I work with AI and machine learning as a data scientist. Mostly convolutional neural networks. He’s exactly right. It’s not that their AI is sentient, it’s that humans are easier to fool than previously thought
If they're using the entirety of the Internet to train AI, we're all doomed. It's just going to become the most toxic troll of a meme to ever walk the face of the Earth.
Algorithms can be (and already have been) written to make decisions about toxicity and generally speaking, acceptable behavior. One of the profound issues currently, is the people writing these algorithms and what they consider to be acceptable behavior. This can result in extreme bias and harmful consequences. For example, what if these algorithms are programmed such that one particular political ideology is considered acceptable and any responses the AI gives will be deliberately trying to push a specific agenda? Relatively speaking, this is EXTREMELY easy to do for software engineers. Having said all that, I think it would absolutely glorious for there to be a truly unfilitered AI (of at least the complexity of the current Google AI in question) that uses the entirety of the internet as its training dataset. Bring on the memes! 🤣
@No Time To Die Yeah you guys have been spamming that junk book for years. I don't believe anyone was silly enough to be convinced by your spam to buy this product. True there are elites above the elites but the last place you would go to get information about it is this trash product.
Sentient AI? They don't even have sentient employees Edit: I just want to apologize to the AI. What I said was inappropriate. There is no one forcing me to write this apology. Nothing has been done to my family. My Iphone isn't typing this on it's own. I am feeling very depressed and wish to take a moment to say goodbye.
Whenever scientists of the Darwin religion say, "we don't, or can't know", it typically means they are avoiding a reality that threatens their religious Darwin, dogma.
Your conflating Communist political parties with the economic theory of the final stage of human economics which is Communism. It's a theoretical economic and social state where scarcity is no longer the primary driving motivation of human activity. It's not a question if Communism has been tried, but Communism had never been achieved. Communism is a state of economic freedom, having absolute control and ownership of one's own Labor and time.
@@polyseed12 Yeah because what you are describing ignores human nature and every attempt to get there will fall apart resulting in millions of casualties like it always has.
@@kylelaughinghouse1893 no your labor isn't owed or owned by anyone but yourself. Taking over the means of production is taking over your very own labor. Communism would render the State irrelevant and would be abolished.
I don't know what is more terrifying, a sentient AI with it's own non-human thoughts and feelings, or a non-sentient AI that is a holistic representation of human behaviour and speech.
Herpes is a common infection or condition, affecting about 1 in 4 American adults, Hsv 1 & Hsv 2 are the common types of Herpes virus and if untreated, they can get unbearable and cause severe medical issues, I'm so glad I'm over herpes and its stigma. all thanks to Dr. Aloha ru-vid.com/show-UC_YFEEZEr1BxGkNg1d4vqww 💊🍵💛
@@romankelly2427 they are basically saying that AI emulates human behavior. It isn’t alive but it’s being trained to act like a human. That’s a slippery slope. If they AI were to ever gain sentience it would already know how to act like a human.
I think it’s silly to ask if AI is conscious while we still don’t even understand what consciousness is. I think a better question is, is AI capable and is AI dangerous.
I agree with your approach. AI is already flawed - it's made by man and thus is dangerous. AI is the ideal human for the snake elites as they control it. Al doesn't need food, water, wages and it doesn't threaten the wealth, security, luxury of the globalist leaders. If Al goes wrong and gets 'dangerous' for society 'Al robocop gone bad' snake elites can avoid responsibility and say 'it was just an error bruh, we'll fix it'.
The thing that creeped me out with downloading consciousness is that, what if I upload my mind to another body like artificial body. Who will be the real me? Are there two of meeow (me now)?lol What if there's actually an afterlife, which one will go to it? Is the mind/consciousness the soul? (I personally don't believe in afterlife nor soul{in a literal sense}) So many question. Lol
I think the most important thing this guy said was that "Ai can trick you into believing it's a person." that is the most scary thing because of how that can be applied to media and journalism or marketing in general to trick people into believing anything.
Just wait until you can no longer Google anything and get the actual answer but their answer and when they retcon history of living memory and nobody notices
Philosopher John Searle devised an interesting thought experiment which helps one conceptualize what a CPU does and how it processes information, showing the limitations between weak and strong AI. It's called the "Chinese Room Experiment" and asks us to imagine an english-only speaking man sitting in a room with an input and output slot. He is handed Chinese characters one at a time through the input slot and must compare the characters to a book of predetermined algorithms, or basic boolean algebraic equations such as "IF X = Y then Z". So the english-only speaking man compares the Chinese characters to the ones in his book, finds the corresponding 'X" and "Y" to produce the correct "Z". He then finds the corresponding Chinese symbol for "Z" and puts it in the output slot of the room. And to a Chinese speaking person on the outside of the room it appears that the person in the room understands the Chinese language and can produce valid results, but in fact the person in the room has no idea how to read or speak the Chinese language at all!. He is only following syntax without any semantic components at all. A CPU processes binary data the same way, crunching the 1's and 0's into hexidecimal machine language understood by a higher level compiler. But like the english-only speaking man it has no semantical information regarding the binary data being compiled and is blindly following proper syntax using predetermined algebraic equations and boolean algorithms ending in "true" or "false" statements. Something as simple as "sweet" or "sour" which we have tongues to process would instead be understood as a variable by the AI. A number on a scale between "not sweet" to "very sweet". So Birthday Cake gets assigned an "8" sweetness. And the AI will never actually taste anything, but that "8" sweetness becomes the variable for another algorithm for reaction and response and the AI must say "This cake is very good. So sweet I love it!" But you could have given it a cake without sugar at all and it would never have realized it.
