Artificial Intelligence Chat

[The Picnic Wasp]

If any form of thinking alone could push people to insanity I think it's trying to figure out what causes our conscious inner awareness that doesn't occur in chimps or machines. What is the spark?

[Slim]

I think chimps do have that.

[Thenop]

Most living beings have that. It would be presumtious to think otherwise, we are not the smartest creature on the planet. Most destructive? Yes, for sure.

[Thenop]

On topic then:
I am toying with the idea of donig a family timeline (paternal side) and willprobably enlist one of the AIs to help me sort the mess. Feels like just the right tool for the job.

[The Picnic Wasp]

I think chimps do have that.

Yes, I did wonder about their awareness of self level. I don't think it's anywhere close to the human interior goings on. Why are we here? What will tomorrow bring? More reaction to the present needs rather than planning. The bonobo might be closer to us in that respect as they display more reason in resolving difficult social situations. Having said that, humans definitely have the ruthless streak of the chimpanzee.

[The Picnic Wasp]

I enjoyed an AI animation about daily life in Pompeii. Unfortunately it quickly changed to disaster movie mode and became like so many other Hollywood productions of this generation, but the idea of realistic (perhaps) glimpses into the past fascinates me.

[Slim]

I think chimps do have that.

Yes, I did wonder about their awareness of self level. I don't think it's anywhere close to the human interior goings on. Why are we here? What will tomorrow bring?

I wondered about this, would have agreed with you but it's seems there's research that contradicts that view.

On a very basic level, animals must have a sort of "what if", for example if a wolf approaches a sheep it must have some sort of rudimentary "plan" for what it'll do based on what the sheep does. It must be mentally pre-empting the sheep's behaviour and imagining its options based on them.

But this seems to imply that it goes a bit further:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/smarter-than-you-think/202003/do-animals-plan-for-the-future

"So, is future planning something only humans and our primate cousins can do? Actually, no – researchers are finding surprising cognitive abilities throughout the animal kingdom. Scrub Jays, a species of North American bird, hide the specific foods least likely to be available for their breakfast on the next day, like meal preppers setting aside portions (Correia, Dickinson, & Clayton, 2007)."

[Fishy]

Man files complaint after ChatGPT said he killed his children https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kgydkr516o

[Matt2112]

I recently saw a demo video where an AI bot is verbally booking a hotel room through another AI bot, an exchange which of course uncannily mimics a human conversation - but when they mutually realise they are AI bots, they continue the conversation in "Gibberlink", which is just an R2-D2-esque digital noise but facilities a much quicker conversation.

At that point I couldn't shake the slightly disconcerting feeling that between them they were conspiring to arrange something a bit less trivial than overnight lodgings.

[pxr5]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kgydkr516o

"It is the latest example of so-called "hallucinations", where artificial intelligence (AI) systems invent information and present it as fact."

The rise of the machines has started. 

[Fishy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kgydkr516o

"It is the latest example of so-called "hallucinations", where artificial intelligence (AI) systems invent information and present it as fact."

The rise of the machines has started. 

.

The rise of the article already posted above has also started.. grins....

[Slim]

I explored a thought experiment with Gemini and ChatGPT. This was my initial message in both cases:

I had a thought about instantaneous, faster-than-light communication. I'm going to suggest a thought experiment but first, let's consider a definition of communication. Let's say there are two spacecraft in deep space, four light days apart. When craft B observes a particular event, it sends a signal to A. Let's say craft B is waiting for a volcano to erupt on a planet within its range of detection. A is waiting for a communication to indicate that this has happened.

Here's how I envisage this. We're going to use entangled particles. On A, a double slit experiment is set up so that entangled photon pairs are created. Let's say that each pair has an "original photon" and a "duplicate photon", its entangled partner. The original photon stream is aimed at the double slits, one photon at a time. The duplicate photon stream is aimed so that it just misses craft B, four light days away. The experiment has been running for weeks, so the stream of photons is already passing B. At the moment the event on the planet is observed from B, B moves into the stream of photons with a detector. Because the photon split angle is very precise, the detector can determine which slit the original photon passed through.

At the moment detection starts on B, four light days away on A, the wave function of the "original" photons will collapse, and the interference pattern will be replaced by the general "particle" pattern. Hence: instantaneous communication. The crew of A become aware that an event four light days away has occurred, within minutes.

I'm not a physicist, I just have a layman's fascination (bewilderment really) with these ideas. After a bit of back and forth with both AIs, they come to different conclusions. I'm not qualified to say which is correct, but ChatGPT's deliberations are, I believe, more plausible:

Highslide Image Viewer

.. whereas I suspect that Gemini's conclusion is, to put it bluntly, wrong. It accepts that FTL signalling is possible. I don't think it is.

Highslide Image Viewer

[The Picnic Wasp]

Fabulous! Wonderful man, wonderful mind. Nothing I am told, or see written, will sway me from the fact that this is entirely correct.

https://youtu.be/-MbD_KdPgZ0?si=PMqMIN7wGG4eTp-d

[Slim]

That may be true and you'd be typical of many who cling to a faith, nonetheless it's mostly bollocks. I loved this bit: "the problem of human death was solved 20 centuries ago", and that's religion in a nutshell - pathetic wishful thinking defying logic, evidence and common sense because the poor deluded old bastard is frightened of not existing.

[The Picnic Wasp]

That may be true and you'd be typical of many who cling to a faith, nonetheless it's mostly bollocks. I loved this bit: "the problem of human death was solved 20 centuries ago", and that's religion in a nutshell - pathetic wishful thinking defying logic, evidence and common sense because the poor deluded old bastard is frightened of not existing.

I used to have these futile harmless arguments with a guy at work who professed his atheist stance at any, and usually inappropriate opportunity. He didn't seem to get the fact that most of the workforce were also atheist and he could have spent a much more satisfying time with them sharing their agreement about the futility of our existence. He never managed to rattle my cage about things but my only annoyance was that he wouldn't even make the concession that in a fantasy, hypothetical situation, I would be the only possible winner of such a stupid argument. He didn't get that at all, thinking it would be some kind of defeat. I think Hitchens and Dawkins admired John Lennox as when he debated them he had inevitably read their sources, and more on occasion. Not a claim I could ever make, but Revelations fascinates me with its symbolism and notion that we are heading as a species to an unavoidable doom, or judgement. I totally get the other side of the coin. I like my chosen thought process.