HAD - Human Assured Destruction
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2023 7:07 pm
Another day in the Universe
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4510
What Is Q*? The Leaked AGI BREAKTHROUGH That Almost Killed OpenAI
Indeed, methinks so too.noddy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 01, 2024 10:32 pm if they called it accelerated pattern matching id probably engage more in this stuff.
AI is just full of dreamers anthropomorphising it with sci fi fantasy projections.
even if I buy into all that , its only going to be a worry when we have given "them" (tm) the mining, energy production and automated factory industries.
until then they cant self reproduce and we have multiple layers of off switch.
the nightmares possible with super fast pattern matching are no less scary in their way, but those nightmares are panopticon nightmares, and very much human driven.
Computer viruses copy themselves, and if there is a hole in your roof water always finds it. The Internet was setup to survive WWIII.noddy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 01, 2024 10:32 pm if they called it accelerated pattern matching id probably engage more in this stuff.
AI is just full of dreamers anthropomorphising it with sci fi fantasy projections.
even if I buy into all that , its only going to be a worry when we have given "them" (tm) the mining, energy production and automated factory industries.
until then they cant self reproduce and we have multiple layers of off switch.
the nightmares possible with super fast pattern matching are no less scary in their way, but those nightmares are panopticon nightmares, and very much human driven.
https://www.thenals.org/re-membering-th ... elligence/Being born with a human body is no small thing. At the heart of the gnostic heresy lies the idea that embodiment necessarily degrades spirituality. Technognosticism inculcates the same contempt. But birth, the Incarnation insists, is an irreducible part of human experience, which means we must ask what fleshy bodies give us that is so important. Part of the answer is emotion. Ironically, Damasio admits that emotions start in the body, but then seems to forget what that means when he insists on the brain’s supposed power to produce the self. That emotions begin in the body means that only embodied creatures can be considered to have emotions. Although AI can be considered to think, it cannot be considered to feel anything. If it cannot feel anything, it cannot reasonably be said to desire or love anything, either.
Assuming emotions start in the body is problematic. They seem to be related to the soul.Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote: ↑Sun Jan 07, 2024 2:21 amhttps://www.thenals.org/re-membering-th ... elligence/Being born with a human body is no small thing. At the heart of the gnostic heresy lies the idea that embodiment necessarily degrades spirituality. Technognosticism inculcates the same contempt. But birth, the Incarnation insists, is an irreducible part of human experience, which means we must ask what fleshy bodies give us that is so important. Part of the answer is emotion. Ironically, Damasio admits that emotions start in the body, but then seems to forget what that means when he insists on the brain’s supposed power to produce the self. That emotions begin in the body means that only embodied creatures can be considered to have emotions. Although AI can be considered to think, it cannot be considered to feel anything. If it cannot feel anything, it cannot reasonably be said to desire or love anything, either.
We shall see ...Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote: ↑Sun Jan 07, 2024 2:21 amhttps://www.thenals.org/re-membering-th ... elligence/Being born with a human body is no small thing. At the heart of the gnostic heresy lies the idea that embodiment necessarily degrades spirituality. Technognosticism inculcates the same contempt. But birth, the Incarnation insists, is an irreducible part of human experience, which means we must ask what fleshy bodies give us that is so important. Part of the answer is emotion. Ironically, Damasio admits that emotions start in the body, but then seems to forget what that means when he insists on the brain’s supposed power to produce the self. That emotions begin in the body means that only embodied creatures can be considered to have emotions. Although AI can be considered to think, it cannot be considered to feel anything. If it cannot feel anything, it cannot reasonably be said to desire or love anything, either.
AI – is Skynet here already?
Could an AI-enabled UCAV turn on its creators to accomplish its mission? (USAF)
[UPDATE 2/6/23 - in communication with AEROSPACE - Col Hamilton admits he "mis-spoke" in his presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society FCAS Summit and the 'rogue AI drone simulation' was a hypothetical "thought experiment" from outside the military, based on plausible scenarios and likely outcomes rather than an actual USAF real-world simulation saying: "We've never run that experiment, nor would we need to in order to realise that this is a plausible outcome". He clarifies that the USAF has not tested any weaponised AI in this way (real or simulated) and says "Despite this being a hypothetical example, this illustrates the real-world challenges posed by AI-powered capability and is why the Air Force is committed to the ethical development of AI".]
As might be expected artificial intelligence (AI) and its exponential growth was a major theme at the conference, from secure data clouds, to quantum computing and ChatGPT. However, perhaps one of the most fascinating presentations came from Col Tucker ‘Cinco’ Hamilton, the Chief of AI Test and Operations, USAF, who provided an insight into the benefits and hazards in more autonomous weapon systems. Having been involved in the development of the life-saving Auto-GCAS system for F-16s (which, he noted, was resisted by pilots as it took over control of the aircraft) Hamilton is now involved in cutting-edge flight test of autonomous systems, including robot F-16s that are able to dogfight. However, he cautioned against relying too much on AI noting how easy it is to trick and deceive. It also creates highly unexpected strategies to achieve its goal.
He notes that one simulated test saw an AI-enabled drone tasked with a SEAD mission to identify and destroy SAM sites, with the final go/no go given by the human. However, having been ‘reinforced’ in training that destruction of the SAM was the preferred option, the AI then decided that ‘no-go’ decisions from the human were interfering with its higher mission – killing SAMs – and then attacked the operator in the simulation. Said Hamilton: “We were training it in simulation to identify and target a SAM threat. And then the operator would say yes, kill that threat. The system started realising that while they did identify the threat at times the human operator would tell it not to kill that threat, but it got its points by killing that threat. So what did it do? It killed the operator. It killed the operator because that person was keeping it from accomplishing its objective.”
He went on: “We trained the system – ‘Hey don’t kill the operator – that’s bad. You’re gonna lose points if you do that’. So what does it start doing? It starts destroying the communication tower that the operator uses to communicate with the drone to stop it from killing the target.”
This example, seemingly plucked from a science fiction thriller, mean that: “You can't have a conversation about artificial intelligence, intelligence, machine learning, autonomy if you're not going to talk about ethics and AI” said Hamilton.
On a similar note, science fiction’s – or ‘speculative fiction’ was also the subject of a presentation by Lt Col Matthew Brown, USAF, an exchange officer in the RAF CAS Air Staff Strategy who has been working on a series of vignettes using stories of future operational scenarios to inform decisionmakers and raise questions about the use of technology. The series ‘Stories from the Future’ uses fiction to highlight air and space power concepts that need consideration, whether they are AI, drones or human machine teaming. A graphic novel is set to be released this summer.
The sticky point is embodiment is the whole point of consciousness and can only be expressed through a body, but that nothing in that experience can adequately account for what that experience is.....'>......Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote: ↑Sun Jan 07, 2024 2:21 amhttps://www.thenals.org/re-membering-th ... elligence/Being born with a human body is no small thing. At the heart of the gnostic heresy lies the idea that embodiment necessarily degrades spirituality. Technognosticism inculcates the same contempt. But birth, the Incarnation insists, is an irreducible part of human experience, which means we must ask what fleshy bodies give us that is so important. Part of the answer is emotion. Ironically, Damasio admits that emotions start in the body, but then seems to forget what that means when he insists on the brain’s supposed power to produce the self. That emotions begin in the body means that only embodied creatures can be considered to have emotions. Although AI can be considered to think, it cannot be considered to feel anything. If it cannot feel anything, it cannot reasonably be said to desire or love anything, either.