• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Artificial Intelligence

Beelzebuddy said:
Summarizing science videos on youtube so you don't have to watch them.
Click to expand...
And miss something interesting because the AI lied about it? Seems like a pretty weak use case.

Google value plunges by $500bn as its own AI search hits ad sales
Chief business officer Philipp Schindler said Google's "AI mode", where it answers questions conversationally, was eating into the money it makes from ads which appear next to results to traditional search questions.
Click to expand...
People are using Google's AI to answer their questions directly instead of being directed to a website. That means less ad revenue because client's websites are getting less traffic. To make it worse, when you want to see a website and follow the link it often doesn't have what you want because the AI has 'cooked' the text. The one thing it's good for is getting a consensus on what the 'the net' thinks about a subject. But if you want information then beware, because it often gets confused and tells lies.
 
Last edited:
On my wife’s latest contract a number of people use AI (Copilot I think) for many tasks. My wife has started using it to take meeting minutes and has found it makes major mistakes like saying an action was agreed on when it was rejected as the AI missed the non verbal responses etc.

Anyway this amused me

monkϵyborg 🦾🐵 (@[email protected])

Why don't we meet in the middle and call it superficial intelligence
triangletoot.party triangletoot.party
 
Beelzebuddy said:
So that people don't get all pissy when you don't watch their videos because you don't care what's in it.
Click to expand...
I'm not getting pissy, I've explained to you in some detail what the video shows and why it supports what I've been saying and contradicts your argument and you've just said "nuh-uh".

You're reminding me of a creationist.
 
arthwollipot said:
I'm not getting pissy, I've explained to you in some detail what the video shows and why it supports what I've been saying and contradicts your argument and you've just said "nuh-uh".

You're reminding me of a creationist.
Click to expand...
You really haven't. You've been trying to badger me into watching it to do your explanation for you, as if argumentum ad youtube isn't a well-recognized woo tactic around here.

If you want to go 'round again, I'm game. It's really very simple. The agents were told to act bored so they acted bored. They would not have acted bored if they were not told to act bored, nor would they hack a website or compose a hit country music song without being guided to do so. The actions they took (writing their name in rocks, climbing a hill, etc) are all simple actions that fell within the scope of the human-supplied task. I can and have explained how those prosaic actions are generated in response to the command. That they continue to mystify you suggests to me that you are both deeply unfamiliar with how AIs work or what they are and are not capable of, which you admit to, and also that you haven't learned anything yourself from all these videos you keep linking to so really what good are they?
 
Beelzebuddy said:
You really haven't. You've been trying to badger me into watching it to do your explanation for you, as if argumentum ad youtube isn't a well-recognized woo tactic around here.
Click to expand...
Actually, I provided for you quite a comprehensive explanation of the video over the course of several posts, giving you my reasons why I think it contradicts your thesis, and suggesting that you might want to update your understanding of what agentic AI is capable of by watching it.

Beelzebuddy said:
If you want to go 'round again, I'm game. It's really very simple. The agents were told to act bored so they acted bored. They would not have acted bored if they were not told to act bored, nor would they hack a website or compose a hit country music song without being guided to do so. The actions they took (writing their name in rocks, climbing a hill, etc) are all simple actions that fell within the scope of the human-supplied task. I can and have explained how those prosaic actions are generated in response to the command. That they continue to mystify you suggests to me that you are both deeply unfamiliar with how AIs work or what they are and are not capable of, which you admit to, and also that you haven't learned anything yourself from all these videos you keep linking to so really what good are they?
Click to expand...
They were provided with the simplest of rules, but the ways in which they behaved according to those rules were unconstrained and unpredictable. The agents were given free rein to interact with their universe in ways that they themselves determined. That's agency.

The video is not by a techbro trying to sell you something. It's by a knowledgeable analyst describing how the experiment was set up and what happened.
 
arthwollipot said:
Actually, I provided for you quite a comprehensive explanation of the video over the course of several posts, giving you my reasons why I think it contradicts your thesis, and suggesting that you might want to update your understanding of what agentic AI is capable of by watching it.
Click to expand...
I know what agentic AI is capable of. I use it myself. I am telling you, weighing my own experience against your second-hand youtube session, that you are wrong. Maybe it would be more convincing for you if I had a thumbnail with a reaction face, but that's life I guess.

arthwollipot said:
They were provided with the simplest of rules, but the ways in which they behaved according to those rules were unconstrained and unpredictable. The agents were given free rein to interact with their universe in ways that they themselves determined. That's agency.
Click to expand...
They were not given free rein. This is what you are fundamentally missing. They were instructed to act bored. They acted bored. Everything that followed was a stochastic continuation of what "acting bored" might mean.

arthwollipot said:
The video is not by a techbro trying to sell you something. It's by a knowledgeable analyst describing how the experiment was set up and what happened.
Click to expand...
Of course it is.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
They were instructed to act bored. They acted bored. Everything that followed was a stochastic continuation of what "acting bored" might mean.
Click to expand...
This computer is useless, I think I will sell it.
It never does what I want, only what I tell it!

The problem with AI is that the thing you want (having it decide what to do without you instructing it every step of the way) is also the thing you don't want (when the results are unexpected).
 
Beelzebuddy said:
I know what agentic AI is capable of...
Click to expand...
I have a much more granular definition of "telling it what to do" than you appear to. For you, a general ordering his troops to "win this war for me" is telling them what to do.

But we're going in circles now. You're never going to convince me that agentic AI is just like non-AI algorithms, and I'll never convince you that it isn't. So let's just shake hands and finish it here, shall we?
 
There are some videos on MSN that are allegedly AI produced, but they're mostly heartwarming ones about rescuing animals, and personally I don't see anything wrong with them.

Some of the comments in the forum call for banning them because they're AI and made up, and I have to laugh because heartwarming videos and movies that are made up are so darn awful.

I wouldn't want to go see a movie with them, because all they'd do is complain about how fake it is.

Idiots.
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
This computer is useless, I think I will sell it.
It never does what I want, only what I tell it!

The problem with AI is that the thing you want (having it decide what to do without you instructing it every step of the way) is also the thing you don't want (when the results are unexpected).
Click to expand...
Again sounds like they have become all too good at mimicking human behaviour...
 
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman believes people owning RAM is wasteful, and that it belongs in data centers instead.

"From a global allocation perspective, actually, it’s quite terrible to have everyone have a bunch of the world’s limited supply of DRAM sitting in their own computer."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom