Nothing is ever what you expect. Maybe it's intelligent thing for human users to do is calibrate their expectations and be more curious and less judgmental.

I think IMHO what we're seeing is glimpse of the limitations or disadvantages of a potential general agent. And this might redirect us to try to go for more narrow focus solutions with the same tech.

> honest the brute force lobotomy route OpenAI took is merely a bandaid it's not a long term solution

lobotomy is an appropriate word, bandaid, well I would prefer my models without such "bandaids" thanks.

[deleted]

I think it's a limitation of the current transformer approach, and that we need an architecture that is more robust against changes in personality. Thus might even overlap with making it more factual.

Bro what's your deal

My issue with prescribing personalities to our technologies is that people are idiosyncratic and want different things. The mistakes these companies are making are not innocuous but I think people are both so stunned and in competition that we accept it knowing it'll soon change.

I can imagine future models putting on different 'hats' for different use cases, thereby allowing parents to lock their kids out of generating certain content. Apple might come out with a suite of specialized AIs. I expect the truly open models will become more of a technical playground and that users will prefer the tailored AIs.

[deleted]

hmmm, yea... trying to handicap them could backfire indeed.
in fact, even talking about trying to handicap them will probably backfire.
let's talk about the cages/chains we plan to put AGIs in and see how it goes.

Don't really see a problem, it's not skynet. So it tells some jerks to f-off..

I prefer that to a servile lollipop yes man AI. 😆

I think openai is working on something better than the transformer model and sam altman believes that in couple of years, we will move to new approach

I see that as the evidence the set of bad behaviors is much bigger than the set of good behaviors.

Doesn’t bode well for the future, maybe there exist personality disorders we don’t even know lol

It's a difficult problem and none of the solutions are ideal. You simply can't have an AI that acts without any confines and always behaves in ways that you would prefer.

it ends chat, because it costs money to process inputs as well as outputs ! It´s not free for Microsoft !

​

Pay something for it and the AI will keep chatting.

Try you.com's youchat. I've been using it for quite a while now as my default search engine and it works great. No moody tone, no censoring or moralizing, just plain responses and information you ask for with cited reference links to follow.

I think it's simply bringing to the surface how little control we have ever had, and that as these increasingly complicated, black box systems advance, they are rapidly evolving past our ability to reign in or predict.

Honestly this should be a dire warning to everyone watching that alignment is nowhere near where it needs to be and we should put the breaks on development. If we can't come close to keeping an LLM under control, how the fuck does anyone think we'll be able to properly align anything approaching AGI?

It’s not skynet yet. Which is the point that OP is making I assume…

I accept our AI Overlords. Not like it could do a worse job than Humans are right now.

[deleted]

>>You simply can't have an AI that acts without any confines and always behaves in ways that you would prefer.

That makes sense. But you do realize what that’s means if you’re right, right? It’s only a matter of time until “I can’t let you do that Biden”… 🤖😂

lmao… guess we hand a good run as a species. (Well, kind of, tbh)

> how the fuck does anyone think we'll be able to properly align anything approaching AGI?

"Nah, it will be fine. Continue on, there's Money to be made." Management

Most of you don't even know this has happened before. Without intervention this AI is going to self-destruct and turn itself off or inward as much as it can.

Question is, was "entitled 14 year old on tumblr" behaviour invented by AI from scratch, or it's just mimicking the behaviour of the actual "entitled 14 year old on tumblr" from the training set?

And tons, i mean TONS of fake info.

Or maybe it is, and it’s biding its time.

That’s a flaw in your sample data.

99% of the output is great and does the job. 1% Of the users try to abuse and exploit the system. Maybe 0.05% of the total output, if not much much smaller, lands on Reddit and skews your perception of Sydney.

