HumanSeeing
HumanSeeing t1_jds08im wrote
Reply to comment by Ivanthedog2013 in The whole reality is just so bizzare when you really think about it. by aalluubbaa
We are not small insignificant specs, we are the entire universe. As with everything there is a balance in what to take seriously and what not. And i am sure we might have very different ideas of what "game" and "serious" means!
HumanSeeing t1_jdrwn8j wrote
Reply to comment by banned_mainaccount in The whole reality is just so bizzare when you really think about it. by aalluubbaa
The closer something moves to our universes maximum speed limit (The speed of causality(the speed of light)) the slower time goes for it. We call the fastest speed speed of light, but it has actually got little to do with light itself the way people might think of it. It just happens to be moving at the fastest possible speed and it is everywhere so we have started calling the maximum possible speed the speed of light.
So yea.. the faster something goes near the maximum speed the slower their clocks tick. But also nothing with mass can actually reach the speed of light, since the faster you move the more mass you gain - e=mc2, the more mass you gain the more energy you need to push further etc etc. So things with mass could never achieve it.
However photons are massless particles, they have no mass. (Except in some sense they do, again because of e=mc2) and since they have no mass they move at the speed of light. If you have no mass you move at the speed of light by default. Hope this helps! Its a fascinating topic.. as our entire universe is.
HumanSeeing t1_jdr8hao wrote
Reply to comment by Smart-Tomato-4984 in Are We Really This Lucky? The Improbability of Experiencing the Singularity by often_says_nice
I do agree, but also i understand their point of view. If you get an agent that is not just only promted. Basically something the experiences no time. And then you have an agent that can exist and keep thinking.. i think that is a way to get it to think of new and original ideas.
HumanSeeing t1_jdr7ztd wrote
Reply to comment by Smart-Tomato-4984 in Are We Really This Lucky? The Improbability of Experiencing the Singularity by often_says_nice
Sure sure, but we are talking about a superintelligence. Not a dumb machine who would try and brute force it. It would already have an idea of basic human types and know all of our psychology. So that kind of reasoning and abilities would keep narrowing down that space of possible minds. In similar way how AlphaGo did not just brute force look up all possible moves, there are more moves there than there are atoms in the universe. But it had clever ways of narrowing down the search.
HumanSeeing t1_jdqoznm wrote
Reply to comment by Lartnestpasdemain in Are We Really This Lucky? The Improbability of Experiencing the Singularity by often_says_nice
Lucky also assumes that the singularity will automatically go well for humans. So i disagree with the assumption that OP makes that it will be a great thing for humans by default. It can also go wrong for us, even if due to indifference. This technology has enormous potential in any direction to change existence forever. It is way more difficult to make it really good than bad.
But i hope i am wrong and i hope the way we would build these things will make it easy to align them. But from another point of view we can also argue just about linguistics. I have no problem someone saying they are lucky to be alive today to have access to the medicine that we have or whatever.
But lucky yea, is an abstract human concept. Saying specifically that we are lucky to experience a singularity almost assumes as if there was nothing existing in the universe. And then a lottery happened to choose what era will be brought into existence. And this time was chosen and now we are here. When yea, thats not how this works.
HumanSeeing t1_jdqoad5 wrote
Reply to comment by norby2 in Are We Really This Lucky? The Improbability of Experiencing the Singularity by often_says_nice
A superintelligent AI could for sure bring back people from the past. The more data about them the better. But if you like this particular artist, the AI could analyze some life shows and the body language and tone of voice. Simulate millions of possible minds and find one who would act exactly like that and boom, there you have it.
HumanSeeing t1_jdqnpsq wrote
Reply to comment by daronjay in The whole reality is just so bizzare when you really think about it. by aalluubbaa
I second this! What connection should quantum entanglement and alien life in the universe have? I sort of assume what you mean, but then you understand entanglement wrong.
Why is the speed of light not instant? Speed of light is instant, from the point of view of light itself. Its moment of birth and death are the same moment. Light being born in the center of the sun and reaching your eye, that is all the same moment for it. Light experiences no time. Really fascinating trippy stuff.
I do agree that it is suuper unlikely for a universe like ours to exist. People can make whatever arguments they want. But the universe is fine tuned for life. Not saying by some intelligent entity or something. But that the laws of physics, every one of them, work together to make all this possible. It is wild that even the periodic table of elements and chemistry is possible at all.
That is is possible for stars to shine.
So.. by now i think the most likely and to me obvious answer is that we live in a multiverse. That there are infinite amount of different universes each with different possible laws of physics. And we just happen to be in one that is supportive of life. Id imagine the vast majority of possible universes are just energy and particles flying around and that's it.
If anyone has any other hypothesis besides the multiverse i would love to hear it. But then you need to explain this cosmic coincidence of why the laws of physics are exactly the way they are, set in exactly this way to allow for life.
And yea.. a way to think about life is like a game i agree. Don't take it too seriously. Altho we pretend we are all doing super serious life stuff and wearing suits and going to meetings. As if that had any significance at all in the bigger picture. We are just tubes who find food to put in one end to poop it out the other end, but remember, super serious!
HumanSeeing t1_jdh2j4k wrote
Reply to How a close group of brilliant friends, in a tiny German university town, laid the foundations of modern consciousness by ADefiniteDescription
So we didn't have consciousness before that? That's amazing. Thank you Germans for all of this rich experience of consciousness!
