AI Watch

[tuffers#1]

The question you’re asking is equivalent to saying “which car are you worried might kill you?” during a conversation about whether speed limits are a good thing

Cars Kill ? do they get to on driver safety courses Like Humans do ?

[CEB]

Tuffet with the “guns don’t kill people, humans do” argument.

[Long slender neck]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

Only as programmed. Computers dont think.

[tuffers#1]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

AI Decision making is bound by the parameters of the Instruction of its program creators . For it truly to make its own decisions it would need to develop its own mind or conciousness . Thats not happening in the next 200 years !

[tuffers#1]

Tuffet with the “guns don’t kill people, humans do” argument.

Well Ive never seen a gun randomly walk down the street shooting at people Petal, especially with out the use of a pair of legs !

[The Mindsweep]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

AI Decision making is bound by the parameters of the Instruction of its program creators . For it truly to make its own decisions it would need to develop its own mind or conciousness . Thats not happening in the next 200 years !

200 years? You haven't been paying attention

[CEB]

Tuffet doesn’t realise that the issue with “bound by parameters” is the need for humans to write thorough parameters that foresee all possibilities.

[CEB]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

Only as programmed. Computers dont think.

They don’t need to “think”. You’re having an argument about whether AI is really conscious: the point is that it doesn’t need to be to be dangerous. It just has to have flaws in its design and the means to impact us in ways we haven’t foreseen.

[Long slender neck]

The question you’re asking is equivalent to saying “which car are you worried might kill you?” during a conversation about whether speed limits are a good thing

Cars Kill ? do they get to on driver safety courses Like Humans do ?

They might when we get around to creating self driving technology.

[tuffers#1]

Tuffet doesn’t realise that the issue with “bound by parameters” is the need for humans to write thorough parameters that foresee all possibilities.

Evidently they will include the parameter "DO NOT DESTROY HUMANITY " !

[Long slender neck]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

Only as programmed. Computers dont think.

They don’t need to “think”. You’re having an argument about whether AI is really conscious: the point is that it doesn’t need to be to be dangerous. It just has to have flaws in its design and the means to impact us in ways we haven’t foreseen.

Well theres been plenty examples of code around for ages making decisions, often with flawed design (unidentified item in the bagging area perhaps one). How's AI different?

[tuffers#1]

The question you’re asking is equivalent to saying “which car are you worried might kill you?” during a conversation about whether speed limits are a good thing

Cars Kill ? do they get to on driver safety courses Like Humans do ?

They might when we get around to creating self driving technology.

Then again just write code "do not hit humans & keep them safe "

[Long slender neck]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

AI Decision making is bound by the parameters of the Instruction of its program creators . For it truly to make its own decisions it would need to develop its own mind or conciousness . Thats not happening in the next 200 years !

200 years? You haven't been paying attention

How is AI going to make us extinct then? The video you posted yesterday didnt give any examples.

[CEB]

tuffet has solved it. No more concerns

[tuffers#1]

You don’t think decision making is delegated to AI?

Only as programmed. Computers dont think.

They don’t need to “think”. You’re having an argument about whether AI is really conscious: the point is that it doesn’t need to be to be dangerous. It just has to have flaws in its design and the means to impact us in ways we haven’t foreseen.

Just pull the plugs out of the power sockets , then the conciousness is gone from ARTiFICIAL intelligence .

[tuffers#1]

tuffet has solved it. No more concerns

I've solved nothing petal , Just defeating the WhatIffery !

[CEB]

tuffet there, using his genius mind to correctly recognise that the thing people shouldn’t do with new technologies and discussion of their applications, is ask “what if?”

[tuffers#1]

tuffet there, using his genius mind to correctly recognise that the thing people shouldn’t do with new technologies and discussion of their applications, is ask “what if?”

The question asked in programming PETAL is always "WHAT IF "
IF
NOT
THEN
ELSE .
The basics of all programming

[CEB]

Again with the non sequitur. I preferred OFF.

[Max Fowler]

The question you’re asking is equivalent to saying “which car are you worried might kill you?” during a conversation about whether speed limits are a good thing

Cars Kill ? do they get to on driver safety courses Like Humans do ?

They might when we get around to creating self driving technology.

When we get around to it?

[tuffers#1]

Again with the non sequitur. I preferred OFF.

Of course it logically follows on . The basics of computing Knowledge is this , yes/no , +/- ,0/1 asked in order to infinate lists of code , concentrated without conciousness thought or life Petal !

[CEB]

Yes, I don’t expect you to appreciate the difference, but the nature of how programming works is totally irrelevant to whether it’s pertinent to discuss “what if” when discussing potential risks of new technology.

But I’ve done it again, I’ve got drawn into arguing with somebody who is incredibly thick.

[Long slender neck]

How programming works is totally relevant.

[CEB]

Cars Kill ? do they get to on driver safety courses Like Humans do ?

They might when we get around to creating self driving technology.

When we get around to it?

LSN will believe that technology carries risk the day he can listen to music on a computing device and not a day before

[tuffers#1]

Yes, I don’t expect you to appreciate the difference, but the nature of how programming works is totally irrelevant to whether it’s pertinent to discuss “what if” when discussing potential risks of new technology.

But I’ve done it again, I’ve got drawn into arguing with somebody who is incredibly thick.

The thick person spent 2 years working in A.I Petal &
the only relevant or pertinent question to ask is how Incredibly Stupid the What Iffers questions are .

O.B.E thinking
What if I'm pretending to be clever on this board & an A.I Man is shagging my wife ?

Thats the kind of question what iffers should be asking themselves !