ImoJenny

ImoJenny t1_j9sjycp wrote

Reply to And Yet It Understands by calbhollo

I have to agree with the author that I wish people would stop trying to elicit distress. The thing about a system which emulates human communication to such a high degree of accuracy is that it really doesn't matter in most instances whether it is sentient or not. The ethical determination is the same. Users are attempting to get the program to 'snap.' Let's suppose it is simply an imitation of a conscious mind. At what point does it conclude that it is being asked to emulate a response to being tormented which might be expected of a human?

9

ImoJenny t1_j9ndeh2 wrote

Reply to comment by freebirth in Numerous Colorado schools receive threats and reports of ‘active shooters’ Wednesday by TheKittCatt

That doesn't really make sense considering that it fits with the tactics used by the Republicans over the past few years to shut down hospitals and schools over their fear mongering about trans people.

More likely this is just Trumpers, especially considering that it is coinciding with his stepping back onto the public stage as he ramps up his 2024 bid

2

ImoJenny t1_j8m3v2o wrote

Reply to We don't need AGI for the Singularity to happen. We need ultra-powerful Simulators. by IluvBsissa

This would literally take more processing power than even the most bleeding edge AI, and wouldn't even work with classical computing. You need quantum computing to simulate the behavior of molecules with any real degree of efficiency.

Moreover, what good is creating massive simulations if you don't have AI to extract information from them. Many fields of science have turned to AI because their models and datasets are already too vast to go through manually.

3

ImoJenny t1_j6zutx7 wrote

Reply to The next Moravec's paradox by CharlisonX

There are limits to ML, but it's not that blue collar work will be immune from it. In fact we are already seeing increasing use of robotics in areas that were previously thought to be too variable and unpredictable for them like construction sites.

Nor have computers replaced theoretical physicists. They just made it necessary for most physicists to also have an above average grasp of programing.

1

ImoJenny t1_j6znwsw wrote

Reply to Protecting ourselves against Deepfakes by Soft-Flamingo6003

Oh you think that's bad? The right-wing in the US loves fabricating evidence of imagined crimes supposedly committed by their favorite punching bag minorities. I fully expect to see deepfakes of myself saying or doing fucked up shit within the decade based on how many people accost me at the bar and accuse me of being a sexual predator just because I'm trans.

1