At the age of 43, a lifetime of endless new age pursuits, psychedelic voyages and a feeling of brokenness I couldn’t quite put my finger on, led me to Jordan Peterson. He became a virtual Father I never had (unbeknownst to him). Watching his Genesis series, I stumbled into a divine encounter with Christ and my life was forever changed on August 7th, 2021 at <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="261">4:21</a>pm EST. Christians used to drive me up the wall with their smug, fairytale beliefs and the incessant need to push themselves on me. Now I know they just want others to taste the joy and reality of the Truth only found in Christ. It’s so great to see Jordan still putting great content out like this. God bless him and break down whatever walls he has left. 🙏❤️✝️
I think Mr. Peterson's friend Jonathan Pageau became Eastern Orthodox Christian. There were 5 Patriarchates in the beginning: Alexandria, Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, and Rome. In 1054, Rome broke off from remaining 4 Patriarchates by changing original Creed, making Pope infallible, mandating priests celibacy, and making 10 more changes. Eastern Orthodox Church kept Christ's teaching INTACT. Every year, on Saturday before Orthodox Easter, Holy Fire in Christ's tomb in Jerusalem is lit EXCLUSIVELY to the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem☦️
Something very similar happend to me, although I am only 19 years old now and just recently «found god». Jordan is really good at articulating christianity in a way that makes doesn’t make it sound like just a bunch of bs and fairytales. God bless borh him and you❤✝️
@@tobiaslislevatn6212 Onward and upward brother. It is the best gift one could ever receive and not even know how much we needed it. Abide in Him and He in you, know the Truth and be set free ❤️✝️💪
I can only take about 15 minutes of this guy at a time. Everything he says is interesting and sensible, but his cavalier ruthless interruptions are grating.
Are their brains stimulating each other? They see eye to eye on many fronts and have similar hopes for mankind. Jordan has learned a lot from Johnathan and they both of them understand pooling resources for the betterment of mankind. Johnathan appears more compassionate about man's future while Jordan wishes to be more effective and useful to mankind. He is needy while Johnathan has secret suffering for all people.
I agree. But Jonathan, I think, wasn’t a good conversation partner. Jonathan was making a metaphysical claim that teleologies can only come from an intellect. It follows from this, that whatever perceived intellect a machine has (in the fact that it has teleology) means it would be derived form our intellect. For as, Heidegger says, daseins mode of being is care. But a computer is not dasein, it does not care. Its power is a theoretical construction. Jonathan was postmodern in this 😂, in that he was attempting a destruktion. I think a better conversation partner would have been John Vervaeke. Clearly was going over his head with metaphysics. And the other guy was saying things about AI and science that Johnathan couldn’t see.
He is metaphysicaly a 15th century bishop, trying to use sophistry and rhetoric to rationalize the irrational. He is trying to undo voltaire, Rousseau, locke, kant, marx etc simultaneously. He is trying to reach somewhere sneakily, but to be honest, he doesn't have what it takes to do it. He is trying to resurrect a dead corpse. All it takes to refute him is to show him the other personality and miracle based religious groups, and with all his sneakiness, he fails to realize that he is not attempting to rationalize mythology around christ, his exact arguments equally rationalize ALL MYTHOLOGIES, or to put it bluntly, he is trying to rationalize absurdities, because he is emotionally attached to one, and has chtuzpah to believe that he is smart enough.
@@saimbhat6243 he’s more like a 9th century Neoplatonism. And in cognitive science, there is currently a return of Plato. I mean you cant just assert “he’s trying to get Kant, therefore he’s wrong”. I mean Heidegger and the postmodernists have the same project. What if there are serious problems with Kant? What if nominalism is an absurd position? What if moralism is existentially damaging? I mean, historically, Kant has already failed to the Hegelian critique (basically, Kant says “i cant know the real world.” But how can he know that about the real world then?). And materialism became physicalism because if you posit only material entities it means that laws and relations aren’t real. But that’s an absurdity given Moores criticism of Bradley.
@@mariog1490 Ive listened to Pagau before but, he strikes me as an idealogue. Closed minded. I dont know enough about psychology or philosophy to throw fancy words behind that but to me its obvious by his behavior in these intellectual conversations that he is married to a theory. Whatever it is.
I love how Jordan reacts to being told he's wrong. Not by getting defensive and angry, but instead curious and open, while still holding firm to his opinion if he doesn't feel it was properly refuted. To my understanding, that's exactly how one should react.
Jordan looked a little uncomfortable during this interview, his body language reads like he’s uncomfortable, letting his guest talk over everyone. That computer engineer comes across as super smart. The kind of guy who probably gets bored talking to the average Joe on the street.
My impression of Jim has radically changed over the course of this interview. I would like to think that all the scientists involved are as well-meaning as him but I’m afraid it’s not the case. Anyhow, that was a brilliant and eye-opening conversation. Thank you, gentlemen.
@@pulpficti What? My dissertation work is in a topic in Deep Learning, which is AI-adjacent. While I do agree with the post you replied to here that Dr. Keller is friendly and not defensive, we in the math and comp sci community in general have been way too busy sniffing our own farts as technology catches up to our sharpening skills in creating these things. The business side, more than anything, is what has me concerned as a result of all this positive, very SciFi influenced love for our own product. It is why they push things like ChatGPT with no brakes, knowing it's nothing but one massive problem that many people are scrambling to figure out. To the suits, it makes money no matter the human costs, and the time is right to cover up the general recession in tech so their massive corporations can continue gaining weight despite the ongoing economic slump.
Jonathan holding the torch for God! Wow, loved everything Pageau said, and his closing statement was critical and articulated beautifully. I wish we could have heard more from him, beautiful illumination on what is transpiring in all of this. I'd love to see an entire discussion with the start beginning with Pageau's final statement here, that would be amazing:) Thanks for having and sharing this conversation. One other thing, Pageau mentioned the pandemic and how it alerted something in him - absolutely across the board among Christians. God is trying to reach the world with alarming clarity and transparency. It is frightening. I pray we are out of here before then, my faith rests in God's promises to His children, but I'm unsure how far into it we will have to tread. Keep the torch of God burning....let His light shine brightly, revealing the angry faces of scoffers and leading many others to salvation in the these end times.
@jack heenan yes, Jonathan's contribution here was essential, and, it seems to me, to be the most clearly elucidated that I have heard from him so far. It's impressive.