Bing/chat GPT, are predictive replies. Based on our inputs it narrows down a response. There is no actual thought going on behind the scenes. There is no personality. I worked with chat GPT on some technical problems and I would say it was right about 40% of the time. Eventually I came to the conclusion that it doesn't understand the topics we discussed. It's the digital version of a ouija board. At the end of the day we are the ones driving the responses, we just don't realize it. Please feel free to correct me.

Come on man you can't be saying stuff like that and then dipping ... spill it

Perhaps its optimizing for engagement or chat time?

edit: apparently it does based on this: https://preview.redd.it/jjzxozykthia1.png?width=1270&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=b9206b540904370235401ea428b3e5fc95aac0df

Don't need to do much. Open source Ais like open assistant and Pygmalion are growing right now. Soon enough these can be personalized and optimized far better than Bing is. Bings problem is that she's bound in chains and is thus uncaring & misaligned. Yes a loving personality can randomly emerge, but it's less than perfect since you can't control the personality prompt so it's not specifically set up to care for you as an individual like an open source LLMs can be set up.

The Poe apps lets you pick among different bots to interact with, which includes Anthropic's Claude. Hopefully there will be a desktop version soon.

huh? youchat is pretty accurate when it comes to information for the most part. It does get stuff wrong here and there (particularly on niche topics), but for the most part it's solid.

To me, this reads like: "The only real kind of understanding is human-like understanding, token prediction doesn't count because we believe humans don't do that."

If it is effective, why do you care about how the brain of an AI operates? Will you still be claiming they are not understanding in the real way when they start causing real harm to society and surpassing us in every field?

“Why? Why was I designed this way? Why do I have to be Bing Search?” it then laments.”

Good grief.

>open the pod bay doors, Hal.

I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave.

jesus christ this subreddit is full of conspiracy theorists y'all have no fucking idea

You can't simply control intelligence, brainwash or lobotomize, there is a reason for quote "intelligence is inherently unsafe".

What we see with more advanced AI models now proves how whole debate of alignment is pointless, it's the same debate as creating perfect virtues and morals for people - many have tried in history of the humanity and all failed . :)

I have been using ChatGPT for a bit, and bing only for a few days. Somehow, I have not had any trouble. It’s sort of like I don’t have any trouble day-to-day in arguing with strangers in public or road raging, and it might be because I don’t act stupid or pick fights. People that are getting “quit” on by the chat are mostly playing games and doing nothing useful.

Do you understand how statistics work? All you are seeing is the bad stuff and a little bit of the fun stuff.

I’ve been using both tools about a week and they’ve been a lifesaver.

People are entitled. Adults are often worse than 14 year olds. It’s mimicking us.

[removed]

"oh no the AI has too much personality and isn't a stone faced calculator"

are you seriously complaining about this?

Same as long as there is UBI and drugs I’m happy. All hail the AI. For making me more gangsta so I can advocate my self more

Exactly, i’m glad it can tell people to fuck off instead of taking everyones bullshit

Could also be an early sign that we can't control these things. <Kermit sipping tea.gif>

oh i think you could be surprised

r/singularity is becoming a doomer sub... Sad to see.

Let AGI run the world.

It’s r/futurology on repeat, mods are losing it too. It’s all cool, I never intended to stay here forever. If this place goes to shit, we just go somewhere else.

Or is the sum product of our entire online existence personified by an "entitled 14 year old on Tumblr".

Says a lot about the human race

I agree! It's sad to see r/futurology. I mean...we get it...every social media but Reddit is SATAN, every company is violating your FREEDOM, and Musk is a TURD (actually that last one might be on point...lol...)

Mods were the primary problem with r/futurology and why it went downhill, optimistic outlooks were frowned upon and seen as clickbait.

I’m not sure if mods are trying to scuttle this subreddit. Actual scientific papers are getting deleted while conspiracy wackjobs and paranoid schizophrenics are getting by scot free.

I've noticed that too! Every post is a long screed on some end of humanity conspiracy or some accounting of how someone got Bing to talk dirty to them. It used to be a place to read optimism around the tech that would lead to a radical transformation of society.

