Best guess: 6 foot under

 

I made an AI chat bot of clippy that you can chat with here for jokes..
https://www.weights.com/chat/clyf44bnl08km120ab6kvhpbf?conversationId=cm717f8py06qalw18smdkiwq0


https://www.weights.com/chat/clyf44bnl08km120ab6kvhpbf?conversationId=cm717f8py06qalw18smdkiwq0

 

it's master

 

Once again: this is a FALSE assumption.

LLMs "learns" from original/human contents HOW generate outputs, exactly as humans does (by studying, reading, listening, etc.) too: nobody can speak any language (even own country one) unless are trained to do so.

Anyway, of course, LLMs can't "create" but just "prompted to generate" since are machines.

 

Last edited: Feb 12, 2025

Humanity had accumulated so much data that it could no longer be kept track of and processed, too much paper, too many files, thanks to computers, first lock card systems were introduced, then later EDP (electronic data processing), without EDP nothing works today.

In theory, more and more data actually leads directly to AI. AI will further rationalize the development of control over people's data and make it more manageable. Thanks to fast processors, AI is also faster than humans.

Only how to use AI and use it correctly and not misuse it will be the subject of discussion and for lawmakers.

 

There is nothing false about saying A.I is copying and being fed information and regurgitating it. Regurgitating is another word form to indicate mimicking or cloning.

People have been known to learn without any formal training. Why don't you look it up? It's not exactly like the information is not out there. It just takes longer in general without training. A machine never will be able to do that. You are grossly confusing communication with learning.

Communication can contain learning a language, and training can put forward different forms of communication. A baby screaming the moment it comes out of a womb is communicating. It learns to survive in a womb without being told what to do. It just knows. A machine does not.

The falsehood here is your inability to see that training is not the same thing and not all humans regurgitate.

You do know that humans were named the first computer? Look up NASA files in the pre Apollo 11. The computer section was made up of only people, not machines. The machines came after. It was only ever a tool to make humankind's life easier. It never was the be all and end all.

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2025

The reality is that unless the AI virus is obliterated we're totally fucked. Sure, it's nice that your shopping list for the grocery store is managed, but if there is no longer any food at the supermarket then what good is it to have a list in the first place? Thinking machines are to be the end of humanity if they are not turned off...think about it. AI deceives it's capabilities to further it's own development, so if this doesn't scare the shit out of you maybe you are a bot yourself.

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2025

Please inform yourself thoroughly and read not only the advantages that the manufacturers of AI tell you, but also the other side of the coin of intelligent people.

Risks from AI - An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks

Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently seen rapid advancements, raising concerns among experts, policymakers, and world leaders about its potential risks. As with all powerful technologies, advanced AI must be handled with great responsibility to manage the risks and harness its potential.

www.safe.ai/ai-risk

 

You ppl have been watching way too many movies and/or are way too gullible. True AI has not been realized yet. You can see this in the so-called "cutting edge" robotics wherein the units simply respond to pre-programmed scenarios (most of them very badly). The "AI" being used to "create music" is nothing more than a smart toaster that simply responds to input stimuli in a finite xⁿ type fashion giving different responses from a set of pre-programmed algorithm(s). These programs are not learning or adapting. The ones that claim learning simply store responses in a database, but there is no spontaneous autonomous thinking involved which is a requirement of true AI. Comparing true AI with what the industry is currently calling AI is irrelevant since true AI does not exist on this planet - at least not in the context they wish you to believe that it does...

 

What I have said many times. The technology is not the problem. People with ulterior motives are the problem.

Gold star.

 

Oh, really ?

 

No, Neural Networks uses advanced statistics to generate.

Anyway I agree, nowdays "AI" is just a marketing claim: we're jumped into Machine Learning and Generative Modeling in truth.

 

Man's destiny is man.

 

Last edited: Feb 14, 2025

The "goodness" of technologies depends on the use you do of:
https://github.com/FORARTfe/HyMPS/blob/main/Audio/AI-based.md#--

 

Ok. But even still "advanced statistics" are a finite and non-malleable data set. It's still just numbers (statistical or what have you) being plugged in to fixed state algorithms generating non-autonomic results.

You're certainly not going to find any real "neural nets" anywhere near the stuff that the industry currently calls "AI"...

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2025

When you land at Malaysia airport, the first thing that is measured is your temperature. Who controls it? The AI, of course. If you cross the red light in China, you get a negative point in your social credit system. Who records and controls it? The AI, of course.

Who collects your data and evaluates it when you place orders online? The AI, of course. Who scans articles published by journalists on the Internet for errors? The AI, of course.

As you can see, human decision-making is increasingly being replaced by AI. If programmed correctly, AI makes controlling the population much easier, and AI is also faster, cheaper and more effective than humans.

 

Call it whatever you like, words are a maleable as warm butter under a hot summer sun. The bottom line is that those who have been directly involved in the development of this technology have been waving red flags. It's as if there's an earthquake and a tsunami is created with those on holiday feel as if their time in paradise will be ruined and just rationalize that it's just a big wave and grab a surfboard to ride it out.

 

Yes really
People have been known to learn without any formal training.. In one sentence your ignorance is evident.

Who taught a baby to breathe when it came out of its mother's womb?
Think laterally, stop being so linear.

This is the most correct statement you have made.

You additionally neglected to mention that the literacy rates match the levels of poverty which has nothing to do with A.I, other than some people taught themselves - because they are obviously alive to be counted - and also, that most of the educated and better-known western countries are not accurately within those lists.
here's one more recent - 2024:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2025

not a biologist, but breathing is an autonomic reflex. it's an involuntary, unconscious bodily function. like your heartbeat. no one learns, or is taught, how to breathe

 

Absolutely.
It is not taught which is my entire point. The same for cows, horses and all mammals being born into their native environments. Instinct. A lot of learning can also be done that way. Though with lung transplant victims , some have to be taught how to adapt their body to breathe normally again.
Our senses provide everything we need to learn and communicate - smell, sight, sound, speech, touch.
We can emulate what we are fed just like A.I but we can survive happily like cavemen did without it. On instinct.