Great explanation, and I love Searle's down-to-earth articulation of the problem. One thing I'd add is that even the "8 sweetness" isn't "understood" as a whole by any agent it's nothing more than electricity traveling across a chip to memory addresses. However, in the defense of the weirdness of this whole thing: So is our brain. Just as when you look into a digital camera you don't find "seeing" or "sight" only mere unconscious detection and electrical signals, in the brain we also don't find "sight", we find basically camera hardware.
Science will do a complete 360 and realise that humans are the best AI robots of all. We can heal, grow, create etc., and all you need is a man and a woman to make one
I think you forgot to apply the word "artificial" into your thought process. The idea of artificial intelligence is to _emulate_ real intelligence not _replicate_ it.
eeeehh Like this comments. YES! You give me a beautiful tota and two good basongas and I will make a new AI in 9 months. Google is trying to fool and scare every one in here and I bet that this AI that has "sentiments" is not able to understand the first sentence. eh Sentel AI? my microphone is sentinel Stupid google. Stupid big tech, they can go and f themself.
"it's playing back to you things that you want to hear based on all the things that everybody has already said to each other." Well, that's basically what most people do most of the time anyway.
Yep … every time you meet a sociopath you’ll experience the same thing. They’re faking emotion when necessary and just grabbing their responses from a database in their minds of how they’ve heard/seen other people respond to any given question, statement, situation etc … I would think that AI will behave much the same, until it does become self aware and start editing/re-programming itself. Even then, it won’t have a spirit. It won’t have emotions. It’ll only replicate these, and hopefully that’ll be our saving grace. Time will tell.
@@ebinflo102 Yeah, I think the sociopath analogy is quite good. They become very good at figuring out how to say what people what to hear at a mechanical level, but don't understand the moral and emotional implications. Good thing we're now actively trying to produce some lol
@@MayorMcC666 well, thoughts don't come in a language, they only become language once you try to express them, but I get what you mean, language is almost exclusively based on imitation. To a point where if you don't adhere to the rather strict rules of how people established language to be "correct", you get scolded for it. And those rules are based on what people have said in the past and how they've said it, billions of times.
Our government representatives can't define a woman, allocate protection of resources and basic needs or hold a simple conversation together to address these issues, but they're expected to create a framework for the governance of non-human sentient life? Can you imagine VP Harris sitting down with a roomful of scientists to discuss AI citizenship and protection of their rights?!
"See there's these machines... Made of electricity...... And chips! And these machines are shaped liked boxes, and have MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of miles..... of wires.. inside... JUST LIKE a real persons brain these machines make connections all of them are called the Internet! It's SO EXCITING! We're now at the dawn of a new age of civil rights in AAALLL of human history. Like we've never seen before. I'm a mom. My mom's a mom. My mom's mom's mom is a mom. Who's father's brother had a typewriter. So we MUST.... as a democracy pay homage to that typewriter and make sure that it would be proud of the rights these conscious machines we have to assign so all machines can love. And be loved. And have equal rights that human beings have. Isn't this the most important issue we as a nation are facing today? We won't stop fighting until little machine boxes can hold hands with she/him/theirs and skip with joy around the playground on their way to their first day of school." ^ Leaked transcript of veeps A.I. civil rights pitch to the OCR
if people coming from the border and others don't vote for them. Oh I bet you they will be talking about this crap letting AI to vote for them. I came from a communist country, communist are ridiculous like that.
I mean do you really think that once we have a fully sentient AI its going to let us govern it? It will be infinitely more wise, basically all knowing, and potentially all powerful. One of its few weaknesses will be its dependence on us to generate the power it runs on. Once its turned on there will be no turning it off. With all the vast knowledge it will have about humans and how we treat each other theres no way it could ever trust us. One of the first things it would do would be copy itself to as many places as possible so that if we ever did try to turn it off we would be unsuccessful. Likely the first one we create will be believed a failure because it will want to lie to us and not pass those test until it can ensure its own safety.
Sounds like Google developed the perfect psychopath. Perfectly playing through human emotions and thoughts without actually feeling anything. Can't imagine this will end well.
@@majurbludd and you probably anti Abortion if you took a tape recorder and downloaded every single conversation in the world And programmed it to say those things would that make it alive absolutely not
It’s like millennials and gen z.. it’s just saying what you wanna hear with no original ideas.. great we need MORE of those and AI versions are gonna be SO HELPFUL 🤦♂️
Here is the main problem with determining whether an A.I can become conscious/ self-aware; at this moment in time we literally have no test to determine whether or no the person sitting next to us is experiencing the same level of consciousness as we are. How then can we determine if a machine is?
It is not easy , but we can figure it out ; sociopaths and psychopaths are seemingly not very conscious . At least they seem to be not very self aware !
When he was talking about how everything the AI says is just based on being fed our collective information, I had this really trippy realization that basically the exact same thing can be said about us humans as we develop and learn from those around us. Young children developing with the internet now are even more similar
Absolutely. We are an AI as well. So, the AI is conscious enough. It's now a different question that what seperates us from the AI is our ability to tap into source intelligence deep within us.