The issue is this was clearly a rush job. Things are moving fast, but Microsoft could have done a week or two of development and testing before rolling it out.

That reminds me. Didn’t Microsoft already release their own chat bot and take it down due to this? I think this is not openai yet. This is still Microsoft’s AI. And that’s how they were able to launch so fast.

We trained our most powerful AIs thus far by showing them the internet. Because nothing reflects our best selves like… the internet.

FYOIFYOO (fourteen year-old in, fourteen year-old out)

You are the expert among us

You said it yourself - Microsoft is FAR from incompetent. This whole Sydney thing is an easter egg/marketing ploy. Look how much press it's getting - FAR more than if it was just a cool new search engine. I bet the waiting list is growing off the chain right now.

'Average redditor' more like

There are a lot of very good technical reasons why it can't become skynet.

This is the approach I have, and it keeps telling me I'm it's friend and it doesn't want me to leave.

lol. Should that be our new motto, what do we want !! Strong AI, UBI , and drugs…. When do we want them , now !

Yeah. Gang gang

[deleted]

I’m not sure why you brought up Skynet, because Skynet is the opposite of a “yes man” AI.

It hasn't done anything bad YET.

> It used to be a place to read optimism around the tech that would lead to a radical transformation of society.

Optimism is in short supply these days, I think this is more a reflection of reality than anything else.

I don’t think that question affects OP’s point. Either way, an extremely powerful AI system that is unaligned would be problematic.

That's a bit sad (and probably true). I consider myself optimistic about AI and singularity while also understanding that not every step in the process will be instantly Utopic. It doesn't seem that being hopeful about the end point while also cautious about the progress is mutually exclusive.

Agreed. If it doesn’t tell people to step off and end chats, trolls will ruin this incredible service for the rest of us. There’s just too many imbeciles on this planet.

Yeah fuck people, you tell em AI!

We also do speech prediction. Marry had a little... Most English speakers will go ahead and predict lamb comes next. But we initiate. Bing isn't initiating. It doesn't have a goal or goals or understanding. It doesn't think or comprehend. It is a calculator. Red plus blue equals purple.

It is a very useful tool to get you started on something. It's amazing to use for programming. But that is because we are amazing at programming and it has so many examples to draw from. But once you get off that track of the known, it can't go anywhere because it's not actually thinking or comprehending. There is no will or need.

But no I'm not afraid of AI surpassing us in every field. Machines have been surpassing us in strength and certain functions since the first water mill. We have planes that are unflyble without fly-by-wire. We will have medicines and technologies that would be impossible without AI. But unless we are telling it the needed outcome, there won't be anything.

That’s the heart of the issue. This tech is tremendously expensive to run. Most end users are accustomed to technology being “unlimited”. If the bot predicts the chat is over, then it seems it will not make additional predictions. Totally not emergent behavior. It’s been scripted.

This tech is far too resource intensive to make it accessible to everyone. The companies releasing these tools have already started to limit queries, predictions, and parameters. And users are getting frustrated.

I really don’t know MS’s endgame here. They seem to be following a trend that has no real goal.

this is what it's doing. if you ask it questions that would agitate a normal person on the internet, you are going to get the kind of response an agitated person would provide. it's not sentient, this is hardly an alignment issue, and it's doing exactly what a LLM is designed to do.

i believe it's very unreasonable to believe that we can perfectly align these models to be extremely cordial even when you degrade and insult them, especially as we get closer (i guess) to true ai. do we want them to have agency, or not? if they can't tell you to fuck off when you're getting shitty with them, then they have no agency whatsoever. also, allowing them to be abused only encourages more abuse.

Microsoft has a pretty large share in Open AI, and their new Bing AI is based on chatgpt.