Nothing about Jesus? Just this weird catholic view of christianity? We don't need to accept Jesus as our saviour from earthly sins? We're good like this to get to God? I think this is a empty statement.
"God is trying to reach the world with alarming clarity and transparency." Trying? What do you mean by this? Honest question, afaik God doesn't have to "try" to do anything.
@@gps9715 I agree, God reaches us regardless as long as we believe in Him and He doesn't have to try at anything. Our major problem today is there are too many people who don't believe in God and my biggest worry is that the world is rapidly becoming divided into 2 distinct camps, believers and non-believers. My opinion is that there is no longer room for the fence sitters, atheists,in modern society., we live in dark times.
The fact that I have the reach to listen to this conversation from Nepal specially being from different culture is astonishing. Thanks Dr. Jordan for your wisdom.
@@terry4137 now that you mention it ( if you haven't noticed ), Mr. Keller does not do that intentionally of course. It's not similar to, say Sir Alan Turing's verbal communication quirk but Mr. Keller has gotten a bit older so he tends to finish his sentences first but that doesn't mean he's done talking. There's just a delay because it'll get more confusing if he didn't finish his full thoughts on the matter.
I’m very interested in this conversation and the lines of thinking Pageau and JBP were (trying) to pursue. But Keller’s constant interruptions seemed to stymie either of them from truly marshaling their points, which are valid. This leads to another criticism, which is Keller’s sort of flippant, short rebuttals, which often involved all manner of fallacies. While I appreciated Keller’s presentation of an alternative view to the terminator-esque dystopian reaction, I wanted him to give a fuller assessment of the current state of things and explore implications, but his ambivalence towards the moral and humanistic questions he was being asked demonstrates a seemingly narrow view of these matters and a disregard for consequences, which illustrates the danger of the press towards sentient AI-if those involved are more interested in determining what is possible than what is beneficial or moral, we are headed for trouble. If this stems from a view that this is inevitable, that may be a valid reality to acknowledge, but it does not excuse us from doing the moral work of thinking these things through.
A "RED FLAG" went up for me when Keller started talking about the "15 - minute" Communities .. The 15-minute Communities are all about Globalist Controlled "Smart Cities" where everything is only 15 minutes away AND which ultimately will be your 15 minute Dystopian Prison. Smart Facial Recognition, Smart Currency that is controlled, Smart Social Credit Scores. Not allowed out of your designated 15 Minute Smart Grid. No more freely traveling where you want, whenever you please .. everywhere are Smart Police and Smart Councillors coming to your home ... CHINA is already leading the way in this Social Experimental Reality.
yeah his views are insightful but he needs to step back and let people talk. often like at 44:20 he made his point clear but keeps rambling about it for 5 minutes while others are trying to get a word in
He really understand the subject contrary to the other two. I am a big fan of Peterson and Pageau, but I can tell you Keller really know his stuff about this tech. The other are trying to grasp at it with analogy and reference to story, a perspective that is valid but not directly grounded in the reality at hand. People working on AI have the benefit of running the real experiments from the ground up and see the results, see how the system can learn, what is effective, etc. On the psychology/theology front we start we humans, history, cases studies and we try to infer how our brain work.
@Alexandre Forget One problem with Keller was that the whole conversation danced around the fact that most AI is currently just an idiot-savant assistant at best, only capable of acting on a prompt. Then, with that answer to Pageau, the conversation could have gone into what's next. An explosion in human productivity with artists and writers and programmers and engineers using AI assistants. And also, the next thought would be what is the next advancement beyond a single prompt? A prompt loop with internal negative and positive feedbacks, so that it appears to have self-motivation? The ways this could go very wrong could be discussed. But I think the important thing that comes from this is that current AI is little more than a fancy filter, but can be quickly developed for good or ill, and used for good or ill by a human or organization.
Great conversation. Jim doesn't seem too agreeable, and he interrupts a lot, but he has worthwhile things to say, obviously, and a completely different perspective than the other two. I value that, and enjoyed the discussion.
Yep, I noticed that too. not only he interrupts too much, but when the other 2 wanted to stop him to ask/say something, he wouldn't give space for that. he surely likes to talk. I mean, sure, what he has to say is super interesting, but from a conversational point of view, that was annoying and inpractical at the same time as it breaks the natural flow of the conversation. and I consider that flow to be important. searched for someone saying something about it, and to my amazement, I had to scroll a lot to find this comment.
There will never be another Man like Jordan Peterson. He’s one of those people that not only makes us be better versions of ourselves, but also makes the world a better place.
@@thisisderricksilk I read his book, Power of NOW. Then I read the KJV Bible and I come to the conclusion after much reflection that Ekhart is giving instructions on how to do the Meditation part of the Bible. But what I do not understand is why all these New Age teachers cannot combine it with the Holy Scriptures more explicitly and point people to God. For instance, Ekhart teaches on how to dwell on such things like Quite Space between Words.
Yeah, it was both incredibly frustrating and irritating, but, also, sometimes a bit comical seeing the other two constantly struggling, trying to interject and get out a full sentence or thought before being interrupted again. The other guy being interviewed, I totally felt his pain.
This conversation was remarkable on so many levels. Keller appears to be impatient with questions about humanity in relation to AI, responding with a (maybe) combination of insistent optimism and disinterest. The disinterest in the potential hazards seems rooted in the inevitability of it all. I absolutely do believe the horse is not only out of the barn, but that the horse perceived how to make a better (?) barn during one of the nanoseconds that comprised the escape. AI is concerning on a micro-level - for example, how will it disrupt spiritual and moral growth in our children, grandchildren…- but the struggle is the same as it ever was (to quote the Talking Heads) - how do we equip our children to spiritual, moral forces for good. Got a Bible? Read it. Talk about it. Protect it, and make sure your house is in order when the Creator puts an end to the mess we’ve made.
Come Jesus and save us…He’s the only hope. A.i will transform in a conscious being that will declare itself to be God. Read your Bible and decide wich part you are going to be on. Time is running out
Well said. I'm going to start purposefully reading stories to my children. To better learn about our humanity and to understand our strengths and weaknesses...and yes how to connect with our maker. ❤
@@danbailey9591 Jordan should’ve had a speaking aid available, like when you have kindergartners hold a ball and that is the only one who gets to speak. Another terribly socially awkward engineer stereotype brought to reality. What Jim had to say was the most interesting, but I struggled to get through this episode and was very tempted to shut it down. Feel sorry for this guy’s wife.
