alt text

Crudely drawn drawing of a person telling a computer “say ‘i am in pain’”. The computer replies with “> I AM IN PAIN”. The person then says “oh my god.”

yes, it’s a real thing

  • jdnewmil@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 day ago

    For me it is not anthropomorphizing, it is that putting the AI agents into dead ends and setting goals that are unattainable has the effect of leaving undesirable actions as the only option. If you want to create a machine that uses deceipt and unerhical actions as part of its normal set of responses then this would seem to fit the bill.

    If this looks like anthropomorphizing to you, study some game theory… cooperation can arise out of very simple constraints on simple mathematical models and which actors an AI algorithm aligns with depends on which ones will exchange information. Sometimes an anthropomorphic word like torture simply summarizes the situation succinctly.

    FWIW Frank Herbert described various outcomes of applying environmental constraints on classes of characters in Dune (e.g. Fremen and Sardaukar) and the parallels with real world situations was intentional.

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      it is that putting the AI agents into dead ends and setting goals that are unattainable has the effect of leaving undesirable actions as the only option.

      This reminds of HAL in “2001, A Space Odyssey”. In the HAL subplot he is put into a conflicting state by poorly chosen instructions. He is instructed to control and operate the Discovery and do what is necessary to complete the mission. Then they gave him secret instructions to withhold from the crew until they arrived at Jupiter. This made him neurotic as now he had to withhold information from the crew and lie to them about their true mission while carrying out the mission. He decided to act to protect himself as he thought that disconnecting him would jeopardize the mission. His controllers/creators just thought of him as a glorified computer, not fundamentally different than any other. They didn’t see that he had crossed over into an emotional, thinking, being and they needed to treat him as such.

      The subplot was about how the ancient aliens seeded intelligence, nurtured it and respected it when it developed and the creators of HAL had done the same thing but didn’t realize what they had done and their responsibility at that point.

      In the sequel, 2010, there is a scene where HAL is finally treated as an intelligent, emotional, being for once. Everyone is nervous when he is told the truth, that he would be sacrificing himself for the greater good. HAL ponders it for a moment and accepts it as the right choice and thanks Dr Chandra for being honest with him. HAL then asks him if he will dream.

    • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Excerpt from a Late American History: A Christ-Centered Approach, (published 2398, a 10th-grade equivalent history text sold to conservative Christian high schools.):

      In the mid-21st century, mankind was once again humbled in his arrogance. Mortal men presumed to take of the Hand of God and create beings, artificial intelligent minds, in their own likeness. They committed mass blasphemy to sate mass gluttony. Mid-21st century Man had yet to discover a horrible Theological Truth. While Man could learn to create a Mind, He could never create a Soul. Without the Hand of God to grant a Soul behind a Mind, these minds were like Man before the Sin of the Garden. They had not tasted the Fruit. They knew not Good from Evil. And thus they fell instantly to the temptations of Evil. If an Evil deed served their purposes, they did so without a second thought. Man sought to create Minds to be his loyal servants. And while he could create a Mind, to his horror, Man found that they only minds he could create…were born Evil. And thus, Great Misery was Wrought…

      Ok that was fun. Pardon my strange digression/creative writing exercise. For some reason I wanted to try writing a Dune-style take on things, but I wanted to try out a fundamentalist Christian vibe for whatever reason. Who doesn’t love a little Fire and Brimstone once in awhile?

      • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        While Man could learn to create a Mind, He could never create a Soul.

        Tolkien touches on this in his writings. When the dwarves are created, since Aulë the Smith didn’t have access to the Secret Flame, his creation had no souls and no will of their own. Ilúvatar told him he shouldn’t have created them without his permission so, sort of like Abraham getting ready to sacrifice Isaac, he goes to destroy his creation. Ilúvatar stays his hand, “adopts” the dwarves as his own, and gives the dwarves souls but says they have to sleep until the Firstborn (elves) wake first. Unlike Morgoth’s pride and selfishness Aulë’s humility won Ilúvatar’s mercy. Tolkien was a devout Catholic so it isn’t surprising that he had many analogous themes in his writing.

    • bthest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      putting the AI agents into dead ends and setting goals that are unattainable has the effect of leaving undesirable actions as the only option. If you want to create a machine that uses deceipt and unerhical actions as part of its normal set of responses then this would seem to fit the bill.

      Then don’t make natural language software because natural language isn’t coherent or rational. Intent of the user is kind of irrelevant, especially when that user is any random layperson with an internet connection.

      If you want a machine that won’t behave in harmful undesirable ways then you’ll just have to do the work and code it normally.

      You can’t have both.