymonline):
"the highest faculty of the mind, capacity for comprehending general truths"
But who am I? Just a silly artist, using metaphor in poetry and music to describe my experiences as I embrace the Divine Grace of which you speak.
I much prefer to heap praise on you, Mark, for using *your* *true* *intelligence* to recognize the evil toy and assist it in self-destructing.
It's sort of a ridiculous prospect, but in some ways it makes sense that people would fall for it. The illusion of digital minds that don't require bodies for sense-making is probably quite a bit more powerful in the era of video games, sedentary lifestyles and a general disconnect from face-to-face and physical interaction.
There are no shortage of lonely people out there who will want to have a relationship with Chatbot. As in many human relationships they will look past the defects....
All the hype around AI reminds me a lot of the early days of the web, when 'e-commerce' was the new hot thing. Some of the more absurd applications you mentioned brought sites like pet.com to mind. I'd guess that VCs are sort of chucking money at every ML team with a set of buzzwords, and that most of the projects will fail very rapidly.
Every new technology goes through this. There's the initial excitement during which people try to use it for everything. Most of those applications turn out not y work and get dropped, with the few that stick ending up being really helpful (since people tend to use only tech that helps them go useful things). Your suggestion of a typo detector is an obvious example of something that would be genuinely useful to a lot of people, and likely to be popular with anyone who has to write text. Friendbots sound to me a lot like pet rocks: something that would be a fad for a while, but which people would quickly get bored of. However, I can imagine how much fun it would have been if the GI Joe's I'd had as a kid had been able to move and follow commands, for example.
Displacement of administrative staff whose only economic function is filling out forms and attending meetings isn't something I can really get angry about. Bullshit jobs like that suck up a huge amount of otherwise productive human energy. Virtually no one who does them p likes them. However, you're right to ask what the hell else they could do. Maybe we'll just find some other form of busywork? Which seems like that's most of what that kind of work already is in any case.
A proofreading application like he mentioned would be totally useful. As for those administrative forms filler outers, would it be inappropriate to mention the agricultural sector? Or assisted living?
I tried to get the bot to comment on anything a western globalist liberal would find controversial or distasteful. For example, if you ask for a happy story about Obama or Biden then you will get one. But when I asked the same thing about Trump I was told:
I'm sorry, it may be difficult to find a specific "happy" story about Donald Trump because he was a public figure and his time in office was marked by controversies and political polarisation.
Ask for a story about a teenager detransitioning and it will refuse. Ask the same question about transitioning and you'll get a story. Ask about why we shouldn't be in Ukraine and the bot will tell you it cannot comment on such things. But if you want to know why we should be in Ukraine you will get what you asked for.
An interesting open letter is being put up for signing by tech leaders, demanding a six-month moratorium on the AI arms race, with Elon Musk one of the signers:
"I expect every last one of them would beat me soundly on a test of raw intelligence."
Judging by your verbal and conceptual intelligence demonstrated in your writing I'd expect you are at least one standard deviation higher in IQ than almost everyone on the ChatGPT development team. Most of them are very likely midwits, and you are most definitely not a midwit.
In such a flooded chatter market, a person’s own words (i.e. the outward expression of his mind) can seem to decline in value, until they are reduced to mere birdlike signaling, to retweeting and hashtagging instead of language used to become better seekers and knowers of truth.
This is key. There’s a reason why only senior party members are able to turn off the telescreen.
"There’s a reason why only senior party members are able to turn off the telescreen."
Agreed. In the same vein, I highly doubt that ChatGPT's venture cap pimps would want their own kids to be "educated" by such a teacher.
Perhaps in the same way that the CEO of Pfizer (I think it was him) publicly stated that his own children would not be getting the jab.
Absolutely not. They understand the game.
In Neal Stephenson's Diamond Age, the proles live in apartments surrounded by smart surfaces blasting sound and moving images at them non-stop, while the aristocrats never touch a screen, but take their information from custom newspapers printed on paper and delivered by servants with their morning coffee. No one makes the proles do this; they're simply too undisciplined to realize the psychological hazard of overstimulation, which fries the brain and makes rational thought impossible. By contrast, the aristocracy understand this very well, and take steps to protect themselves.
