Posts by DeVille's Advocate

The first real robot war is coming: Machine versus lawyer

Machine V Lawyer? I thought you were going to write about the fact that most lawyers will soon be out of work. They may be preparing to fight a fight that never comes. It could be machine "artist" vs machine "lawyer"...

AI's most convincing conversations are not what they seem

Re: The real issue

True, but

We were here first! The burden of proof lies with the newcomer.

Re: The real issue: BEING

Yes! Exactly! It's not a BEING.

It will come soon!

What we have now are large language models. All that is needed for sentience is a large SENSING model (and plenty of live inputs like you describe).

But what's so special about "sentience"? It is only one part of what makes a person.

So what if a machine were sentient?

YES!

This is critical!

Instead of asking "is it intelligent?" or even "is it sentient?", we need to ask if something is a BEING.

If some intelligence can switch off and on again, can update, refresh, restore, and upgrade, then it is not a being. It is someones (scary powerful) tool.

Sentience (sensing) can be tokenized and large sensing models will be built soon. But people would be wise not to anthropomorphize sophisticated tools.

Sentience? Why this word?

Several good articles like this one use the word 'sentience' as a stand-in for the next step - the thing that this AI is not yet.

The meaning of sentience has to do with sensing, perhaps including internal ("self awareness") and perhaps including external, the state of those around.

Current wondrous AIs dazzle us with only one single thing - a large language model. They are certainly intelligent.

Soon someone will build a LARGE SENSING MODEL.

It will be wondrous, and arguably sentient, but it still won't be ALIVE. It still won't be a BEING.

People, no matter how impressive a thing you make, please please don't try to grant it HUMAN RIGHTS. (Unless you've made a BABY, of course )

Blood money is fine with us, says GitLab: Vetting non-evil customers is 'time consuming, potentially distracting'

Let the people vote!

What I don't understand stand is, Why only the big customers? Why not vet ALL customers? There are services and APIs to assign any person on Earth a social credits value.

Of course, I probably won't be allowed to be a customer, sadly. I eat meat. I fly on those polluting aeroplanes. I wear clothes manufactured with dubious labor. And worst of all, I'm not obedient enough to maintain a positive social media presence. Oh well.

Or, make it even simpler... Companies should let all their employees VOTE on every potential client. No, that wouldn't work, they could VOTE THE WRONG WAY! Companies should be forced to give ALL people a vote on accepting or rejecting any customers. But Media and newspapers, such as The Register, should get two votes of course.