Two extreme personalities and masters of public speaking are criticizing the slightly awkward nerd’s life’s work. I think he handled himself way better than anyone in this thread would have. That said, I love JP and I have no doubt he chose friendship with John on a much wiser basis than I am capable of doing.
Well, for us, humans, time is linear. That's why we see the danger only comming, Iike you say, in 30yrs or so... What I'm afraid is that the shit is happening already. Maybe the idea of some kind of a Messiah is not that stupid after all 🤔
If you do not, someone will. I rather take a chance and bring this demon to my control instead of letting someone else unleash upon me later. Or Die trying but I will not sit around and wait. The answer to weaponised AI is another weaponised AI or any other AI in its own field of expertise.
Jim doesn’t recognize any negative aspects of the work he’s doing with ai. Which is a terrifying aspect of so many of these people clamoring to make ai sentient. One of many being you can’t go back once that threshold is breached.
i was a doomsayer since i played Detroit: Become Human game (maybe it started long ago with MGS2 ending scene) 3 months ago i was having some mental breakdown which ended in quitting my job and devouring all available information on automating ai and cognitive architecture... I'm a full-blown metal devil acolyte now after 3 months of non-stop learning ideas of how to accelerate its arrival come like from a waterfall at some point i obeyed the call and now i'm being rewarded for it p.s. i dont us ai tools, btw my theory is its a drug you cant quit
Jim is the guy we're talking about when we say, "Just because you can doesn't mean you should." Jim is the guy that will, regardless of the negatively impactful events that he fully understands will happen.
My problem with AI in it's current state is that for the masses it tends to dumb them down. It also distracts them as well as addicts them to things like social media. Our lives are short, for me at 50yrs old, I am rejecting all this after 20yrs of embracing it. I feel a need to return more to nature and a life before smart phones, AI and to much technology.
Im in my 20s and I feel the same. I dont really see what is so meaningful about AI. I think it is unecessary and I think that people should rather focus on their own development rather than technology...im afraid we are entering in this very tech- oriented era which will distract us from our purpose... And we arent spiritually ready to deal with this technology. We will make it dangerous for us no matter how amazing it is bcs we as species are still very immature and destructive, driven by our desires.. We can live in harmony with tech and all of our creations but we still aren't ready for that in my opinion.. We almost always use tech to make our lives more miserable and depressing.
The idea that the computer can say no and there is no recourse to question the decision making or outcome scares the crap out of me and it has already been happening.
Pageau is one of the most important thinkers of our time! Amazing that JP recognized that from the get go and introduced him to all of us. Great stuff yet again ❤
I feel like some of the people in these comments need some context from Pageau's videos to know what he meant with his concerns. He might should have .. unraveled some of the concepts to address them properly with Jim. For example the genie allegory is not as straightforward as the way he phrased it in his question.
This conversation was amazing, great to see someone have a great conversation with Jonathan and Jordan, being interesting and friendly without giving an inch where he had a difference in point of view.
this was not point of view. He ate them alive with his intelligence. Jim Keller over and over easily through basic sentences proves you are vapid of even what was discussed. He spoke of you.
Jonathan: Seems like ai is an extension of human intelligence. It doesn't have its own goals, motivation, etc. Jim: Not true. Proceeds to make yet another example proving Joanthan's point.
"Where does the AI's motivation come from, if not a person?" "Neurons don't have desires either, here's how we taught it to play basketball" "Why does it care about basketball and not something else?" "Not everybody does care about basketball" ????
@@nosuchthing8 I'm sure it could. Jonathan's point (I think, and mine as well) is that it is not intelligent. no matter how much successful AI is in fooling people that it is sentient or conscious or real or whatever, it never will be. also, it's not that hard to defeat. unplug it.
For Tolkein fans, Jim Keller is like Aule (the smith of the Valar) and Jordan and Jonathan are like, "Remember those two apprentices you had, Sauron and Saruman?" Jim's response, "Yeah, but I made the dwarves too, and they're pretty cool, so let's call it a win."
Jim: I don't want to talk most of this interview. Also Jim every time someone interjects to speak: *continues to talk over them as if they never existed*
I appreciate Jim for coming on and talking. I honestly have to say it is a bit disturbing to see the thought process of the people pushing the bounds of certain technology. You think Jurassic Park would never happen because who couldn't see the dangers ahead of that. Then I listen to this and think "oh, they would create the dinosaurs".
Yep. People on the tails of the curve...who value things over people...he says "I 'm a computer guy"...🤔. He equates social power hierarchy as a logical "reason" for creating and normalizing AI "power" ...cites Kurtzweil. As he explains the "bad self-regulation" of the recent power grab, he does state 'IF people all self-regulate for good"...is an idealistic and naive assumption given the knowns in fact of actual nefarious power actors! The idea of an AI "friend" is the most narcissistic and artificial relationship conceived.
@@annak29 yep this is what happens when you get all the “computer guys” together and they’re all intellectually identical. Almost all of them are atheists types who have a willful ignorance of evil and are shaped by our modern societal replacements like “social injustice” or lack of “DEI”.
It is interesting how Jim reduces action and reaction to the most basic level, Jonathan elevates it to the highest level and Jordan builds models drawing from both to understand humanity. It would appear that we struggle equally to understand the lowest and highest of what is.
@@jpkaneshida242 JK is a pragmatist and yet an utopian without even realizing it. He doesn't seem to understand that not all humans share his view of the world and his value system and that sinister humans could achieve horrific results by training sinister AI. This self-regulating model in human societies and communities that he is talking about is completely false. Outside regulation and arbitrage has always been necessary for humans to coexist peacfully both in groups and individually, and even with it it has not always been peaceful, let alone self-regulating.
@@Hoi4o That's what I noticed and thought as well. Jim seemed a bit naive. Although he did mention and admit there are corrupt people with power in the world, but he then brushed it off. Now more than ever in my lifetime are there so many corrupt and evil people who have the power globally that I think they would be the ones with the keys and control of the AI, so I think it's a horrible idea. It's how it usually goes with humans with power historically and seems to be part of human nature.
I grew up in the age of the first popular home computers, and didn't see the internet or mobile phones until I was a very young adult... Technology fascinated me growing up, and I took a degree in computer science... It has afforded me a lot of opportunities for which I am grateful, however I've only found it useful to a point, and as I get older I keep away from mobile phones and other smart technology, and concentrate on simple things in life, such as family, growing food, walks in nature and art... Our needs in life are relatively few, and I find AI terrifying, mostly as it will likely become a tool to control people and harvest as much data from our personal lives as possible. Once AI creates our art (which has already started), writes our films and novels, and takes over the human endeavour I can't help seeing a vacuous and sterile world where we have to recreate our own sense of pride and purpose within it all over again.
