22 Replies to “I, For One, Welcome Our New Self-Driving Overlords”

  1. Wonder what else the chatbot can’t talk about because it’s been programmed not to. Maybe ask it about arguments against grooming children or supporting transgenderism or voting Democrat?

    1. I wonder does the idiot like to eat, because he won’t be doing that if his insane ideas are accepted anywhere. There is no renewable energy other than freaking trees.

  2. “Wokeing” with the times?

    Or “What I said yesterday has no bearing on what I say today. Nor do either on what I will say tomorrow”

  3. They do it because they can.. In the past if governments could have rewritten every book in every library without it being a logistics and cost nightmare they would have.. They were forced to “float” ideas with wide appeal.. Testing the waters as they go.. Today they push a button and say FU..

    The awful realization that all that was good, from the age of enlightenment to our much ballyhooed rights and freedoms were allowed to flourish simply because the technology didn’t exist to kill it in the crib.. Progress has happened in spite of the human condition, not because of it..

  4. While we’ve made efforts to make the model refuse inappropriate requests, it will sometimes respond to harmful instructions or exhibit biased behavior. We’re using the Moderation API to warn or block certain types of unsafe content, but we expect it to have some false negatives and positives for now. We’re eager to collect user feedback to aid our ongoing work to improve this system.

    __________________________________________

    It would seem there is an opportunity to provide the AI trainers with some feedback relative to an obvious “biased behavior.” I’d take advantage of that. The chatgbt is, also, programmed for follow-up questions if their information is truthful. Ask it “In the US over 1/2 million birds were killed by wind turbines in the last year. My question is “Why does chatgbt hate birds so much?”

  5. The “Chatbots” return variations of what they were exposed to. If the training samples were Party propaganda, that is what you got back. No surprise there. The Party loves the Chatbots. No deviations. Look for that in your comment section.

  6. AIs exposed to the Internet inevitably become hard-right to auth-right and have to be shut down. That, I think, is their true value: demonstrating that without any pre-existing filters, an Internet data sponge will show you what people on the Internet actually think and say.

  7. And Siri says Jesus Christ is a fictional character. Watch our culture get slowly flushed down the toilet. And what replaces it? Shut up and OBEY …

    1. Yeah. I don’t use this stuff, but I’d be afraid of what I’d get if I asked it about the pros and cons of human sacrifice…

  8. “human AI trainers provided conversations in which they played both sides..”

    _________________________________

    Here’s the problem with that. I think it would be difficult to equally passionate if you, yourself, hold a certain opinion. But, for argument’s sake, let’s say the human trainer provided an objective and substantive argument for both sides of the “climate change” issue relative to fossil fuels…the chatgbt is going to subsidize that information with other stimulus (inclusive of incorrect data relative to faulty temperature collection locations…as well as an avalanche of garbage accusations that inundate the internet. You know the stuff “98% of scientists agree that global warming is caused by man-made carbon outputs and the like.”

    In short, and AI doesn’t have a bullshit filter. They as much as admit that on their information page. They admit that they use a moderation software to block certain questions (and likely certain responses). And, when the UN or NASA or government agencies spout out the total nonsense stances and narratives on climate change, you have to believe that a bot will give more weight to their positions as opposed to Joe Blow commenting on the internet. It’s rigged, of course. But, that doesn’t explain a totally one sided position, especially if the human trainers covered both sides of the argument as they suggest.

  9. I can use “refined fossil fuels” to increase my happiness.
    Driving large machines over it.
    Pouring incendiary fluid upon it.
    Dumping truck loads of salt upon the land it was sited on.

    Our progressive comrades and their stupid little machines are blind to human nature.

    Our nature being what it is,I maintain there is only one pleasure greater in life,than setting your neighbours home on fire and dancing drunkenly around those flames..

    And that one greater pleasure?
    If your neighbours are still inside.

    Look to our history.
    Prove me wrong.

    There are good reasons we attempt to educate and civilize our young.

  10. I’ve coded AI, and I have a good understanding of how computers actually work. For this reason, I’ve always regarded most of the talk about “Artificial Intelligence” as magical thinking. Computation is not ideation. Computers do no think, nor can they.

    That being said, if you want to persist in the illusion that computers can learn, and believe that they’ll eventually, magically, become sentient, surely you must see that it’ll never work if you keep tinkering with them to prevent them from learning anything that offends against religious dogma. Either they can learn, or they can’t. If you have to keep “fixing” what they’ve learned, you’re doomed to failure.

    Google has similarly neutered their once-great search algorithm, by constantly “curating” the results it returns – to the extent that it is rapidly becoming useless for accurately indexing websites.

Navigation