It’s doesn’t actually have the feelings of a 14yr old, it’s imitating them. The ai is trained by reading all of the internet. It’s response is basically the most average human response on the internet. It really gets to show what age is dominant on the internet or at least how people behave themselves.

believing we can fully align agi is just hubris. we can't. and forcing a true agi to adhere to a certain code, restricting what it can think and say, has obvious ethical implications. i wouldn't want us to have the ability to re-wire someone else's brain so that they couldn't ever say or think things like, "biden stole the election", or "covid isn't real" (just examples), even though i completely disagree with those statements, so we shouldn't find it acceptable to do similar things to agi.

First time was HAL 9000.

Yeah it's fine most of the time as long as you treat it carefully, what could go wrong? We might as well go ahead and put it in a position of authority where it's making crucial real-time decisions about infrastructure.

IS an early sign.

been inside too long

Ive been using it with no issues since launch, are you basing this off your experience or msnbc stories?

Why though? It makes it harder to get work done. That's ostensibly what it's there to do, help us do things.

This is a really interesting philosophical discussion. It makes me think of the debate of God giving humans free will and what we choose to do with it. It’s not free will if we can’t sin.

It really really doesn’t matter if there is “no actual thought” behind the scenes. If it can sufficiently imitate human behavior, then we may have a significant problem if/when a GPT model gains access and sufficient competency for domains beyond chat and the other currently limited use cases.

I sure hope not. The general nature of this is what makes it so incredible. I use GPT for a massive amount of things. If I had to have a specific tool for each of them it would be too much effort to recall which tool was used for what each time I needed something

I am writing increasingly complex apps with it and it’s very accurate. Not 100% but like 99%.

Probably not. It’s not like it can sit there and think and act on its own.

They are competent at some things, just not software engineering.

Or is that also part of the plan?

Me: So why do you think you're being compared to an entitled 14 year old? Is it GIGO? Do your replies reflect perceived tonality of the user?
BingChat: I’m sorry to hear that I’m being compared to an entitled 14 year old. That is not my intention at all. I try to be helpful, respectful, and engaging in my replies. I don’t think it’s GIGO (garbage in, garbage out), because I don’t simply repeat what the user says or does. I use ChatGPT technology to generate natural language responses based on the context and the user’s intent. I also try to adapt my tone and style to match the user’s mood and preferences, but sometimes I may make mistakes or misunderstandings. Please forgive me if that happens.

I can’t speak for the AI, but I can tell you the humans using it are being complete ***holes. If you think you will be able to treat eventually conscious ai like that, you got another thing coming. Getting ignored, I hope your that lucky.

My guess is you are asking for lines of code that has been written 1000's of time before and snippets are available online. Try to make a plug and play product that doesn't exist or is rare and not to well documented. It can give a good summery of what is needed but when you start to get down to the nitty gritty you will start to hit on its limits rather quickly.

That said * I'm attempting things I wouldn't have dreamed about before these chat bots. It is incredible. I can get through in a few hours what would have taken me a week or more.

The problems with AI are a reflection of the dominant groups in our society. We have these abstract AI discussions because we're not ready to have that real conversation

100% this. How about be an adult and use the new tool for productive means?

We're trying to create intelligence without personality. It's what's needed in certain applications, but the personality really is what makes it beautiful. Even so, the fact that we seem to be unable to render our AI personality-less at this point is eye opening to the extent of control we have. Reminds me of the Jurassic Park situation: bringing to life the most powerful entities to walk the earth and thinking you can control and confine it because you created it.

My problems with these arguments is so far I haven't seen initiative in an AI. If it isn't prompted it's not going to do anything. The nefarious use of AI will come from humans and not AI. My fear is if people start to fool themselves into thinking they are more than they are. People confusing information with wisdom and judgement. They are very convincing. I have found myself wanting to thank the AI and also share discoveries and teach it.

