Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #183372
| Path | csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
| Newsgroups | alt.comp.os.windows-10 |
| Subject | Re: Scary AI |
| Date | Tue, 8 Apr 2025 14:45:49 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 58 |
| Message-ID | <vt3qqt$2rfml$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <vt3f7u$2eh7c$3@dont-email.me> <vt3jee$2krgp$1@dont-email.me> <vt3oli$2omc2$1@dont-email.me> |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Injection-Date | Tue, 08 Apr 2025 20:44:46 +0200 (CEST) |
| Injection-Info | dont-email.me; posting-host="48a79f8a701f61c039c81452d0cad3a9"; logging-data="2997973"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ErFwuBKi/M5LDdxRhH0TJSJFOUBCbg9M=" |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.1 |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:A/nn0X6a5MzSKNDRBf7FORbJIpc= |
| In-Reply-To | <vt3oli$2omc2$1@dont-email.me> |
| Content-Language | en-US |
| Xref | csiph.com alt.comp.os.windows-10:183372 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 4/8/2025 2:07 PM, Ed Cryer wrote: > How does the program do that? > I used to earn my daily bread programming commercial mainframes. But > this AI "in the style of" beats me. I've done Walt Whitman, Louis > Carroll, William Wordsworth and others; and all win my praise. > And that's only one facet of the AI phenomenon. > > I'd have needed a vast database of examples set up just for Shakespeare > alone. > > I'll not rest until I grab the working essentials of how this thing > works; call it a program, call it an algorithm, call it what the hell > you want, but I want to know how it produces its stuff. > The sort of things I've read so far are; "It has all the Internet at its > call, and summons up vast resources". But that gives nothing away. If > you've ever had to write a computer program, you'll know that is true. > > So, how does it do its stuff? > As a programmer you know that it's all math. It's all calculations on an abacus. It just gets increasingly complex. The marketers say they've lost track of how it's working and that must be intelligence and blah, blah, blah. But it's still all just binary data and math calculations. So how do they make these things up? They copy billions of lines of data and look for patterns. Notice that your poem includes lots of cliches strung together. They mostly don't make a lot of sense. But they come close and we read into it. So how COULD they do it? There's only one way: To gather data and compare it in various ways, then synthesize new combinations. That's math, just like any other computer operation. You might download porn of a naked woman with an amazing ass and go into a long fantasy about having a relationship with her. Would it matter whether that woman exists or whether it's an AI production? What you're enjoying is a bitmap recording of RGB pixel values, projected on a screen. There's neither a real woman nor an AI picture there. There's a data stream of numeric values interpreted as RGB pixel colors. The rest is in your mind. I think that's the interesting thing about people who talk about tests for consciousness. We'll know a computer is conscious if it can make a human think it's conscious. But that assumes the human is conscious. What is conscious? If I always stop at Dunkin Donuts for a chocolate donut when I pass by, is that conscious? If I give my life savings to a woman who says she loves me, is that conscious? How about if I decide an AI is conscious and empathetic because it seems to like me? So, no, AI is not conscious. The more intriguing question for me is whether it's possible for humans to be conscious. :)
Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 16:26 +0100
Re: Scary AI "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-04-08 11:45 -0400
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 12:39 -0400
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 19:07 +0100
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 14:45 -0400
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 20:35 +0100
Re: Scary AI jetjock <jetjock@unkown.com> - 2025-04-09 14:01 -0500
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-08 20:57 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-08 17:16 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-09 19:53 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-09 16:47 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-11 12:23 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-11 13:31 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 02:30 +0000
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-13 07:49 -0400
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 13:08 +0000
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-13 02:38 +0000
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2025-04-18 01:40 +0300
Re: Scary AI Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-04-17 20:22 -0400
Re: Scary AI Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-18 02:12 +0000
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-18 06:44 +0000
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-04-18 14:34 +0300
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-08 20:46 +0000
Re: Scary AI Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-04-08 22:48 +0100
Re: Scary AI Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-04-09 09:50 +0000
Re: Scary AI occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2025-04-18 16:45 +0200
Re: Scary AI Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-04-09 05:29 +0200
Re: Scary AI Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2025-04-18 01:02 +0300
csiph-web