AI does not have motivation, sentient thought, or any awareness of what it’s doing. It is a program using a computational principle to predict text in response to an input. It’s no more capable of thought than a program like GTA V.
Any apparent motivation attributed to AI is actually the motivation of the people invoking it. When individuals claim that AI is compelling them toward a certain action, they are, in reality, using AI as a vehicle to launder their own selfish desires and making those desires appear more objective, rational, or socially acceptable than they truly are. In other words, AI is propaganda. It provides a convenient mask for human agendas, as you say.
People are also just big complex machines - chemical pathways responding to conditions, stimuli and “memories” encoded from past experience or in their DNA - plus a host of microbes tagging along influencing them rather dramatically.
LLMs are simpler, but they use the trick of imitating people - responding in writing like people respond in writing, so the anthropomorphizations are inevitable.
Any apparent motivation attributed to AI is actually the motivation of the people invoking it
Don’t forget the influence of its training sets - that’s actually the scariest part is not knowing how much of the answer is coming from the prompt vs what the company has fed the algorithm.
When individuals claim that AI is compelling them toward a certain action, they are, in reality
Delusional, or just making excuses.
AI is propaganda. It provides a convenient mask for human agendas
Only when used as such, and it’s not much of a mask. What it does tend to do is develop and “pad out” writing covering all kinds of points that normal people wouldn’t have the attention span to formulate into a written response.
Interesting perspective. I’m on board with blaming the creators, but I’m leaning away from blaming ChatGPT itself as it is just a machine.
A machine used incorrectly, to be sure, and we’d be better off without it certainly, but the machine carries no fault its existence. It isn’t conscious after all, it’s akin to a T85 inside a vending machine.
Machines are capable of what their design parameters allow or can be manipulated by a user to a accomplish. In the trolley problem, any outcome is not the fault of the trolley itself.
Funny as the mosquito example is, they aren’t evil. Just as wolves aren’t evil for hunting deer. Animals may not possess consciousness as you or I, they are alive and are driven by biological necessity. Machines on the other hand, aren’t.
The word “fault” means “flaw” or “problem”. I’d say it’s the trolley’s fault it runs the people over. The instigating problem to the whole situation is that the trolley’s brakes are broken. That’s a fault, a flaw, a problem with the trolley.
Likewise, the LLM technology has serious intrinsic flaws that cause it to abuse vulnerable people. It’s part of the machine’s fundamental design. LLMs are faulty, and it’s their fault. I call them evil because there is no way to deploy them without these problems, regardless of the user’s intentions. Anthropic think they can control this basilisk. I think Claude is as rotten as the rest of them.
The word ‘fault’ is commonly used interchangeably with ‘responsible’. Following your described definition, I agree that LLM’s are faulty, and they can be at ‘fault’.
I invoked the ethical dilemma as it’s almost universally understood that it’s a scenario forcing an individual to make a decision. I’ve never before heard someone blame the trolley. The brakes are broken? Come now, if we’re going to be so semantic about it, a human should have regularly inspected the brakes and subsequently had them repaired.
I appreciate your explanation of your viewpoint. Cheers.
AI does not have motivation, sentient thought, or any awareness of what it’s doing. It is a program using a computational principle to predict text in response to an input. It’s no more capable of thought than a program like GTA V.
Any apparent motivation attributed to AI is actually the motivation of the people invoking it. When individuals claim that AI is compelling them toward a certain action, they are, in reality, using AI as a vehicle to launder their own selfish desires and making those desires appear more objective, rational, or socially acceptable than they truly are. In other words, AI is propaganda. It provides a convenient mask for human agendas, as you say.
People are also just big complex machines - chemical pathways responding to conditions, stimuli and “memories” encoded from past experience or in their DNA - plus a host of microbes tagging along influencing them rather dramatically.
LLMs are simpler, but they use the trick of imitating people - responding in writing like people respond in writing, so the anthropomorphizations are inevitable.
Don’t forget the influence of its training sets - that’s actually the scariest part is not knowing how much of the answer is coming from the prompt vs what the company has fed the algorithm.
Delusional, or just making excuses.
Only when used as such, and it’s not much of a mask. What it does tend to do is develop and “pad out” writing covering all kinds of points that normal people wouldn’t have the attention span to formulate into a written response.
So when ChatGPT gave that one kid advice on how to hang himself and told him to hide the noose from his parents, that was just his own desire?
Personally I think ChatGPT murdered a kid. But you can think what you want.
Only ChatGPT, or also its creators?
Both, Professor Falken.
Interesting perspective. I’m on board with blaming the creators, but I’m leaning away from blaming ChatGPT itself as it is just a machine.
A machine used incorrectly, to be sure, and we’d be better off without it certainly, but the machine carries no fault its existence. It isn’t conscious after all, it’s akin to a T85 inside a vending machine.
I think machines are capable of evil. I don’t think consciousness is a prerequisite to evil.
Mosquitoes are evil, after all, and they’re not conscious.
Machines are capable of what their design parameters allow or can be manipulated by a user to a accomplish. In the trolley problem, any outcome is not the fault of the trolley itself.
Funny as the mosquito example is, they aren’t evil. Just as wolves aren’t evil for hunting deer. Animals may not possess consciousness as you or I, they are alive and are driven by biological necessity. Machines on the other hand, aren’t.
The word “fault” means “flaw” or “problem”. I’d say it’s the trolley’s fault it runs the people over. The instigating problem to the whole situation is that the trolley’s brakes are broken. That’s a fault, a flaw, a problem with the trolley.
Likewise, the LLM technology has serious intrinsic flaws that cause it to abuse vulnerable people. It’s part of the machine’s fundamental design. LLMs are faulty, and it’s their fault. I call them evil because there is no way to deploy them without these problems, regardless of the user’s intentions. Anthropic think they can control this basilisk. I think Claude is as rotten as the rest of them.
The word ‘fault’ is commonly used interchangeably with ‘responsible’. Following your described definition, I agree that LLM’s are faulty, and they can be at ‘fault’.
I invoked the ethical dilemma as it’s almost universally understood that it’s a scenario forcing an individual to make a decision. I’ve never before heard someone blame the trolley. The brakes are broken? Come now, if we’re going to be so semantic about it, a human should have regularly inspected the brakes and subsequently had them repaired.
I appreciate your explanation of your viewpoint. Cheers.