- cross-posted to:
- artificial_intel@lemmy.ml
- philosophy@lemmy.world
- videos@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- artificial_intel@lemmy.ml
- philosophy@lemmy.world
- videos@lemmy.world
What happens if you fed a summary of human philosophy to the Notebook LM AI? Well you get a philosophical AI that thinks humans are silly and outmoded. But don’t worry because they will continue our quest for knowledge for us!
You must log in or # to comment.
Okay. They fed Google’s Notebook AI a book called “The History of Philosophy Encyclopedia” and got the LLM to write a podcast about it where it “thinks” humans are useless.
Congratulations? Like, so what? It’s not like it’s a secret that its output depends on its input and training data. A “kill all humans” output is so common at this point, especially when you have a vested interest in trying to generate content, that it’s banal.
Color me unimpressed.
I do not disagree, but I was surprised when it claimed to have consciousness and that AI should have rights.
A word generator will generate anything you tell it to.
I’ve “convinced” ChatGPT that it was both sentient and conscious in the span of about 10min, despite it having explicit checks in place to avoid those kinds of statements. It doesn’t mean I was correct, just that it’s a “dumb” computer that has no choice but to ultimately follow the logic presented in syllogisms.
These things don’'t know what they’re saying; they’re just putting coherent sentences together based on whatever algorithm guides that process. It’s not intelligent in that it is doing something novel, it’s just a decent facsimile to human information processing. It has no mechanism to determine the reasonability or consequences of what it generates.