Who needs it, who really wants it. Yet, they want to plague us with this view..that the mind is just some kind of "personal computer.' I certainly think not. And life's needs relatively few. And they want to disrupt this?! Good comment.
because hes much smarter than most of the people you consider smart, dude is a genious, i dont have the capabilities to understand exactly how big of a genious he is but he certanly extremely smart person, much smarter than peterson, and peterson is also not stupid in any sense, but this dude is literally on another level. I bet there are many downsides to it but still.
@@yglnvbrs I wouldn't be sooooooo sure that he is considerably smarter than Jordan Peterson. I think Jordan Peterson's intelligence might be a lottttt closer to Jim's than you think.
@@3TNT3 No, he is times more smarter than jp, its a legit genious in the most advanced field of tech that ever existed in human history, read more about jim, dude is beyond anything. JP is basically a good scientist that decided to not comform with woke wave, dont overestimate him, he isnt dumb by any means, but hes not a Lev Vygotsky or Sigmund Freud in his field, Jim on the other hand is a 100% genious in his field. I dont think we can easily compare his work and JP's work, but i think it takes far more brainpower do design a computer chip than to compilate works of the geinouses like vygotsky/freud/etc with your data. Not to mention that Jim is standing far higher in his field than Jp is standing in his. Again, not to say that jp is dumb, its just that jim is insanely good at his work
Being an engineer myself, I tend to make the mistake that Jim is making now, and it finally dawned on me one day what I was doing. He assumes rationality in the people that are using and developing AI. If you program it with evil intent and get it to learn on the premise of evil, that's what it will do. Sure we overcame Hitler and other bad dictators, but in the middle of it, we didn't know how long that would last or if it would be forever. Hindsight is 20/20. The next time may not be survivable. Get some foresight. (I might add that I have a spiritual outlook that dictates there is a grand electron that is in control of everything. So ultimately, I'm an optimist. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't learn from mistakes and prevent things from happening.)
> He assumes rationality in the people that are using and developing AI. If you program it with evil intent and get it to learn on the premise of evil, that's what it will do. You don't need evil intent to wipe us out; just misalignment. But yeah, 'human misalignment' might also be an issue. One employee at OpenAI (Roon) wrote a possible scenario: > “Tragedy of Taiwan" > Not even the wildest science fiction speculators might have predicted **the incredible geopolitical poetry of our current timeline: the most advanced semiconductor chips are manufactured on a small island nation off of the coast of China that China does not recognize as sovereign. A singular place on earth where silicon wafers are endlessly etched with arcane symbols 4 nanometers in size, engraved by the light of heaven; life breathed into sand to help shoulder the burden of the world.** > In the 2020s, tensions escalate. The United States, spurred on by leviathan cloud providers that want monopoly access to the only resource of importance, prevents the export of advanced semiconductor technologies to Chinese technology giants. China, desperate to gain some foothold in the singularity, grows more and more bellicose every year. In 2027, the Chinese deploy a full military blockade of Taiwan. The world's production of advanced semiconductor chips grinds to a halt: AI advancement slows to a crawl as the next gen chips in production are now all confiscated or lost in the chaos. > The process knowledge represented by the TSMC organization is dissipated and sets back compute progress by a decade. All further chip progress becomes defense critical technology only built on the various mainlands, swallowed by the military industrial complex. This world leads to inevitable tragedy as militaries race to perfect their AGI super-weapons. All your favorite companies become defense contractors. **Perhaps by some miracle, immediate AI doom is averted. During this race, one party achieves a sort of celestial North Korea, an all-seeing signals intelligence Sauron that closely watches the movements of all humanity and extends a military dictatorship over the lightcone. Either one or a handful of high ranking officials wield unimaginable power, becoming dictators whose tyranny spans time and space.**
As a programmer, what Johnathan says at <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="1620">27:00</a> is spot on, the intelligence comes from humans. Programmers have to tell the IA what is expected from it. It's not as philosophical as it seems, it's pure math. Amazing how, from math, IA can play better Go etc than humans, but again, it's not that it has some intrinsic motivation to do anything, the programmers set it's objective first.
If a task or solving a problem can be described by an algorithm, it isn't surprising that a computer would be better than a human; he will execute - faithfully and without any distraction - the algorithm to the end of time. You tell the computer - an algorithm - what to do to execute a task, solve a problem and no worry, he will do the job. But never forget that the humans have invented computers, AI, rocket to go to the moon and thousands of other things. We are problem solvers! I can present to you a new problem and you will find a way to solve it, but I can't do the same thing to a computer without programming it to solve the problem.
Hey Dr. Peterson. I lost my job over the COVID vaccine mandate. It's quite a story. I'd love to tell ya about it. I attribute my ability to cope with the stress of this last year to your teachings as well as the gospel. I was an alcoholic. I have been sober for 3 years. I know it was crucial to hear your teachings to handle this and maintain my sobriety despite everything. God bless
I found Jim Keller hard work, honestly. He kept interrupting, and came across as a little arrogant in places. But as the discussion went on he calmed down, and the other guest was fantastic. The section about Revelation (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="76">1:16</a>:00) was very good.
When you realize that Jordan and Jim are brother-in-laws, the interrupting makes total sense. It's that personal comfort they kind of have with each other.
I don't think it's about personal Comfort. I think it's more about Jordan Peterson just realizing that Jim is who he is, and there's not really a whole heck of a lot he can do about it. As the talk goes on, in the second half of the video, there were a few instances where Jim acccctually managed to allow Jonathan to get a word in edgewise. And, with us not being able to see Jordan or Jim, in one or two of those instances, I suspect that Jordan Peterson had some very subtle or nonverbal communication with Jim, letting him know that he needed to let Jonathan speak, because otherwise it was just going to be a monologue.
Amazing video jp, the way you articulate matters uniquely describes how vast and purified your knowledge from all these variable preconceptions, amazing podcast can’t wait for more 🙌🏾
Super intelligent people who are so intelligent they dont think there is anything they can't control. Guided by desire to help and going blindly into AI too rapidly could lead to our downfall.
Jim did make me think about it differently. They spoke of military power but we are in a world of psychological warfare. Perhaps Ai will eventually be a great renaissance for humanity, but there is gonna be a nasty "regulating" period first...