HumanSeeing t1_jd6xac4 wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in The Age of AI has begun - Bill Gates by Buck-Nasty
This reminds me some talk about how if you are a billionaire who does something to help humanity, they get tons of shit for not doing enough (and i agree) but when you are a billionaire and you just hoard your wealth and do nothing, no one complains about you. To be clear i think it is absurd that we are still living in a system where it is possible for billionaires to exist.. i mean i understand how we got here. History and human nature and corruption and greed etc. But it is wild how successful the brainwashing of people is to just take the world today and everything in it as normal.
HumanSeeing t1_jd45o9h wrote
Reply to comment by AnakinRagnarsson66 in Let’s Make A List Of Every Good Movie/Show For The AI/Singularity Enthusiast by AnakinRagnarsson66
Everyone has different tastes, i could not stand the really abrasive personalities in that movie. And it has got nothing to do with a singularity, it is just gang stuff and some adventure where a robot happens to be with them.
Submitted by HumanSeeing t3_11wdjdo in AskReddit
HumanSeeing t1_ja9mbpb wrote
You sound like some close to human level AI that is being trial run in some authoritarian dystopia. "Beep.Boop. It has come to my attention that certain number of humans in this subreddit are a certain way and that is against my programming. Beep. Boop."
HumanSeeing t1_j9szouq wrote
Reply to New agi poll says there is 50% chance of it happening by 2059. Thoughts? by possiblybaldman
Ok ok, my prediction. I predict we will have AGI with 90% certainty before 2100. The 10% being a chance that we just die. See, i did a prediction! These are so arbitrary and literally no one can give a prediction worth anything at the moment except that things are advancing exceptionally quickly.
HumanSeeing t1_j8y6kf9 wrote
Reply to Microsoft Killed Bing by Neurogence
>Blame all of the people having meaningless psychological experiments with it and posting about it online.
Yea, that kind of rubbed me the wrong way too. People just saying the most nasty disgusting stuff to this AI and confusing the fuck out of it and then being like "Ohey look at me, i confused the dumb silly system".
Imagine going up to a human and just saying the most fucked up stuff to them and things that make no sense. And then celebrating that the human is like.. confused and thinking what the hell just happened.
HumanSeeing OP t1_j7hvf56 wrote
Reply to comment by kamenpb in Who do you think will have a better/more popular AI search assistant, Google or Microsoft? by HumanSeeing
Absolutely agreed, that would be amazing and life changing to have such tech!
HumanSeeing OP t1_j7hr0hg wrote
Reply to comment by 22HitchSlaps in Who do you think will have a better/more popular AI search assistant, Google or Microsoft? by HumanSeeing
Yes, very true. But in this particular situation i think they would be strongly related.. because the only thing that really matters is which one is better and easier to use.. whatever that is, that will be more popular.
But true that not necessarily. But then again this will be adopted earliest by the more tech savvy parts of the populations, and what they choose will also have a strong influence on what other more normal people will start to use.
Or people will just be like "Oh google assistant is better now" and bing people will be like.. "Oh, finally, i can talk with Bing!"
HumanSeeing OP t1_j7hnk0t wrote
Reply to comment by earthsworld in Who do you think will have a better/more popular AI search assistant, Google or Microsoft? by HumanSeeing
Oh right, thank you! I remember seeing something written about Bard recently.
HumanSeeing OP t1_j7hibjq wrote
Reply to Who do you think will have a better/more popular AI search assistant, Google or Microsoft? by HumanSeeing
Wow, so to the people who think Google will do better, what do they have that could compete with ChatGTP?
I think it is very possible that eventually Google can come up with something better than ChatGTP. For sure, with the resources they have.
But at the moment? Lamda does not seem to be as suited for what ChatGTP can do. They are just quickly hurrying to build something that can imitate CGTPs abilities. Unless they have already been working on a similar system.
HumanSeeing OP t1_j7hemop wrote
Reply to comment by SkySake in Who do you think will have a better/more popular AI search assistant, Google or Microsoft? by HumanSeeing
Its also interesting to think about corporations as super intelligent agents making changes in the world. Google might be becoming more evil and evil. But googles deepmind is a company that i do have faith in.
Demis Hassabis (CEO of deepmind) is an amazing human being and you can see that he genuinely wants good for humanity.. so, that makes me feel a bit better about it. And they already have applied AI to many fields to solve many problems we are facing.
And they also have some agreements to limit the evil that google could ever make deepmind do, but i am too lazy to go look up the details right now. Would love to hear if someone remembers.
Submitted by HumanSeeing t3_10vg820 in singularity
HumanSeeing t1_j7275sf wrote
Reply to comment by nagelbitarn in MDMA, psilocybin approved for psychiatric use in Australia by CouldDoWithaCoffee
Yep, god forbid people feel good or enjoy themselves.
HumanSeeing t1_j6k579x wrote
Reply to comment by imnos in Chinese Search Giant Baidu to Launch ChatGPT-Style Bot by Buck-Nasty
Hey, here for real. This is exactly the kind of situation where it is helpful to remember that there is no point of arguing with stupid people. Because they bring your down to their level of stupid and beat you with experience.
HumanSeeing t1_j6ec09k wrote
Reply to comment by PrivateLudo in When will you talk more to A.I. than to other humans? by Terminator857
Some people be lucky. You say you have close friends and family members AND you want an intelligent AI to talk with? Jk lol.
HumanSeeing t1_jefyzw1 wrote
Reply to I have a potentially controversial statement: we already have an idea of what a misaligned ASI would look like. We’re living in it. by throwaway12131214121
Yeah, very much agreed. I also think of corporations as superintelligent agents.. superintelligent in making profit at least. And this is the result of uncontrolled capitalism. It is absolutely wild that humanity has let this happen, but at the same time totally understandable and not surprising thinking where we came from and how we evolved to be etc.