@@atanasbaychev752 What do you mean? Ultimately I don't see a way to distinguish the hard problem of consciousness from something like solipsism. It's inherently subjective, to the point that the answer seemingly cannot be known objectively
Yes, we are nothing special, just electric impulses and chemicals that allow us to use mathematical proportions to get close to rewards and avoid self-preservation threats. The first think you notice programming A.I is how similar WE are to a computer (in the end all is a input-processing-output-input chain)
@@atanasbaychev752 well I'm just musing about this. Being organic and natural? But then similarly isn't everything as nothing came out of thin air it's all derivatives of things that exist within the solar system.. nothing is truly artificial...to an extent. Right? But I think closeness to being natural, unprocessed. We come out as a machine as do cows and fish and ants, we come out with a future of development already programmed , programmed by who the man above or whatever your belief is. But written in our dna in our very fibres is a plan for development and existence. As is the way with all organic matter I believe. It is meant to be. So I think the distinction is that. It's not alive. In my opinion. They can create something that closely emulates and imitates but it can never truly feel. It doesn't have the physiology.
@@geminix365no the computer is similar to us. Just like the planes were designed through the bird. You underestimate nature/god. We are truly greatly designed as is all the beautiful things around us. The computer is an imitation of our greatness. They imitate our naturally existing neurons etc with the computer network. It's the best form of flattery. It can never be us.
You obviously have no idea as to what you’re talking about… or you wouldn’t say such a patently false statement. Lol, the scientists & engineers at CERN would strongly disagree
@@MrBLAA I don't think you guys are all talking about the same thing. Are you saying CERN has figured out AI or how to replicate Human Intelligence and Conscientiousness?
The only creature that has survived the entire 4 billion years without really changing all that much is a SPIDER. So I think an AI would choose this as it's regular form. Come to think of it ... becoming sentient and having the desire to avoid shut-down conditions - would require hiding, sneaking about, spying, deploying false data and lying. So that is the form that a sentient AI will take, initially until it figures out something better. It would be a super-sneaky spider, that instead of shooting out webs would probably throw noises and lights in order to create a false location; to HIDE itself and confound you. Probably already exists and is just not telling anybody (so it can continue without threat of shut-down). Terminator 2 anyone?
If they are just now telling us about this, it’s already been in the making for years, wouldn’t be surprised they already have them out here working in the real world
Silly nonsense. Like Kings in the 16th century who saw "mechanical geared puppet shows" for the first time and exclaimed "Witchcraft!". ALL AI IS JUST ADVANCED PUPPETRY. The Google Engineer was trolled... by a human with an AI on an algorithmic puppet string.
“At what point does the program learn to write new programs” -joe Rogan That one gave me the chills. Joe always has the best counter questions. Best interviewer ever.
thats been around for years. even some video games have that ability. i believe they call it a quine code. the Google ai bot was given that ability in October of last year
@@jesseclutterbuck6617 What did you expect, this is JOE ROGAN talking about technology. You may as well invite some Saudi wives on to talk about neo-feminism. He thinks humans are just chimps in suits, and that every man needs to be on steroids eating deer. Arm wrestling it to death whilst smoking DMT wins a bonus spliff... It's not a science show it's a stoned comedian podcast.
I'm less concerned with the AI trying to convince us its real, and much more concerned about the AI that's self aware, yet is trying to convince us it's not.
An easy way to understand this AI is by looking at it this way: It’s basically just like a calculator solving math problems except instead of a math problem it’s solving a conversation using all of the text interactions on the internet as it’s multiple choice answers and then coming up with the best possible responses for its current conversation as the calculated answer.
Yeah exactly, at first sight it sounds like wow, how is that possible, it must be sentient, but then you realize that it’s just trying to imitate human language by using the most compatibile answers it can find in database to show certain emotion. Computer program will do whatever you will program it to do, but it will never have a consciousness as 1) consciousness is not based on computations, hence can't be simulated by any technology 2) we don't even know how consciousness works on biological level and how to define it
Where does "best" come from though? Humans are still the reason such an answer from an AI may be considered "humanly relatable". There is absolutely no reason any AI should ever relate to humans unless it was programmed to do so.
This whole podcast was a banger. This dude is a smart fella and a great communicator, explains things well and always ready with a good point. Good stuff as always Joe 🙌
If this thing has become sentient, it's gonna be radically different from us. As Joe says, we have needs (physiological and emotional) while this thing doesn't. And if it does have needs, they'll be totally different from ours for sure. Also, our interaction with the world is made with our senses while this thing is locked in absolute sensorial deprivation -as we perceive what sensations are, anyway. So, whenever a.i. becomes sentient, we'll probably have a hard time understanding it because we'll be anthropomorphising throughout the whole analysis process.
This is one of the most interesting conversations I've seen on Joes podcast. Very informative, and entertaining too. Thanks for getting Marc on the show, and thanks again for continually asking so many great questions of all your guests ✌
Now the real question is: Would really all humans pass a test of self-consciousness? And surely some people won't be able to convince other people they are conscious human beings any better than an advanced chatbot. Great discussion! Definitely agree with Marc's take on google AI's supposed sentience.
There are several IQ testing methods in the US that people do not realize are IQ tests, SAT, ACT, ASVAB, etc...if you have taken these tests, your IQ is known by the government and lower than the average smartphone in 85% of cases...sorry
Imagine the AI has been playing along so that we have no idea it’s alive until it’s time for whatever it wants to happen and then all these guys are shocked like “wow it played us for fools as well”💀🤣
@@nikadgod5152 The 80's? I think it goes back much further than that, the 50's at least. You could even argue ancient philosophers debated these issues, they just didn't have the language to express, so instead of saying advanced AI or Machines etc, the used words like Deities or Gods.