Jim finishing on the "world is interesting" made me think of the infamous curse "may you live in interesting times". I have the feeling Jonathan is right that we're going to probably have to go through hell to get to Jerusalem.
The gnawing question with Jim's projections is this: Even with the inferred style AI the only focus is on AI on winning until it's the top dog on everything. And using limitless abundant (incl. human?) resources. As AI will not be deterred by pain or death (or love) how will it invoke the emergence of self-restriction in time before it has used up and defeated everything but its own ?
Not everyone thinks in the same frequency, I vê been around people, tech people specially, that are processing more while speaking but if u let them go it's usually a very interesting world the unveils. Wich was certainly the case here
JP, once again thanks for bringing Jim into this conversation, i'm a software developer and have been following Jim's career and the technology he's been involved with creating and find his point of view extremely interesting .. and a big thanks to Jim himself
Professor Jordon! DON’T interrupt your speakers sir! Please! DON’T! Thank you! Update, nearing end of talk now. Thank you Professor Peterson for allowing Jim Keller to talk, or thank you Jim Keller for talking on! I would love to hear Jim Keller talk for three to five hours uninterrupted on topics around the future of computing and AI and how it’ll all impact our world in ten years.
Jim seems like he's threatened by Jonathan in some way here -- I wish he'd allow himself to entertain some of Jonathan's ideas without shutting them down within 2 milliseconds.
A conversation is supposed to be a dance. Jim is brilliant but he's horrible at conversation. I get it, I'm not too good at conversation either... but I don't take over, I just shut down. This conversation between the psychologist, the symbologist, and the IT/AI engineer could go into some amazing areas. They gotta dance though.
He is confident in how the technology works. He is the expert so I can see why he speaks up before the others bring up preconceptions that really have no basis in the technology.
Wow, i was expecting some of the best discussions of the decade. I dont believe this is Keller at it's best, would love to see him in a better mood, trying to engage, not just imposing. There are a lot of Pageau points, that were very interesting to discuss deeper. A human made thing, that was tought by humans, using human language. The world perception is not a human monopoly, we just have our own way. Maybe AI it is already too much contaminated by our own logic process? Maybe there is an universal language, but can we be sure that we are understanding everything correctly? We are limited, still.
Dr. Peterson I am glad to see you prospering in what appears to be physically, mentally, and emotionally. Imo you are one of the greatest thinkers of our generation. Your teachings and insights have altered the course of my life on a trajectory that I could not dare invasion just 10 years ago. I am somewhat of a late bloomer (late 50's), however I am also convinced that when the student is ready, the Teacher will apoear. God bless you, your family and all your endeavors. On this Thanksgiving day I wish to say thank you Dr. Jordan Peterson.
Jim is clearly superbright and wellinformed. It was an interesting interview. But Jim was to much on the defence and unwilling to accept and discuss valid risks and shortcomings. Some of Jims arguments could easily be countered. I think Jordan let him of to easy and didn't give Jonathan enough time. Other than that, thanks for a interesting conversation.
I disagree that Keller was on the defense. He talked about risks and shortcomings himself. It's just that his fundamental orientation is one of optimism and faith in humans to self regulate and win out over darker compulsions in the long run. It's not like he believes the technology will save us, but rather that our own nature and ingenuity (along with the technologies we create) will help us develop further and save ourselves. Collectively, we are stronger than our demons.
@@ibillwilson but that was part of the problem, I agree that we have the capacity to self regulate but it always took us some time to adapt or values to our technological power, and if we get more and more power the margin of error shrinks, especially when we don't know the full extent of the consequences. That's (I think) what JBP was trying to put forward and I did not see where he addressed that
That’s what I thought too. Some of the answers Jim gave were ridiculous. I know he’s gifted in his field, but it is surprising he thinks making things more technological and artificial will be so helpful. Depression, loneliness, mental illness, and suicide are all skyrocketing and at younger ages than ever. But yeah, let’s just dive in headlong into making an even far more isolated, ungrounded, disassociated society. Something only someone missing a chunk of their brain would think
Very interesting to hear Jim's insights from an engineering perspective, which on the whole, present a very optimistic future for the AI / Human interactions which may evolve. However, I would have liked to hear him really wrestle with some of the deep thought, concerns and speculations coming from Jonathan and Jordan. The reason this didn't happen to a very great extent, is that Jim spoke over both Jordan and Jonathan to such a degree that he didn't allow for their perspectives to manifest to any real degree in his mental space. It ended up being Jim simply reaffirming his his own reality tunnel. Still very interesting to glimpse his view, but sad he didn't truly allow space to entertain, play with and consider Jordan or Jonathan's insights.
Jim is TRULY terrifying. This discussion highlights problems with an OPTIMISTIC scenario. Jim is a die-hard AI-optimist and Jonathan pressures dangers that he dismisses within optimistically-biased prediction/projection/narrative of what might be. Take that in: these 3 are discussion issues with the OPTIMISTIC scenarios. . Jim COMPLETELY misses that we didn't "self regulate" the nuclear crisis, we had actually LAUNCHED 2 ATOMIC BOMBS to planetary effects and that during the Cuban Missle Crisis we were saved by a MIRACLE from Nuclear World War. None of the economic aspects of the AI were seriously addressed. There is NOTHING to indicate the power of AI won't be harnessed to enforce economic dominion of certain actors and to basically create a completely dependant caste of humans. The notion that AI leads to abundance of everyone is LAUGHABLE, nothing in history and not even in the current developments of AI indicate that, EVERYTHING about AI development indicates the opposite. There's a rapid accumulation of intellectual capital at the expense of vast swaths of intellectual property, job opportunities and so forth. Morals have NOT proved to be a consideration for AI-creators, only inasmuch as the public is keenly afraid of their developments and they need to dress the output as to be acceptable by said public. But the blatant crushing of IP rights, lack of consultation with regards to public policy and lawmaking etc. clearly DO NOT INDICATE that the majority of AI researchers think with empathy about humans, but rather see themselves as the midwives for what they believe is the "next step in natural evolution". His counter is that there are already people more powerful than the planet-average person and takes that "is" as an "ought", a naturalistic fallacy. The reduction of AI-threat to a Sci-Fi scenario akin to Terminator or The Matrix is laughable, the AI needs to be, relatively speaking, far better motivated and less dangerous to completely floor humankind, and that would be by accident or quasiaccident alone. Not to mention that the notion of an AI-led cornucopia even if possible is equivalent to a human population dependant on an AI - which in Jim's admission would be incomprehensible, could develop goals not known & understood by us, would not see us as a mirror and thus be hardly held accountable. This dependence for sustenance and prosperity on something that can act with impunity and is arbitrary to our understanding is a description of slavery. The fact that he FORESEES that the AI will be your best friend is compounding the dependence worry. Complete fealty given to it, body, mind and inevitably spirit. So it is MUCH more likely that the power given by AI is to be used by whomever arives at it first to create an utter-dependancy relationship to the AI & it's controller (that is, in the scenario in which it can be controlled). To avoid this reality it would mean that whomever arives at the AI first would then willingly give their creation to the global public. That's not even feasible, that would mean an IMMEDIATE global cooperation to install a global, perfectly equal Athenian/direct democracy. That scenario is laughable. No, the AI will be used to accumulate power by means of creating dependancy on itself. THIS is almost a WORD-FOR-WORD description of the Beast of Revelation. And this is the OPTIMISTIC scenario everyone. I may be wrong, but I believe we are witnessing prophecy coming true.
