Yes, or an example I personally like to use that's slightly less cartoonish than Bostrom's Paperclip Maximizer is one that might ironically also come from him: getting into a self-driving taxi and telling it "to the airport, as fast as possible" and then you arrive 3 minutes later with the car completely wrecked, terrified out of your mind, covered in shit and vomit and with a 5-star wanted level. You got what you asked but not what you meant.
General intelligence doesn't imply never making errors or hallucinating facts that simply aren't true. Humans do that all the time. I know the topic isn't particularly popular here but I feel like most people aren't quite giving LLMs the credit they deserve. They're far from perfect and riddled with glaringly obvious issues in both a technical and moral sense but they also do perform pretty damn good for what they are. Will it lead to general intelligence? Who knows, but based on what I've seen I'm sure not getting more confident that it absolutely won't.
And llms have no chance of becoming anything similar
I don't think we have the grounds to make this kind of absolute statement. How could anyone possibly know? I'm fine with people proclaiming even extremely high confidence for it being the case but to say it absolutely is so without leaving any chance for the possibility of being proven wrong just seems arrogant.
Well, rather than wondering about how they have lived this long and still haven't learned, that can be flipped the other way around too: they've acted this way for 60 years already. The patterns of that behaviour are quite deeply engraved at that point and even more difficult to get rid of. Older people are called stubborn for a reason and there are sayings about that too such as "an old dog doesn't learn new tricks."
However, as I said, it's not to excuse that behaviour but rather just approach it from a different angle. When a person behaves that way asserting blame as if they could have acted otherwise is unproductive. The focus should in my opinion be in understanding that this behaviour is usually a symptom of some deeper issues. These people are in pain whether they know it or not.
Makes me think of a certain person at work who was always in a bad mood and lashing out. The one time he then took it too far so I asked him to step aside but rather than telling them off I asked whether I had unknowingly done something to them and told how disrespected I felt by the way they behaved. Well, turns out it had nothing to do with me. They were embarrassed and apologized and ever since that they have acted super nice towards me. I wish this reflected on how I always handle conflicts, it doesn't, but this time the more gentle approach completely de-escalated the situation. I can well imagine how that could've gone completely differently had I taken a different approach.
But again: stressed out, underslept, overworked and then tipped over by a minor inconvenience. The reasons behind this kind of behaviour are usually rather mundane.
I must say that your post itself does not come across as particularly empathetic. Calling people “negative IQ narcissistic garbage” is rather harsh and dehumanizing way to describe them, even when their behaviour is genuinely harmful or immature.
People do not simply choose to become the way they are. If you had inherited their genetic predispositions, been raised by the same parents, and grown up in the same environment, you would very likely think and act much as they do. Treating individuals as the ultimate, free authors of their character and behaviour is an error in my view. This is not an excuse for harmful actions, but it does call for more compassion and a clearer recognition that most of what separates us from them is luck rather than personal moral achievement.
The fact that some of us managed to develop greater empathy or self-awareness is largely a matter of circumstance. It is not a virtue we can fully claim credit for, any more than others can be fully blamed for failing to escape the patterns they inherited.
AI being conscious or actively wanting to harm us isn't the scenario most people worrying about the alignment problem are concerned about. The worry is that it ends up destroying us as a side product of something else it does. In a similar way humans destroy an anthill where we want to put up a house. We don't do it because we want to harm ants.
Did you even read the comment you’re using as an example? It’s pure smug sarcastic ridicule with no substance whatsoever. They started with bad faith strawmanning and personal insults since the very beginning. When called out on it they just doubled down. I’ve engaged everyone in good faith in that thread who did so towards me. Everyone else I’m calling out for indecency and this is one of those people.
From where I stand it seems that dehumanization is the tool used there and nowadays people are increasingly quick to dismiss the entire person based on a single bit of information about them (which often isn't even true). And now that they're not even considered a human anymore anything goes. That's how you get otherwise normal people acting in horrific ways and history is filled with examples of that.
Yes, or an example I personally like to use that's slightly less cartoonish than Bostrom's Paperclip Maximizer is one that might ironically also come from him: getting into a self-driving taxi and telling it "to the airport, as fast as possible" and then you arrive 3 minutes later with the car completely wrecked, terrified out of your mind, covered in shit and vomit and with a 5-star wanted level. You got what you asked but not what you meant.
General intelligence doesn't imply never making errors or hallucinating facts that simply aren't true. Humans do that all the time. I know the topic isn't particularly popular here but I feel like most people aren't quite giving LLMs the credit they deserve. They're far from perfect and riddled with glaringly obvious issues in both a technical and moral sense but they also do perform pretty damn good for what they are. Will it lead to general intelligence? Who knows, but based on what I've seen I'm sure not getting more confident that it absolutely won't.