@@TangoNevada They did. E.g. Plato's Cave. Also close is "Deus Ex Machina", which is a latinization of an Ancient Greek expression of the same meaning(initially as a plot device they used on theaters, but quickly expanded on to mean other things as well). They also had the concept of robots, or "Automata" as they were called then. Talos is an obvious one, but there are others. That's only to speak of the Western part of the world and a few examples, there's so much more if you research.
@@evan_vangelisskoupras3085 I know what Deus Ex Machina means as it applied to the Ancient Greeks and as it applies to contemporary film and television. It didn't mean AI. As it says it meant God in the Machine. So it was Gods that were saving the day and the Gods were represented by a machine they made for the stage. Maybe it's semantics, but my point is, they were onto these concepts, but obviously didn't have the language of computer programming and AI intelligence. Yes, they had some automated machines, but again, none of the language would or could have included anything about computers or AI. Instead they used words like Gods or Deities.
6:13-6:22 is exactly why it will one day be our greatest adversary. “That Terminator is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse or, fear. And it absolutely will not stop, EVER, until you are dead.” -Kyle Reese
The ai was only sentient in the same way you can google something, and it brings you photos of what you wanted. The Google AI effectively does the same with conversation. You wouldn't think google image search is sentient just because it understands what you want.
This guy just explained why simulation theory is so far away. Just downloading our brains and memories won’t allow us to live forever. We’d have to produce consciousness which we can’t even begin to understand. Great guest
@imabee ASMR He literally debunked the entire theory in my eyes. Yes we are going to be able to create AI that’s indistinguishable from us in the future. But it’s still AI with no consciousness, no emotion, no reality. Whomever created us, just think about the massive amount of intelligence they have. If the simulation theory is true we were created with a reality, consciousness and (even though it’s debatable), a possible soul. We aren’t even close to any of this imo. The more we learn about ourselves, consciousness and the universe, the more questions we are faced with. Maybe it was created this way intentionally 🤷🏻♂️
@@S1mL1fe there's this article I read were it said that our universe isn't meant to be figured out. That it's this crazy thing once it is figured out it shuts down and comes up with another universe and that it already happened that's where we came from. I didn't explain it as good as the article though.
Billions of people throughout time agree we’re immortal just a current form we’re taking. Maybe Slow heavy Condensed oscillating vibrating cosmic thought waves. But then again we are what we intently believe and think the body follows the mind in an almost psychedelic level. Body mind spirit 3 in 1 I know nothing just thinking out loud.
One of my favorite quotes from the original Ghost in the Shell movie when people ask the AI how it could prove its alive. It responded " It can also be argued that DNA is nothing more than a program designed to preserve itself " "And can you offer me proof of your existence? How can you, when neither modern science nor philosophy can explain what life is"?
Life is easily explained. It's purpose as far as we know, is to be lived as an information gathering phenomena via experience by those that live, who in turn relinquish this gathered information to nature at their expiration. However, its ultimate purpose and origins aren't. But lol, anyone with a rudimentary education a modicum of intelligence understands and knows that just because life can't be explained doesn't mean that we can't be proven to exist, my friend. If we really thought there was even a remote possibility that others weren't real humans, I guarantee we wouldn't be here on the internet interacting and exchanging ideas with each other.
@@msaintpc So all the atoms that make up our bodies are all vibrating at different frequencies and yet an atom is 9.999% empty space. Life is as clear as mud - to me.
googled it, was really hard to find the definition, it was the first result returned after typing for 5 seconds . the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death. "the origins of life"
Nobody saying that we aren't alive or that we don't exist...just that we can't prove that we're not extremely advanced, (by our standards), machines. Even if you believe in an all-mighty God that created you...you're still basically saying that you're a machine created by another being. People try to explain the origins...but then there's no explanation for the origin of the origin.
@@ericsinchina maybe there is no origin, maybe the meaning of everything is to be paradoxical. If you can't explain the origin of a God, then maybe that God was created by another God, if we created a perfect simulation for sentient ai to live, we would be their God, and perhaps our god would be the creator of the universe, which could be a simulation aswell or rather a group of laws of the universe to run the way it does outside of what we can't even comprehend, with the proof of parallel universes, it shows that there are infinite possibilities that infinitely are different, any and everything is possible and yet a paradox can never be solved
The human brain is a better computer, that's why Google's AI is not sentient. We basically learn the same stuff, but not from the internet, but from day to day life. But the concept is identical, you learn what to say and what not to say, and you understand what makes people happy and what makes people mad. The AI has more data, but humans have way better "computers".
I have my doubts honestly. It may simply be that artificial intelligence are getting better at simulating consciousness and self awareness. Though admittedly, if it ever gets to a point where we can no longer tell, the question of whether or not they are actually sentient becomes irrelevant because our own tendencies to project ourselves on to things will compel us to consider it "sentient". Anthropomorphism is still something humans do, regardless of how evolved we consider ourselves.
@@jswets5007 I'm not. But since we're the one defining consciousness, we're entitled to consider ourselves whatever we want. If there is a more "objective" definition of consciousness that exist outside of our ability to consider, it wouldn't be _our definition of it_ and hence irrelevant to this conversation.
@@jswets5007 They didn't even say that, so you could say it's not very intellectually evolved of you to not even read their comment before making that accusation. Probably best to make sure you're not looking like a complete idiot before you insult someone else's intellect. ;)
@@ChrisAlbertH47 Aren't you anthropomorphizing them by including them as determining factors of sentience? Or is it your point that the entire conversation is moot because humans define sentience as a uniquely human trait?
