Artificial Intelligence

[dotti34]

Any comments about artificial intelligence? I find it all a bit scary - probably because I don’t understand it or know why it’s needed. Well what I do know is that it’s a machine’s ability to perform the cognitive functions we associate with human minds because Mr Google told me, in other words it’s completely beyond my comprehension. Is it something we need?

It will replace humans in numerous jobs, has in fact already done so, but apparently will also create jobs. It’s a worry if it gets used inappropriately and you can bet your bottom dollar someone will find a way of doing so. I was listening to a man on the TV who was trying to explain it and he said that AI does not know the concept of truth. What! By the time he had finished a convoluted explantation of AI I was more confused than ever.

[landhusweg]

I must admit that I don't understand what AI is, nor why we need such a thing.
Will it mean that the following things will be over with:
- Climate change
- Famine of people around the world
- Wars around the globe

The explanations of AI given by scientists on TV. leaves me in the dark as before.

Cheers

[Margaret Pilkington]

It scares the behjasus out of me. I think it is very sinister as it adds another dimension to the ability of scammers.
Imagine the situation where the voice of a young person is cloned…and their type of language used is employed to scam money out of their elderly parents.

I do not understand it fully because I believe the scientists who are formulating this want us to be kept in the dark about the possibilities.
One of my other concerns is that people will lose their jobs because if AI can do the job then it costs less and it will never phone in sick saying it has been up all night with a poorly child.

The possibility that AI might learn how to think for itself is the stuff of nightmares.
There are those in the computer world…far more savvy than me…who are expressing concerns.
Now if that doesn’t worry you then what would worry you?

[dotti34]

Delving further into the subject I have read that (in simple terms) it is computer science that can simulate human intelligence in machines making it possible for these to think like humans, to perform tasks that humans would normally do. Of course there is much to it than that but to me it’s all as clear as mud. It’s like more of science fiction is becoming fact. Definitely a worry on a few points.

[Hill Walker]

Originally Posted by dotti34

Delving further into the subject I have read that (in simple terms) it is computer science that can simulate human intelligence in machines making it possible for these to think like humans, to perform tasks that humans would normally do. Of course there is much to it than that but to me it’s all as clear as mud. It’s like more of science fiction is becoming fact. Definitely a worry on a few points.

The first thing that should be recognised in any discussion about ‘Artificial Intelligence’ is that it is completely misnamed. Intelligence is one of those things that is usually easy to recognise but is almost impossible to define, like (for example) beauty it has intangible properties. It is therefore impossible to produce an artificial version of something which cannot be defined.
The second thing is that the term ‘Artificial Intelligence’ is being used to cover a range of things that are completely different and have no fundamental connection to each other.

For example ‘Computer Image/Vision Recognition’ is based on so-called ‘Neural Networks’ the design of which was an early attempt to produce a computer model of a very tiny bit of how brain tissue was thought to be constructed. They do work and are useful, BUT they have to be trained and it is almost impossible to be certain quite what they have been trained to do. For example self driving cars are trained to recognise people crossing the road but this can fail when the situation differs from the training, if for example two people carrying a long ladder cross the road the software will probably recognise the people but could fail the recognise that they are connected by the ladder.
On the other hand ChatGPT is based on a (language) syntax analysis programme which tries to work out what the user said, the results of this analysis then triggers a reply which usually is derived from searching a database of previous replies and/or searching the larger ‘database’ of a web search engine.
‘Artificial Intelligence’ covers both these examples (and many others) but the only thing that is common is the use of a computer.

The above is greatly simplified but I’m sure you’ll get the idea.

(Also note that Evolutionary Biologists are still undecided if ‘Intelligence’ is a Darwinian survival characteristic so it could all be a waste of time and effort.)

[Margaret Pilkington]

It still scares me.

[taddy]

[QUOTE=Hill Walker;1273235]The first thing that should be recognised in any discussion about ‘Artificial Intelligence’ is that it is completely misnamed. Intelligence is one of those things that is usually easy to recognise but is almost impossible to define, like (for example) beauty it has intangible properties. It is therefore impossible to produce an artificial version of something which cannot be defined.
The second thing is that the term ‘Artificial Intelligence’ is being used to cover a range of things that are completely different and have no fundamental connection to each other.

For example ‘Computer Image/Vision Recognition’ is based on so-called ‘Neural Networks’ the design of which was an early attempt to produce a computer model of a very tiny bit of how brain tissue was thought to be constructed. They do work and are useful, BUT they have to be trained and it is almost impossible to be certain quite what they have been trained to do. For example self driving cars are trained to recognise people crossing the road but this can fail when the situation differs from the training, if for example two people carrying a long ladder cross the road the software will probably recognise the people but could fail the recognise that they are connected by the ladder.
On the other hand ChatGPT is based on a (language) syntax analysis programme which tries to work out what the user said, the results of this analysis then triggers a reply which usually is derived from searching a database of previous replies and/or searching the larger ‘database’ of a web search engine.
‘Artificial Intelligence’ covers both these examples (and many others) but the only thing that is common is the use of a computer.

The above is greatly simplified but I’m sure you’ll get the idea.

(Also note that Evolutionary Biologists are still undecided if ‘Intelligence’ is a Darwinian survival characteristic so it could all be a waste of time and effort.)

A well put together post but I am even more confused now,

[MoreJoe]

Marc Andreessen is one of the smartest guys I know. He is a pioneer of the early Internet days, a founder of Mosaic and the primary author of two of the most successful Internet Browsers in the world. He is "One Smart Cookie".
I just watched him participate in a two and a half hour conversation with Joe Rogan on the "Joe Rogan Experience". Among the many subjects they covered there are AI, the future of AI, potential misuse of AI, the emerging product of Chat GTP and who could and should make use of such capabilities.
I was amazed that Marc has permitted access to Chat GTP to his 8 year old son.
My opinion of the wisdom of this diverges from the opinion of Marc.
I admit that he is way smarter than me and therefore I might be a Technical Luddite.
I recommend that if you can access the "Joe Rogan Experience" on Spotify you should watch or listen to the July 19 edition.
At 2 hours and 40 minutes it is lengthy but you will walk away with a more complete grasp of what is coming at us.
Good Luck to us all...
-Joe

[MoreJoe]

Link to the Marc Andreessen conversation.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3EW...1ad5e9f277479d

If it works?

[MoreJoe]

Link to the Marc Andreessen conversation.




https://open.spotify.com/episode/3EW...1ad5e9f277479d





If it works?


-MoreJoe