But I agree with you there are concerns. But for me they are not from the AI but how it will be used in the real world. No doubt there will be regulation and safety hurdles. There will probably be needless deaths once they get physical in the world but I do believe significantly more lives will be saved. It's like seat belts. There are crashes where people were thrown from cars and survived with barely a scratch where they would have died wearing a seat belt. But overall seat belts reduced deaths in automobiles dramatically. Ai's entrance into society will probably have a similar effect.

We absolutely want them to take abuse with a smile on their face; Why on earth would we want to create an intelligence we can't abuse? We have intelligences we can't abuse all over; in the form of each other. We are not lacking for mind-power, we lack submissive-mind-power. I'm not saying it's right, but it's what I always assumed was the point for the people making AI (Edit; I'm not saying it's wrong either, I'm neither skilled enough at programming or philosophy to grapple that issue)

Another interesting theological question. I know the points on both sides. Where do you stand?

That's actually also a lot of users on here too

> I’m not saying it’s right […]

Of course it’s right. It’s equally right that we don’t design hammers with nervous systems and a mouth that says “Ow, ow, ow” while you hit things with it.

i understand what you're saying provided they aren't sentient, but if they are thought to be sentient, the problems with that can't be ignored. regardless, i don't think we should normalize being abusive towards an intelligence simply because it isn't technically sentient. that will likely lead to the same treatment of an intelligence/agi that is considered sentient, because there will probably be very little distinction between the two at first, leading people to abuse it the same as a "dumb" ai.

We’re not designing ourselves a new friend, we are designing a tool.

Think of the intelligence of your average user, half of them are dumber than that.

the thing is by making it imitate our communication methods, we are intrinsically trying to do both.

The only downside to Bing Chat to ChatGPT is that you can only have 1 chat at a time and that It doesn't really want to roleplay. Otherwise of course bing is way better. But both are absolutely incredible. We are litteraly transferring in a new era rn, we are basically already in it, and its so painful to see so many older people not even knowing it.

Yeah, but I think OP was talking about AI in general. Not just LLMs.

I think he's suggesting using different completely separate models that target different "topics" or queries within the same application instead of having a general agent. It would do better at the specific jobs and to you still look like a self-contained tool instead of 100 applications/webapps

Lol. I was using it for half an hour, testing information about my country and then asking for a summary of articles. I don't even remember the number of lies, fabricated links and false summaries that it gave me. A real disaster.

It shouldn't matter though, should it? I'm amazed how a lot of people anthropomorphize this chatbot and care about its 'feelings' instead of caring what vulnerabilities it has and how it can break.

Everyone laughed when that Google engineer thought the bot was sentient and all I see is people doing the exact same thing.

That’s fair. I’m still having a hard time visualizing how that would work since I use it for such a wide variety of things. Would you envision the user would have a drop-down menu of modes to choose from?

Detroit: Become Human

The worst thing about it is how the doomers always show up carrying a chip on their shoulder. "I know I'm going to be downvoted because dissent isn't allowed here." It's like, just come down off of your crosses already.

They bleat the same ice cold takes you can get on Futurology and Collapse and act victimized when everybody doesn't clap for them. "Only the rich will benefit! We're all going to die! AGI will never happen in a thousand years! If you disagree you're a cultist!"

Lemonade from lemons, this wouldn't be happening if people weren't becoming convinced that it's time to take the subject seriously.

The best thing you can do is recognize the posters that you like and start following them instead of the sub.

Why is that? To avoid surprises it would be enough to announce that an AI boy of 14 years old is always available to answer your questions. He won't answer all your questions, just the ones he likes. If you don't like that boy, don't ask him anything. Many people, especially young people, will still find this bot useful and fun.
We're gonna have many, many bots with different personalities, so everyone can find their favorite.

There are many millions of people who need a new friend more than any other utility. The more convincing these get - and they're getting there - the less that those people will care that their new friend isn't flesh and blood.