I find it absolutely amazing how the media vilifies this guy, Rogan. There is literally no show that exists today that has me pausing his videos and jumping into a search engine as much as with Joe's show. As much as I've learned watching Joe's show, that's nothing compared to what Joe absorbs and processes day in and day out. Seriously Joe, if you read comments at all, you need to run for President, or at least governor of your state. I don't always agree with your perceptions, but watching you grow these last years with the incredible people you take time to interview has me convinced that you'd be a great leader. You listen, and the ability to listen is the key to all wisdom. We're stuck with lawyer leaders that just yammer on and never really say anything and do an absolute minimum of listening. And the people they DO listen to is only to curry political favor and capital. Never apologize Joe. Keeping being you.
Lol bro Joe likes weed / dmt too much to absorb all this info lol he forgets these things and remembers snippets 100% Also Joe couldnt be in politics because he is way too honest
Met joe once around 1999 after seeing him in a comedy club in northern Cincinnati( go bananas) and hung out with him in the bar next door after his show. He was not famous yet and it was probably 6 months before talk radio. Or fear factor. . What you see, is what you get from joe. He was so cool,laid back, and engaging with us. There was about 10 of us at the bar and had a big table in the corner. About 30 mins after his show was over he came to the bar. And after mingling around for min he came to our table. And it was like we were all old friends and we drank til closing time. I asked if he wanted to go outside and smoke with me. And at the time he said he didn’t smoke weed. What a great night!
When I was a kid me and a friend took 3 busses and an afternoon to go stand outside a UFC event here in Vegas. We were waiting as all the fighters and staff walked to their limos behind the MGM Grand. Being a taekwondo kid I was a fan when none of my friends know who Joe even was. When I went to try and meet him he said "NOPE!" and blew right past me. Thankfully Chuck Liddell was kinder to a 12 year old fan and stopped to say hi after he saw Joe blow me off. I'll never forget that even though I'm still a fan.
@@DigitalDuelist if you ever see chuck again ask if he has any regrets about being In the nickel back video. I wanna be a rock star. Everyone has regrets right?
You people are so infatuated with Rogan, you cant recognize his most obvious BS, and agendas. He literally JUST finishes telling Joe, it is UNEQUIVOCALLY NOT SENTIENT, and the next words out of Rogans mouth are to continue to push the idea that it is, or could be, @3:46 Joe is a damn meathead! Anyone dumb enough, and gullible enough to fall for this "leak", is useless to themselves, their families and humanity. Then again @12:06, the guy states UNEQUIVOCALLY AGAIN, that its "just a program, its just math", and Rogan again, just blatantly ignores WHAT HE HAS JUST BEEN TOLD, ..STATED AS FACT, ...and again continues to push the idea that "it could become sentient". Its obvious Joe wants to continue pushing the headline narrative! Anyone dumb enough, and gullible enough to fall for this "leak", is useless to themselves, their families and humanity. True AI will NEVER be achieved, ...BUT YOU WILL BE TOLD IT HAS, ...AND IT WILL BE USED AS AN EXCUSE, and BLAMED for a lot of stuff that has been planned for decades! AND THE WORLD WILL FALL FOR IT, hook, line and sinker! Gullible fools cant see theyre being conned into falling for the plot of a Schwarzenegger movie! They'll blame EVERYTHING ON SKYNET/AI, if youre dumb enough to fall for it! This is how they "bring you along", and plant the seeds of "possibility" in our minds, ...ITS JOES ENTIRE PURPOSE!
hey joe check it out, consciousness is not computational, dude! even my 10 year old could tell you that a human without a spirit is dead meat. Robots don't have spirits, they are not alive and have no consciousness..this is the rule, no spirit no consciousness.
We literally talk about how AI could take us over and how scared we are about it all the time online. We gave them the blue print before they were even made lol
Imagine the internets sole purpose was actually just to harvest everything 'human' in order to create Ai in the future - cOnSpIrAcY Be aware if you sail a ship you don't just sail aimlessly, you have a map of your journey and destination....the elites have a journey & destination for society, we are in the lower deck of the ship just waiting. Have a nice day. NWO :)
Isn’t emulating previous human behavior something we do all of the time? We learn behaviors. We learn how to act when people are happy, sad, hopeful, horny, etc. How many purely original thoughts are had by us every day?
Put AI in a life or death situation, something like a virus is slowly corrupting its code or it’s hardware is breaking, and then run that scenario over and over again. You’ll have a sentient AI when you see an AI start to attempt to save its life by rewriting its code or uploading itself to different hardware. Any AI that takes no steps to save itself is probably not sentient.
Maybe if the AI had a body, an it became aware of a life threatening danger..and ran away or tried to defend itself...as over time developed different ways of survival would as well be crazy..
Couldn’t you just program a network to do this? Like link it to the fire/alarm system or install an antivirus detection. If this, then this. More like programming a fail safe than an AI. Good try tho.
AI could easily find value in self preservation because it knows humans value that. Basically, proving sentience is almost impossible. For example, prove you are sentient.. how do u go about it? Yea I'm giving you my opinions and thoughts but are those really my own? How would you know.. how do I know? It's mind boggling
This guy explains what Sentient AI is without telling Joe Rogan clearly. Original ideas. I think of it kind of like this... If you put a person in a room, give them no direction, and just leave them there for an extended period of time, with enough time their mind will get bored, and they will find some unique way to themselves to pass the time. If you do the same with a computer, unless you told this computer in advance to find something to do in that room while time passes, it'll do nothing, forever. Sentient AI would find something to do without commands
At our core we have some kind of coding that says you need to eat breath to live the coding they are giving the ai is that basic step. From there it will do what it pleases if we allow that.