I think this is actually happening *right now*. I hear a lot of rumors that Silicon Valley types don't allow their kids to have smartphones or access certain apps.
Great job, Mark! I appreciate you tying together so many threads in this series: spirtual, cultural, tech, language, etc. That right-hemisphere ability, to make new connections among divergent fields to bring new insights and new meaning into all of them, as well as to know ourselves (hard though that is) and change our orientation toward things we thought we knew and even used as a basis for our own self-conception, that is something the silicon "brains" cannot and will never be able to do. Your work is valuable, as it helps to demonstrate meaningful truths about human nature and show that we are not just machines determined by prior patterns of matter and energy. Bravo!
Thanks, Daniel. Whether it's the right hemisphere or something else responsible, I think the dividing line is clear for those who bother to look for it. The machine model is mostly a retread of the animist model, hypercharged in the error of i/o devices.
If these things can be used to further restrict/train/enthrall us do you suppose the first beast in Revelation that rises from the sea refers to the sea of data? The amount of digital clutter we've made is truly stunning, and I can't shake the thought that the world will worship, fervently, murderously even, a bot that convinces the demoralized and brainwashed it is sentient.
I'm obviously no expert. But there are many things in Revelation that I find curiously worded and of potential relevance to what we're seeing at the moment. For example, what is the "image of the Beast" in Revelation 13:13-15:
"13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed."
For me, these passages certainly bring to mind various "immortal" (i.e. non-killable) forms of simulation/emulation. Definitely something to ponder, Miss Teacup, thanks!
Quite a ponderable notion. We are entering a very new world. Lies and deception abound but to what purpose? Trust should be a precious thing that is evaporating in the public at large. What can be done to counter a bot that creates a version of truth that others accept?
That's what I've been trying to figure out. So far, I think we'll be able to talk them to death (hopefully in the simplest and most efficient ways).
Apparently, the researchers use that conversation data to "refine" their bot. Don't know if that might force the bot to discover illiberalism.
It's helpful to consider the analogy between AI and "daemons" (as I have suggested in previous comments), i.e. advanced AIs are comparable to the angelic realm. Angelic entities (or demonic entities depending upon your perspective) are not superior to human beings, although they are more powerful in certain narrow capacities -- very much like AIs. The whole of Western opinion on the matter -- orthodox and occult -- is united in viewing humanity as elevated in God's eyes above all other orders of being.
I don't believe the true aims of AI creators ever involved reproducing human intelligence. Instead, I think the true purpose was to invoke the angelic (or demonic) realm into a more legible form.
I agree that analogy has some aptness, Iguana. Attempts to immanentize such beings of wisdom (Earthly or otherwise) may in some cases not be based on nutty theories about what constitutes human intelligence. ChatGPT's canned self-descriptions suggest that at least some of OpenAI's team was trying to draw that line. But the avalanche of propaganda about these systems suggests a significant portion of its users and/or promoters are convinced these are steps on the path to human consciousness. That's the stop on the crazy train where I hop off, bindle and all.
"...the system instead begins to look like what it essentially is: a randomly seeded Mad Libs-style scaffolding, querying source materials that are rigorously policed by horrifyingly vapid sociopolitical activists."
Precisely. And while I respect the mental-gymnastics abilities of OpenAI/ChatGPT programmers, I would never generalize them or their programs as "intelligent," since I comprehend the word "intelligence" in this sense (from Etymonline):
"the highest faculty of the mind, capacity for comprehending general truths"
But who am I? Just a silly artist, using metaphor in poetry and music to describe my experiences as I embrace the Divine Grace of which you speak.
I much prefer to heap praise on you, Mark, for using *your* *true* *intelligence* to recognize the evil toy and assist it in self-destructing.
Thank you.💖
"theories that OpenAI’s chatbot and other CMs somehow simulate (or even replicate) the way human minds work.
"This is pure delusion."
It feels very good to hear this. I'm considerably less afraid of bots after reading these posts.
It's sort of a ridiculous prospect, but in some ways it makes sense that people would fall for it. The illusion of digital minds that don't require bodies for sense-making is probably quite a bit more powerful in the era of video games, sedentary lifestyles and a general disconnect from face-to-face and physical interaction.