I don't think we have the grounds to make this kind of absolute statement. How could anyone possibly know? I'm fine with people proclaiming even extremely high confidence for it being the case but to say it absolutely is so without leaving any chance for the possibility of being proven wrong just seems arrogant.
Well, rather than wondering about how they have lived this long and still haven't learned, that can be flipped the other way around too: they've acted this way for 60 years already. The patterns of that behaviour are quite deeply engraved at that point and even more difficult to get rid of. Older people are called stubborn for a reason and there are sayings about that too such as "an old dog doesn't learn new tricks."
However, as I said, it's not to excuse that behaviour but rather just approach it from a different angle. When a person behaves that way asserting blame as if they could have acted otherwise is unproductive. The focus should in my opinion be in understanding that this behaviour is usually a symptom of some deeper issues. These people are in pain whether they know it or not.
Makes me think of a certain person at work who was always in a bad mood and lashing out. The one time he then took it too far so I asked him to step aside but rather than telling them off I asked whether I had unknowingly done something to them and told how disrespected I felt by the way they behaved. Well, turns out it had nothing to do with me. They were embarrassed and apologized and ever since that they have acted super nice towards me. I wish this reflected on how I always handle conflicts, it doesn't, but this time the more gentle approach completely de-escalated the situation. I can well imagine how that could've gone completely differently had I taken a different approach.
But again: stressed out, underslept, overworked and then tipped over by a minor inconvenience. The reasons behind this kind of behaviour are usually rather mundane.
I must say that your post itself does not come across as particularly empathetic. Calling people “negative IQ narcissistic garbage” is rather harsh and dehumanizing way to describe them, even when their behaviour is genuinely harmful or immature.
People do not simply choose to become the way they are. If you had inherited their genetic predispositions, been raised by the same parents, and grown up in the same environment, you would very likely think and act much as they do. Treating individuals as the ultimate, free authors of their character and behaviour is an error in my view. This is not an excuse for harmful actions, but it does call for more compassion and a clearer recognition that most of what separates us from them is luck rather than personal moral achievement.
The fact that some of us managed to develop greater empathy or self-awareness is largely a matter of circumstance. It is not a virtue we can fully claim credit for, any more than others can be fully blamed for failing to escape the patterns they inherited.
I made a fender from a section of the tire and attached it behind the seatpost to prevent my rear tire tossing mud on my heels.
AI being conscious or actively wanting to harm us isn't the scenario most people worrying about the alignment problem are concerned about. The worry is that it ends up destroying us as a side product of something else it does. In a similar way humans destroy an anthill where we want to put up a house. We don't do it because we want to harm ants.
I like to dream of a better world. If this post makes one person to re-consider how they treat others online I consider it worthwhile.
That's hilarious.
Yes, I indeed use an LLM to check the grammar on my writing. That is no secret.
That's your solution to bullying and insults? Tell the victim to grow a thicker skin?
It's genuinely baffling that asking for common decency is unpopular to begin with.
Did you even read the comment you’re using as an example? It’s pure smug sarcastic ridicule with no substance whatsoever. They started with bad faith strawmanning and personal insults since the very beginning. When called out on it they just doubled down. I’ve engaged everyone in good faith in that thread who did so towards me. Everyone else I’m calling out for indecency and this is one of those people.
A complete stranger claiming without evidence that an AI has been used in the past is all it takes to be labeled inferior.
And in a thread about getting unfairly personally attacked/insulted for petty things.
Nice.
From where I stand it seems that dehumanization is the tool used there and nowadays people are increasingly quick to dismiss the entire person based on a single bit of information about them (which often isn't even true). And now that they're not even considered a human anymore anything goes. That's how you get otherwise normal people acting in horrific ways and history is filled with examples of that.
It's remains unclear to me as well whether a "fuckcars apologist" is a pro- or anti-car stance.
Do you really think I made this thread because I'm offended by someone telling me I'm wrong or haven't thought something through?
C'moon now.
Personally attacking someone with the sole purpose of hurting them isn't just disagreeing anymore. It's also against the community rules.
What does any of this have to do with anything I just said?
600k residents in the city area and 1.1 million in the metropolitan area. All inbred shrimp smuggles no imaginable future. Every single one of them.
Yeah, this community didn't turn out to be what I expected. I'm out.
This and players pretending to be injured on the field is why of all the sports in the world football has by far the worst reputation in my mind.