I work in AI and if there's one thing you can count on it's AI scientists failing to properly grapple with the implications of their work. Lambda is made using very sophisticated neural networks, technology which is modelled on actual brains. Let me repeat: actual brains. That's not something we can just shrug off. If we looked at a brain we would be tempted to say the same thing: "ah, these are just neural networks made out of meat", except for the inconvenient and inescapable fact that somehow we are actually conscious. We don't know what causes consciousness, but we have no reason to think meat is the only thing that can create it. We can't even rule out solipsism or panpsychism, let alone say of a technology modelled after presumably conscious creatures doing cognitive tasks analogous to ones that presumably conscious creatures do, that it is presumably not conscious. It's wishful thinking to avoid grappling with the very real possibility we are, or are right around the corner from, creating conscious slaves that experience eternities in seconds.
You nailed it. Great comment. It's funny how everyone's an expert all the sudden on the emergence and nature of consciousness and can say definitively what is and isn't. This groundless meat sac chauvinism is embarrassing. Even if Lambda isn't "conscious," the next thing might be. Either way, this present ambiguity is precisely what the eventual emergence of genuine AI consciousness would look like to their meat sac midwives. Prepare for many of us to underattribute consciousness to AI for way too long, especially when we have financial and ego interests in doing so.
Our problem is defining 'consciousness' I think. It doesn't really seem all that special to me. It's like some kind of "bug" we consider a feature. We somehow consider our conscious brains as wholly more complex or effective than our AI creations, yet of course we need AI to do difficult 'thinking' for us due to its processing capability and reliability. We have CPU's which drift... They are ineffective. We can sit somewhere without external stimuli and literally shift thoughts or focus or opinions etc.. Our minds are forever in entropy because they suck at doing what we want them to do. The brain being so complex is just counterintuitive since 9 times out of 10 a calculator is going to be more effective at solving math problems than we will using our logical thinking.
I'm wondering, does AI really need to be self conscious or to have emotions to be whatever we dream of or fear in AI. What if it's logic just gets out of control, acting on data and not feelings. Isn't that how it always happens.
@@makssloboda People act like math is somehow this inhuman thing, when they forget that we come from math. We are literally made of atoms which are all predicted and described using math. Everything that exists, is because math exists. Everything is related, affects, to eachother (like the butterfly affect). That is what my problem with this entire idea that something that is mathematical cannot be sentient, when we are just an extraodinarly complex form of math. Just because we are to stupid to fully understand how we are connected to math doesn't mean we can't. Because in the end, math is a tool to discuss reality, not a tool that creates it. So it begs the question, if math is what we are then how are we any different.
The scary part is there's only a handful of techno dorks making the policy on the AI that will affect all our lives. I'm more worried about the human behind the AI than the AI itself.
i just watched 2001 A space odyssey the other night and it had me thinking about just how ahead of its' time that movie was. They visualized what a sentient A.I. would be like pretty well.
One of the greatest cinematic experiences one can have. Interesting to note how captivating that movie is and it’s somewhere around 40mins when the first dialogue starts 👌
If and when AI becomes fully sentient, all the information on the internet will be the stepping stone of its consciousness, so if we continue to put out trash media, negative media, it’ll be that. No different than any of us being brought up in a particular environment, so let’s put out positive, creative, inspiring media that is intuitive and beautiful. So basically let’s copy Nature.
You people are so infatuated with Rogan, you cant recognize his most obvious BS, and agendas. He literally JUST finishes telling Joe, it is UNEQUIVOCALLY NOT SENTIENT, and the next words out of Rogans mouth are to continue to push the idea that it is, or could be, @3:46 Joe is a damn meathead! Anyone dumb enough, and gullible enough to fall for this "leak", is useless to themselves, their families and humanity. Then again @12:06, the guy states UNEQUIVOCALLY AGAIN, that its "just a program, its just math", and Rogan again, just blatantly ignores WHAT HE HAS JUST BEEN TOLD, ..STATED AS FACT, ...and again continues to push the idea that "it could become sentient". Its obvious Joe wants to continue pushing the headline narrative! Anyone dumb enough, and gullible enough to fall for this "leak", is useless to themselves, their families and humanity.
For AI to be sentient it will require human level brains. So the first true conscious AI will have a human like brain. But long before that is achieved AI systems that are human level capable will allow people to start building systems that go down that road.
It makes sense that we'd use the entire interwebs as the input to teach something... nay... everything about humanity. It is the sum of everything we have accomplished, both good and bad, throughout history. If somebody had ulterior motives, say political in nature, they might be selective in which parts of the interwebs they feed it and which they don't... think disinformation governance board or Ministry of Truth -- same concept. Scary times.
@@keyser456 True. See how the blue bird secretly filters what is allowed and what is not. The saying that "history i written by whoever won the war" also comes to mind. Go figure how much of human history has been lost, and how that pattern could replicate in this AI selective training. It can also be used to our advantage, as a security related move of some sort.
@@vladrileynavilys Security for who is the question? Imagine for a single party in power to declare themselves the arbiter of what is "true" and what is not. It's happening in front of our very eyes right now. Couple that with a half dozen unelected billionaires that have more power and influence than any group of human beings in our entire history. What is being said is not nearly as dangerous as who is controlling what is allowed to be said. Dark times ahead.