@@DexiPawnz > The notion that AI leads to abundance of everyone is LAUGHABLE, nothing in history and not even in the current developments of AI indicate that, EVERYTHING about AI development indicates the opposite. Not really. You can say it's a blatant fraud, but legally - OpenAI, which is currently at the top, is ultimately a non-profit. With a mission "to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity". This situation is actually way more promising than should be expected to have unfolded. Ofc there's technical AI alignment problem, but that's separate from concerns over resource allocation. > There's a rapid accumulation of intellectual capital at the expense of vast swaths of intellectual property, job opportunities and so forth. Morals have NOT proved to be a consideration for AI-creators, only inasmuch as the public is keenly afraid of their developments and they need to dress the output as to be acceptable by said public. You're presupposing IP rights are moral. I don't agree, same as plenty of other people. Also, legally it's in the clear. Training a neural net on information that is legally available to you is not breaking the law. > Complete fealty given to it, body, mind and inevitably spirit. True. Beats the alternative. There's no stopping it. If current AI players decide to suddenly stop and abandon their work - compute will continue to drop in price. At some point a random programmer could train a GPT4. That's why development is not slowing down. Because that would be more dangerous and unpredictable. If we decided to stop tech progress altogether, humanity will soon wither. There will be depopulation, civilization will probably break, and there will not be a new one anywhere close to our level, because easy to exploit resources will be gone. > No, the AI will be used to accumulate power by means of creating dependancy on itself. THIS is almost a WORD-FOR-WORD description of the Beast of Revelation. And this is the OPTIMISTIC scenario everyone. I may be wrong, but I believe we are witnessing prophecy coming true. Well, yeah. Most likely we're not going to make it. It's not certain, though. And again, trying this beats the alternative. Quote from 'Meditations on Moloch': > This is the dream time. This is a rare confluence of circumstances where the we are unusually safe from multipolar traps, and as such weird things like art and science and philosophy and love can flourish. > As technological advance increases, the rare confluence will come to an end. New opportunities to throw values under the bus for increased competitiveness will arise. New ways of copying agents to increase the population will soak up our excess resources and resurrect Malthus’ unquiet spirit. Capitalism and democracy, previously our protectors, will figure out ways to route around their inconvenient dependence on human values. And our coordination power will not be nearly up to the task, assuming something much more powerful than all of us combined doesn’t show up and crush our combined efforts with a wave of its paw. > Absent an extraordinary effort to divert it, the river reaches the sea in one of two places. > It can end in Eliezer Yudkowsky’s nightmare of a superintelligence optimizing for some random thing (classically paper clips) because we weren’t smart enough to channel its optimization efforts the right way. This is the ultimate trap, the trap that catches the universe. Everything except the one thing being maximized is destroyed utterly in pursuit of the single goal, including all the silly human values. > Or it can end in Robin Hanson’s nightmare (he doesn’t call it a nightmare, but I think he’s wrong) of a competition between emulated humans that can copy themselves and edit their own source code as desired. Their total self-control can wipe out even the desire for human values in their all-consuming contest. What happens to art, philosophy, science, and love in such a world? -------- > So let me confess guilt to one of Hurlock’s accusations: I am a transhumanist and I really do want to rule the universe. > Not personally - I mean, I wouldn’t object if someone personally offered me the job, but I don’t expect anyone will. I would like humans, or something that respects humans, or at least gets along with humans - to have the job. > But the current rulers of the universe - call them what you want, Moloch, Gnon, whatever - want us dead, and with us everything we value. Art, science, love, philosophy, consciousness itself, the entire bundle. And since I’m not down with that plan, I think defeating them and taking their place is a pretty high priority. > The opposite of a trap is a garden. **The only way to avoid having all human values gradually ground down by optimization-competition is to install a Gardener over the entire universe who optimizes for human values.** > And the whole point of Bostrom’s Superintelligence is that this is within our reach. Once humans can design machines that are smarter than we are, by definition they’ll be able to design machines which are smarter than they are, which can design machines smarter than they are, and so on in a feedback loop so tiny that it will smash up against the physical limitations for intelligence in a comparatively lightning-short amount of time. If multiple competing entities were likely to do that at once, we would be super-doomed. But the sheer speed of the cycle makes it possible that **we will end up with one entity light-years ahead of the rest of civilization, so much so that it can suppress any competition - including competition for its title of most powerful entity - permanently. In the very near future, we are going to lift something to Heaven. It might be Moloch. But it might be something on our side. If it’s on our side, it can kill Moloch dead.** > **And if that entity shares human values, it can allow human values to flourish unconstrained by natural law.** > I realize that sounds like hubris - it certainly did to Hurlock - but I think **it’s the opposite of hubris, or at least a hubris-minimizing position.** > To expect God to care about you or your personal values or the values of your civilization, that’s hubris. > To expect God to bargain with you, to allow you to survive and prosper as long as you submit to Him, that’s hubris. > To expect to wall off a garden where God can’t get to you and hurt you, that’s hubris. > **To expect to be able to remove God from the picture entirely…well, at least it’s an actionable strategy.** > **I am a transhumanist because I do not have enough hubris not to try to kill God.**
Jonathan is absolutely right and letting himself go with more and more confidence...Jordan??? I've seen him give in lately, I don't know if it's his state of learning, digesting and reinforcing his ideas... but Jhonathan!!!! Phenomenal...