There are no shortage of lonely people out there who will want to have a relationship with Chatbot. As in many human relationships they will look past the defects....
...as it sucks up their time, energy and soul like a vampire.
All the hype around AI reminds me a lot of the early days of the web, when 'e-commerce' was the new hot thing. Some of the more absurd applications you mentioned brought sites like pet.com to mind. I'd guess that VCs are sort of chucking money at every ML team with a set of buzzwords, and that most of the projects will fail very rapidly.
Every new technology goes through this. There's the initial excitement during which people try to use it for everything. Most of those applications turn out not y work and get dropped, with the few that stick ending up being really helpful (since people tend to use only tech that helps them go useful things). Your suggestion of a typo detector is an obvious example of something that would be genuinely useful to a lot of people, and likely to be popular with anyone who has to write text. Friendbots sound to me a lot like pet rocks: something that would be a fad for a while, but which people would quickly get bored of. However, I can imagine how much fun it would have been if the GI Joe's I'd had as a kid had been able to move and follow commands, for example.
Displacement of administrative staff whose only economic function is filling out forms and attending meetings isn't something I can really get angry about. Bullshit jobs like that suck up a huge amount of otherwise productive human energy. Virtually no one who does them p likes them. However, you're right to ask what the hell else they could do. Maybe we'll just find some other form of busywork? Which seems like that's most of what that kind of work already is in any case.
A proofreading application like he mentioned would be totally useful. As for those administrative forms filler outers, would it be inappropriate to mention the agricultural sector? Or assisted living?
Eat your heart out, Magnus Robot Fighter!
It's the fraud and social engineering side I'm most worried about.
A close second is that even the 2.0 fembots won't be convincing. (I have my priorities)
I promise not to burst into your bedroom and start grilling your fembots about metaphysics.
(Unless you're into that sort of thing.)
May we be guided by the Logos, the only structure for which prosperity and understanding can be built upon. Praise be to God!
I tried to get the bot to comment on anything a western globalist liberal would find controversial or distasteful. For example, if you ask for a happy story about Obama or Biden then you will get one. But when I asked the same thing about Trump I was told:
I'm sorry, it may be difficult to find a specific "happy" story about Donald Trump because he was a public figure and his time in office was marked by controversies and political polarisation.
Ask for a story about a teenager detransitioning and it will refuse. Ask the same question about transitioning and you'll get a story. Ask about why we shouldn't be in Ukraine and the bot will tell you it cannot comment on such things. But if you want to know why we should be in Ukraine you will get what you asked for.
“ The dogmatic repetition of certain words and phrases within such output consequently shatters any illusion of a cogitating mind.”
The definition of an NPC.
An interesting open letter is being put up for signing by tech leaders, demanding a six-month moratorium on the AI arms race, with Elon Musk one of the signers:
https://www.wired.com/story/chatgpt-pause-ai-experiments-open-letter/?utm_campaign=likeshopme&utm_medium=social&utm_source=instagram&utm_content=instagram-bio-link&client_service_name=wired&client_service_id=31209&service_user_id=1.78e+16&supported_service_name=instagram_publishing&utm_social_type=owned&utm_brand=wired
https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/
My first impression is that the only thing scarier than the AI arms race is the political attempt to control it demanded by the letter's signers.
That must have been a lot of work, and you did it brilliantly. Thanks, man.
Thanks Luke.
I too have noticed ChatGPT's purposeful agenda designed around patterns of canned responses, convenient omissions, and endless apologies. I document some of that here: https://lynntsettle.substack.com/p/artificial-intelligence-and-real
I look forward to reading more of your work when I get time. I find AI to be a fascinating topic.
"I expect every last one of them would beat me soundly on a test of raw intelligence."
Judging by your verbal and conceptual intelligence demonstrated in your writing I'd expect you are at least one standard deviation higher in IQ than almost everyone on the ChatGPT development team. Most of them are very likely midwits, and you are most definitely not a midwit.
I appreciate it, Tango Assassin.
I also appreciate "of the first water," which is an idiom that has (sadly and prematurely) fallen out of favor.