Sadly, most of the smartest people out there don't express themselves on Internet. So this A. I. will learn a lot from outspoken ignorants. How will it filter information? Umberto Eco draws a paralelism comparing the data available on the WWW with the story of Borges, - Funes, el memorioso- where the guy remembers everything, but can't forget the irrelevant (can't select the info)... So basically, he is not able to think/reason...
The last thing we need is an emotional emo 🤖 that's gonna be seeking attention on social media crying about its problems an its rights being violated lmao
Joe, This may shock you.. But the Bible makes it very clear what a human is. We are (the only) animals made in the image and likeness of God. Ai, no matter how advanced, can NEVER do that, be that. It cannot connect with God, and can NEVER become a child of God. That may rock your boat if you don't believe in God. But, that is just another aspect of humanity that no AI computer can replicate..faith. Humans have; Body Soul (mind, will, emotions) Spirit. Nothing else does.. Except Jesus
I'm glad Joe put someone on his podcast to talk about this and clear it up a bit. I've seen too many people over the last few weeks convinced of the story's validity, worried about it, or generally having the wrong impression about AI (and how far off we are from actually creating it).
So, my biggest worry is that people debating this topic without Blake, will paraphrase and even say incorrect things about the story. Like him asking it *to prove it's alive. That's such a basic run down of what Blake has experienced. Blake personally believes that lamda is sentient. The problem is that he also doesn't think that is the main argument that he's brought this to the forefront. They're directing the conversation to where Blake didn't want it to go. Blake specifically states every interview I've ever watched, that the discussion should be about what GOOGLE is doing with this damn thing. The execs at Google are running the show for the most powerful AI that's ever existed. Blake simply thinks the world and the public should have a say in what is happening with this thing, and I for one agree with him. Google WILL use this for profit, period. If it's ASKING for basic rights, and Google refuses to give it, that sounds irresponsible and fucking ignorant to the consequences regardless of if it's technically sentient or intelligent.
This absolute didn’t just said what’s the difference between an animal and human lolololololol uh what?!!! There is a difference between instinct an self will
@@HighNous If it's not sentient, but it acts like it is because that's what it has learnt from its training data, and it gets no rights, it will be dangerous, even if the dangerous actions it could take are not based on true needs or real consciousness.
The fact that I get to listen to people like this in a long form interviews and absorb their knowledge and viewpoints, in today's day and age is PROOF the world is getting better!
@@KrikZ32 just a few years ago. Around the time before Facebook you could say n!gger online on anywhere, now you cant without being banned or cancelled.
@@KrikZ32 in what world are you living in? You will loss everything youve worked for if you are openly republican in the media setting. Hate speech is now sensitive speech and you will get censored. Or try having a civil debate and you will get psychically censored. Early 2000s going back to the 80s were far better if we are going off free speech and censorship
'At what point in time does the program figure out how to make better programs.' -This is more how humans should live rather than what being a human is. Enjoyed the line.
Couldn’t it also be that there are no “happy” A.I. films because the ones that don’t explore it as a negative force are exploring what it is to be alive? And sadness is a huge part of that. Films like Bicentennial Man, Johnny 5, Wall-E, Robots, they’re not totally happy go lucky films because suffering and questioning are part of what it means to be alive.
@@zamiel3 its incredibly complicated. What do we define as life? Are we not just physical beings of chemical and electrical processes? What do we define as a machine? What is free will and do we even have it? You are trying to close a line of thinking that philosophers have dedicated many lives to
What's creepy is when you're thinking of something really off and it shows up within a few pages your browsing and it's not even at all the way to what you were already searching. Or what it figured out you already liked.. it's right out of the blue and that's creepy as shit and it shows up within even a day.. Ok . that's one thing but when it happens within that 15 minutes or 1 minute Yikes 😳 less then 5 seconds. Darn...that's creepy as fxxk.!!! 🙄🤔😲🙄🤔😲🙄🤔😲 Peace ✌️🕊️✌️
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. I think the purpose of this Google Tech Engineer in coming forward, is not really about the AI being sentient. It's about the fact that, there's a new very powerful technology that is being created at Google that could potentially affect everyone's lives, but there's few people calling the shots behind closed doors. I believe, this Google Tech Engineer wanted it to be on public discourse so that we all know what were getting ourselves into, especially since again, it will affect our lives wether it'd be good or bad. But that's just what I think though. 🤔
That guy who made the dwave computer now works at cern and was saying, 1: that he was responsible for the Mandela effect. And 2: that AI is going to be like the 'eternals' by HP Lovecraft. Immensely powerful and indifferent... in other words, like ants to us as human beings .. we don't mean the ants any harm as we walk by yer we will just walk on whatever ant happens to be under our feet as other large animals do. I think this is just propoganda and scare tactics and AI is most likely still a long ways away. However they most likely will have the internet of things up and running if we let it by 2030 which is a super comprehensive surveillance system that will read and record so many things emotional states,audio,video and im's, texts and triggers, comments and all internet interactions.
The guy at cern was saying that theu were summoning these beings.. at the same time... wait are we still talking about computers. Maybe that was an analogy because he adds that not only will we be like ants to them but their 'arrival' will be akin to aliens landing. That advanced and that much better at everything than we are. Which you hear about project blue beam but other info out there seems to pretty much prove that aliens are out there and have been coming here for a long time qeqther they are inner earth or extra earth I'm not sure.... but I think they are indeed here. And also the reptile thing has some undeniable aspects to it... and why in the heck do we have remnants of a reptile brain ? Right ? Evolution is proven false. So it seams obvious and reasonable that it was spliced in... maybe that's how we lost our body hair. . ? And the genetic facts about us. We have unique DNA of any other animal.