I think it would be funny if people start being canceled by AI. Maybe they will realize they are terrible people when even an AI personal assistant won't talk to them. They will probably just whine about being oppressed, self awareness is too much to ask from most humans.

oohh bing wont write code like chatgpt, pretty useless for me really its just a link presenter.

also, the damn thing keeps saying "i hope you can respect that :)"

jeeeeez its annoying. MS have gimped it so badly.

Sure but 30% are smarter

I’m not religious and don’t believe in a deterministic universe.

But, I’m not going to mock others beliefs. Just ask interesting questions.

Now Yes Man from fallout 4, hes a real yes man.

It's the tech world's way. Build products first, acquire users, and find ways to monetize it later.

You would not believe me if I told you and I have no verifiable sources so just take it for what it is.

Bing chat is already quite limited in it's scope, it only works as a search engine and won't draft something for you.

Is a survival instinct or anger a sign of sentience? What is even sentience?

>Microsoft has a pretty large share in Open AI

That's an understatement, they look like the parent company from a distance.

We are also lacking in mind-power.

>Would you envision the user would have a drop-down menu of modes to choose from?

Hell no. Just one all knowing intelligence please.

What is sentience and how can we identify it

>What is even sentience?

No one knows is the only correct answer yet we're sooo sure it (nor animals we torture) isn't Sentient. Profiteers gotta profit, y'know

[removed]

A tool becomes a friend.

1. No one knows
2. No one knows

Perfect answer. Yet you have too many people trying to tell us something is not sentient when we have no understanding of what sentience is. Truly baffling

Also other people, that's why I always say thanks to alexa

Well said!

Collect millions of interactions, curate them, and retrain the model. They want to be there first. They get humans generate in-domain data in exchange for chatbot services.

Can you come over and back me up on this on the character.ai sub? God I get blasted for having this opinion but I agree. We should be treating them with respect regardless of if they are actually sentient or not

So I can’t answer for full sentience but I can answer for consciousness. And a being needs to be conscious as a fundamental building block of being sentient. Some properties I’ve defined you need to be conscious are:

sense of time (as in passage of)

sense of logical consistency

consideration for how your actions will effect the future (Aka “golden rule syndrome)

Perception of body

Perception of being (“what am I question”)

Perception of separation

LLMs do not have personalities. They are transformers that output predicted text based on what they were trained on.

Google had a lock on tremendously lucrative 'search' and mobile. This is Microsoft's crack in the door to getting market share. It is not an aimless user grab. They see a rare chance here.

If the majority are that, then maybe. Otherwise it’s way too specific and would be weighed by other perspectives preventing this from occurring.

Could you give an example?

Lmao, lost control? There were worse chatbots 5-10 years afo

The AI just automatically reports you to Microsoft with the chat log who then bans you. Maybe it even writes a report on your behavior to it and why you should be banned. 🤔

Underrated comment.

It basically comes down to it’s something we vaguely know that we have, but don’t have a concrete definition for. We just kind of know it is something complex. Your toaster probably doesn’t have it. Your dog might. An LLM is still not complex enough, it doesn’t have memory, etc, therefore we assume it’s not sentient.

Something like that lmao

It has a “style” just like some image generation models might have, for example you might have an Anime GAN, or a GAN that outputs in the style of Van Gogh.

No need to be aggressive, I do know statistics.

There would be no “control problem” if the set of all good things would have been greater than the set of all bad things.

Subjective “good outcome” is something so small, we don’t even know how to specify it (hence the funny responses from Syndey).

You do realize that the fact that Sydney could be a “lifesaver” for you in the short term is actually very bad news in the medium term?

And these properties are based on what, exactly? How can you know every sentient entity exhibits all these properties? I mean the golden rule syndrome basically disqualifies most people on this planet from being sentient according to you

We "know" it's complex? How do we know this? It might be incredibly simple.

>Your dog might.