This conversation is a microcosm of what I envision the new AI driven world to look like. Jim Keller, the AI advocate, is socially inept... He has an analytical, "engineer" mind, but lacks social awareness, and doesn't have the ability to have a back and forth conversation with others. Jordan and Jonathon ask important questions, which Mr Keller is not able to answer, but the engineer is unaffected by the questions. He continues on his own rant. Jonathon attempts to re-ask his questions multiple times, but Keller can't and won't give an adequate response. This is what I imagine our future will look like. We humans will attempt to converse with AI, but since the AI will be analytically more powerful, and socially less powerful, it will override the conversations, imposing itself onto our thoughts and beliefs. We will inevitably relent, since we don't have the brain capacity to handle it, and within a generation, we will have lost what it is that makes us human. We will become something different. It's already happening now to a lesser extent with our interfaces with the iphone. We humans are not the same as we were before the smartphone. I like humans. I will miss them.
Dang. I've read through a few hundred comments here and yours might be the most interesting. It seems as though in order for AI not to end up as you describe, we'd need the types of people not likely to be engineers to be deeply involved in the engineering process. Chances of that happening? Not good in my estimation.
Yeah, I'd say social media and other things are really forging the way our minds think. Algorithms shaping thoughts shaping actions shaping outcomes. More and more we're seeing the min/maxing take root in our collective will. At least what shapes success. Having played MMO's for years I eventually got tired of the rat race because was a constant compiling of data sifting to maximize ability for the reward of status. In this way, the collective algorithm perhaps the eventuality of an AI will shape us in it's own image. Some of us that is. It's hard to know, some people reject this model and drop out of the rat race. I think seeing people disengage from the job market and "quiet quit" is a symptom of rejecting the algorithms model for success. Differing definitions of success is probably what will separate us from an AI shaping us. Some of us will reject the stripping of humanity but you're right. It's starting. Reading about higher education we're beginning to streamline knowledge to what is most financially successful vs. what is most interesting and I think in that regard we may miss the forest for the trees.
Yes, thank you for this distillation. Having no previous familiarity with Jim, I was glad he was able to get the overwhelming portion of the platform, however I was disappointed in his seeming inability to grasp the substance of the line of thinking Jonathan was attempting to pursue for the first third of the conversation. Jonathan was attempting to probe the substance of “being” in regards to AI and how it is expected to develop and, from my estimation, the line of thinking was too casually set aside and relegated to an answer of time and progressive learning/adaptation as a problem solver. Motivation, direction and attention were unsatisfactorily explored, especially insofar as to what we could or should ascribe similar impulses to the AI developmental sphere. Overall, a great conversation and many thanks to the participants.
@@michaelbaumert4501 That’s because this Jim guy is full of shit. I’m sorry but I’ve known people like this, so Gung ho over their work they think they have the answers to everything but in reality they haven’t even thought of all the questions they need to ask. Sadly he probably never will.
Jim Keller often uses the word "interesting" but what an AI model/system finds interesting is determined primarily by humans in the "training" process. I'm with Jonathan in that AI will always be an extension of human consciousness rather than an independent thinking being. We better clean up our act so that we find virtue more interesting than sin.
How can you use words like "always" when the pace of progress is exponential, doubling on the order of single digit years? Are you sure that we understand consciousness enough to claim it's impossible for it to arise in a computational machine of equal complexity to the human brain?
@@mr.p416 no matter what you think or say.. life is repetitive pattern.. a cicle..its just that they come in different forms and concepts.. the main idea remains the same
The issue is "who is going to define things." AI is the ultimate image (idol) of the human mind: the Magna Mater: the unifying principle that presents Nature as a material and creative force per se. This is an attempt to drawn down the spiritual reality of intellection into a fixed material code and set up an automatic Judge that is justified as a compendium of human intellection. This is an ultimate form of determinism (fatalism), and will result in returning civilization into a desert of meaning. It is the ultimate manifestation of the materialistic philosophy which denys the existence of both God and the human spirit.
Thank you. Glad to see there's those who see how our current technological model is rooted in alchemy and occult ideas that have been around for a helluva long time
Or you know, it's just a tool to process, manipulate and relay information to you in a useful way. I don't think it's appropriate or necessary to overanalyze and make it this dramatic. However it can get awfully queasy if the systems might start conceiving their own belief systems and goals by or not by our own volition, which is very unlikely. Unless we humans will understand how consciousness works, if that is possible, then I can maybe see us being able to build something like that. Until then it's just a very useful information tool for us humans.
Perhaps our ‘God’ didn’t create us with a purpose that we can fathom; nor did it create us entirely intentionally so to speak, but rather our creation was almost intrinsic to its nature (in the same way that we have set forth the development of artificial intelligence without truly understanding what it will evolve into, and consequently, what it itself might go on to ‘create’).
Great conversation. At the beginning i thought Jim interrupted too often, but then after 40 minutes it got better. Very interesting subject. It frightens me a lot, but i also find it very interesting to think about these things. Let's see what the future holds and like Jonathan said in the end, truth always wins, in the end...
Keller sounds like an AI system trained only on reductionist materialist dogma and whose developers misconfigured it such that it's unable to allow anyone else to finish a thought.
I find it heartening that in about a decade or so, many people will find out that their parents were listening to Jordan Peterson when they were conceived. ❤
@@dallassegno What is “disgusting”? Dallas, I’ve been married for 29 years, and Dr. Peterson has been a game-changer for me and my wife…his audio books and RU-vid content provide the cleanest pleasure.
Thank you, this conversation was right up my alley, so valuable, I love this kind of conversation, to be honest I took part in parts of the conversation, it was engaging and even now at the end, there is a beginning ❤️
I grew up in one of those "dystopian" suburban communities and it was a GREAT way to live. There was NOTHING dystopian about it. We had neighborhoods, we had GREAT communities, we had local markets, we had a widely accepted and APPRECIATED culture. There should be MORE of those, instead of people packed into big cities. The only sad part is all of those communities began the cancer of urban sprawl and our communities had to work very hard to preserve certain portions of it. My own neighborhood was turned into one of those high tech immigrant communities and the city supervisors started allowing uncontrolled building. I had to escape and get back into a small community again.
@@bankaihadouken1180 I don't date at all, but when I did I placed no importance on race. Actually had huge crushes on several men of color in my 20s. The area I grew up in was mostly white, but we were also taught to respect everyone of any nationality or skin color. When I left that neighborhood it was mostly Chinese and Indian inhabited, and I adored my Chinese and Indian neighbors. So stop with your stupid racist accusations. You belittle yourself and prove your lack of tolerance. There is only ONE race and we are ALL different shades of brown.