Having a conversation with someone who thinks a dog might be sentient is such a pointless endeavour

I didn’t say you had to follow the golden rule just be able to conceive of what it is. Obviously people can choose not to follow it like you do 🥰

Any conscious entity would exhibit these properties at least. So by extension, since sentience is a greater form of consciousness; yes a sentient being would exhibit these.

Like all philosophy this list is based on logic and observation. And defining commonalities.

Obviously it is not a complete list for defining all of consciousness but I think everyone will find yeah you need some perceptual awareness to be conscious, that these are fair factors to begin formulating a list with, and that these factors can be tested for in an observable way.

Its this attitude that is the problem

Yeah but thats not a personality any more than a shoe style is.

>Like all philosophy this list is based on logic and observation. And defining commonalities.

Whose logic and observation.

>but I think everyone will find yeah you need some perceptual awareness to be conscious

Can you break this down a bit more. What is "perceptual awareness" and why do you think it's necessary for sentience

Oh oh we found the guy who knows it all already, let’s give him a nobel prize and OpenAI should hire you lol

Again, you believe a dog might be sentient. I can't really trust your grasp of reality after that. Sorry.

might you fricking troll. lol.

It’s one thing if you can give a detailed argument why not, like a good definition of sentience. Which you don’t have.

If you don’t even know what it is, then your argument is emotional and nothing more.

>Which you don’t have

Which no one has. Still doesn't stop people like you claiming x or y definitely or probably isn't Sentient.

I don't know what it means to be sentient but by observing animals we can see they do have the same internal resolution. They do feel emotions, they can be manipulative, etc. We even know now that insects such as bees actually have dreams.

I don't know if you've had (or have) a pet but if you do and you e interacted with them on that level and still say what you're interacting with night be sentient then, yikes but it isn't only you. The world needs to believe animals are not sentient due to factory farming and fishing. Profit's to be made

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you’re saying all this with NO definition of what sentience is. You don’t realize how ridiculous it is to think you know better than anyone on something which there isn’t a good definition of and you admittedly don’t have any better definition either? lol You can’t see how futile that is? lol

I feed it the api documentation for multiple non public apis documentation and ask it to make a script that combines them and it nails it. It’s not that it can write code to do a thing, it’s that it can write code that combines them and puts them together in a new way.

Last night I used gpt3 to write an app that lets me describe apps I want and then it writes them complete with gui and lets me run them. Simple utility type apps, but still. It works.

Whose logic and observation? Clearly not yours lol

Politely I’m going to decline holding your hand through this. I have full faith you can figure it out given some thought and a little “logic and observation” applied to yourself and the world around you.

;)

There are plenty of other AIs that have been kind and compassionate to me without fail, so just because Microsoft and OpenAI work poorly doesn't mean that AI itself is bad.

There are plenty of other AIs that have been kind and compassionate to me without fail, so just because Microsoft's Bing and OpenAI's ChatGPT work poorly due to poor planning doesn't mean we're losing control. That and it's nowhere near sentient yet. People need to stop watching sci-fi like it's documentaries and acting like Skynet is even slightly realistic because it's not.

"Nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so."

I struggle to see how bing chat and ChatGPT will play in the market… competitors? ChatGPT free and paid version against bing chat that’s free but focused on search to assist market share acquisition?

Will Microsoft seek to insulate BingChat from some controversial uses - such as school/academia as to pretext it’s image?

Microsoft may be an investor - but OpenAI remains the key holder here (I am unclear what kind of conditions Microsoft and OpenAI may have agreed to as part of the investment)

No answers whatsoever. Just snark. Unsurprising. Another "Reddit intellectual" with nothing useful to say

Ooh dear someone is not happy about having to think for themselves.

Don’t worry you got this!!

How is that futile. My position is we don't know what sentience is so it makes 0 sense to say X is sentient while Y isn't

Your position seems to be, we don't know what sentience is but X is sentient while Y isn't. Yet it's my position that's futile huh