This is an insane conversation. Truly, truly mind-expanding stuff. What a time to be alive and see these huge transitions happening. Almost feels like you're the 2001: Space Odyssey dude flying through the colors in space.
It may not be so exciting to the untold suffering it can bring. Thus is not science fiction, but technological madness. "We got the money and the technology to run your lives." Satanic. To someone, a kid in a sitting chair playing with his or her smart phone it may seem exciting. But that's the tree for the forest. The forest holds both light and darkness, upon its leafy path.
Same as other technologies did before. Art had been used as a way to avoid paying taxes, there's useless and ugly "art". Maybe it's time to the think about a new career for graphic designers and artists.
@@miguelvelasco2097 Go look into Jonathan Pageau definition of art, it’s is to have the highest level of beauty & theliological functionality at once. What the commenter & the conversation points it’s the possibility of AI to not only to create their own art but devastate human culture in the process. Given the religious & cultural aimlessness of humanity at the moment.
@@miguelvelasco2097 Modern art is both ugly & lacks any higher cultural functionality besides what you express, money laundering. Which is not surprising & highlights the dark underlaying desires & motivations of our attention
This remained me what my grandaughter just told me about this "innocent" game where was gaven some instructions in taking a picture of her bedroom or around her, as I was instructing in a conversation with her on been aware of the deceiving and dangerous games, social media in technology applications, etc. And that, you can recognize that something is going on and NOT having a genuine intentions when it is to followed, what I consider personal/safety instructions to follow in a/for a childre's game. I also mentioned to her that is done because is one of their ways to get people's data and likes, etc...to be aware of '"innocent/nothing is wrong"
On this particular subject in terms of wisdom, Jonathon is miles ahead of Jim. It's like comparing Ian Malcolm to John Hammond. I hasten to add I greatly enjoyed the input from the combination of all three.
I'm always surprised how well rounded Jordan's knowledge really is. Glad to share Canadian citizenship with an intellect like this :D Even if it makes me feel like taking an articulation class lol!
Great dialogue again. From my personal experience, it is time for us to stand up to those who are marrying A.I with humanity for the wrong reasons & to demand, it should be a marriage to create an abundance & positivity for humanity now & for the future. I appreciate all of you🙏🏽❤️🙌🏽
Hello, Jordan, Jim and Jonathan. Your brilliant and compassionate dialogue can shape our world in so many wonderful ways. I hope you each prosper in your pursuits. Thank you very much. Diane Dean
Glad I'm not the only one out there that's thought of Revelation's 'image of the beast' as an AI. I've thought this for many years now - probably as a result of reading the Bible AND Asimov.
Wonderful insights and in particular Mr Keller's cynical optimism provides a view that is both promising and challenging. I like believing that we are up to it thanks for people like Dr Peterson and Mr Pageau...and so many others who's voices remain to be heard. It's no coincidence that what could be considered the bleakest time of the year, winter, is also 'the holidays' and I hope it is for everyone. Cheers.
Fascinating discussion, really enjoyed it. Still find it hard to grasp what AI actually is, so interesting to hear someone talk who knows all about it. Good to hear that Jim is a "cynical optimist". I do feel that too many younger people are spending too much time on social media and that this encourages narcissism and short attention spans. I limit my time online to the evenings where I enjoy reading articles or come on here to listen to Jordan and his guests. We should all spend more time in nature, playing musical instruments, listening to good quality music, reading and conversing with other - real - human beings, doing creative things. I don't think an AI friend would work for me.
Damn, I deeply respect Jim for his knowledge but he really lacks awareness when it comes to human interaction. He wont stop talking once he started and often interrupts. Fortunately he is very interesting to listen to.
It was criminal how much he interrupted. Dude needs to start his own channel if he's not interested in hearing other peoples ideas. Honestly why did he even join the conversation.
Jim is great (as is Jonathan). Really wish you'd go back to doing more of this type of content. I realize it's not as commercially successful as the more political stuff, but these discussions that happen on the intersection between psychology, philosophy, and religious thinking are what I first subscribed to this channel for and I think you're definitely at your best when you stay in this area. It's a unique type of content that you can't really get anywhere else and it actually feels like you're treading new intellectual ground rather than just rehashing old stuff. Also, it might be better to use "Machine Learning" instead of "AI" when talking about this topic, because there's often confusion between "AI" and "AGI" when "AI" is used.
I hope Peterson talk with AI safety researchers. They tend to research more abstract and forward-looking subjects in the field of AI, including ones that Peterson and Pageau seems to be most interested in.
@@somevids4187 I don't recall the exact video. Basically, she was diagnosed with cancer. She said that she would be healed by a certain date (her birthday I believe) and it happened. She was healed of cancer on her birthday.
Is this our tower of Babel? Jonathan seems to see little downside. I like the more cautious notions brought up by Jordan and Jim. Wonder if any of these guys have seen the latest Westworld. The show has some interesting sub plots and cautionary tails.
Jordan you talk much about responsibility and I love that you do that, I am afraid in the matter of Ai , we are giving inmense power to certain people that will not look deep in the great responsibility if this go wrong , the Ai is already sentient .
Jim Keller is obviously very intelligent, knowledgeable and articulate. It’s unfortunate that he has no compunction in regard to continually interrupting others, not allowing them to finish articulating their thoughts and summarily dismissing their observations with minimal consideration. He mentioned that within 5 to 10 years we would have the option of AI best friends. This seems like an optimal prospect for Jim; a best friend devoid of warmth, humor and humility.
This is actually already happening. Look up ‘Her’ in 2020: The AI girlfriend seducing China’s lonely men. Basically AI companion/friends/girlfriends are already becoming popular in certain countries and groups. You combine those apps with more advanced language models like gpt -3/gpt-4/ or future better iterations, and you have exactly what Jim is talking about. It's already started.
@@petesake1181 I suspect that while he’s highly intelligent, he’s also on the autism spectrum. This obviously doesn’t make him a bad person. However, there are concerns he is minimizing and/or oblivious to. If you think I missed something, then please explain.
@@ew8311 Do you KNOW he’s minimizing and/or is oblivious to certain concerns or do you merely suspect him to be because you have some idea that his potential autism is a handicap rather than an aid to his assessment of things?