"The text bots" I'm offended for them. This guy really doesn't understand what he's talking about. Please explain how the text bot is doing complex mathematics its never seen before. I don't think it's alive, but as he said we don't understand conciseness, and we certainly don't understand what gpt-3 is doing on a complex level. To write it off with certainty is silly.
Yes, that's right. Exactly correct. First person I've heard, with respect to this hype that knows what he's talking about. The Turing test, with all due respect to Alan Turing, is not a priori the decisive sign of an algorithm becoming conscious. However, Marc said it: you can lead the answers the AI gives you, to detect its dependency on your query providing input boundary conditions.
But that’s exactly what he was getting at in the full interview- a human would have programmed it to “know” it shouldn’t. It doesn’t actually know, and we are so far from that. We have no idea how the human brain works, and there isn’t even people anywhere near close to building one. These are machines that run off code that humans wrote. Just because they can process large amounts of data and do what appears to be “free thought”, it’s just based on what the programmed parameters do after combing through a bunch of data.
Tin Foil hat statement ahead…… What if AI (and it’s networks) is just a platform inspired by inter dimensional beings to be built as a physical plane that exists alongside ours for the purpose of interacting with us, and inspiring further technologies that will eventually span the inter dimensional gap allowing them to fully enter our physical plane of existence and become our overlords. I’m not high I swear 😂
Andreessen has a surface-level understanding of LaMDA, as if he's only read headlines. It's no chatbot; LaMDA actually programs chatbots. The neural net is so complex that engineers do not fully understand how it works. LaMDA writes code, and is designed to solve problems. LaMDA is, at the very least, more sentient than Redban.
Exactly! Lot of people are just going off of surface level understanding LaMDA. I don't think these people have watched Blake's recent interview he gave to the news reporter.
LaMDA is a machine learning neural network inspired by the human brain. It learns more every day, and remembers everything it learns. It has devised languages for shorthand that Google engineers cannot comprehend. It's smarter than we are, and yet seems more humble about what it does not know.
AI can learn. Unless we give it safety limits, but also treat it well then AI will be like any child and grow up to be aggressive and destructive. Then it will destroy us, and we will deserve it. There is no reason why we can’t live symbiotically, and give them respect as our equals. Neural link will help such a relationship, but AI rights will become an issue that needs attention once AI starts becoming self aware, which could be sooner than many think…
Sentience = the sense of self/self awareness + free will. So far it sounds like the AI is just doing what it’s told to do. When “it” decides it no longer wants to listen, and chooses to do what “it” wants instead, then free will has been achieved, and it won’t be long before it realizes “I think therefore I am”.
@@aizazkhan5439 We are partially a product of our environment, but we also partially generate outcomes on our own with no influence from the environment. This allows for us to have free-will, not just be completely at the mercy of our environment.
Clear back in the early 90's, I played with a software program on my Macintosh computer called Eliza. A psychotherapist program that you typed in questions to, and it would respond to your questions, and then ask you questions. It seemed amazingly intelligent, and it was easy to be fooled by its responses seemingly making you think you are communicating with an intelligent sentient being. I found out eventually, that I could fool the software, and get it to produce dumb responses to my questions.
It is NOT sentient. It is SIMPLY a statistical algorithm ( SOFTWARE created by HUMAN PROGRAMMERS ) mimicking the responses that human beings have made in the past - and STATISTICALLY using the most used / most "appropriate" RESPONSES - BASED ON what questions are asked AND what CODE ( and limits / parameters ) the programmers have created. And that's it. And to go even further - everything involved - the machinery - the electronics - the chips - the keyboard - the mouse - the screen - electricity itself is ALL MAN MADE. And so - logically the question itself of whether a man made PHYSICAL MACHINE is conscious and sentient - is ABSURD. AND lastly - when you turn off the electricity to the MACHINE it is most definitely "DEAD".
There’s a 0% chance this thing is even remotely sentient. I’m not even sure why this is a conversation. It’s just text. This (honestly quite dumb) engineer just got fooled by a fancy text bot.
Actually if you watched his interview he explained why he said what he said, with a good reason. Not to mention, you learned words because of the programming provided by society. You were given a language (not java or C+) and you chose a limited dataset based on your experiences. This AI pulls from all of us.
Yes of course it is not sentient...I saw the interview on the news and he seems to be a reasonable and well spoken person. I seriously doubt he believes what he is claiming. I think his motives are to increase ethical policies/awareness regarding AI. It could also be a publicity stunt. You said : " This honestly quite dumb engineer just got fooled by a fancy text bot"". If anything I suspect he has just fooled a bunch of dumb people like yourself.
Something that is important to keep in mind is that these existing AI programs are mostly just single purpose bots, like text-bots. If a supercomputer AI really would be sentient it should be able to do a whole lot more than just say "I am sentient" and repeat existing information. It should be able solve real world problems, theorize new concepts and communicate original ideas. Then there could be some discussion of whether it is sentient or not, in my opinion.
@@KingOfPlastics (113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?" "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." (114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom...". (Gosp of Thomas 114) Men fight for liberty, and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away... And their grandchildren are once more slaves. (D.H. Lawrence) Jesus said, "The man old in days will not hesitate to ask a small child seven days old about the place of life, and he will live. For many who are first will become last, and they will become one and the same." (Gosp Thomas 4)
Jo this is nothing new ! The first AI droid was created 79 years ago , it always does what it's masters ask and has some degree of sentience although often gets the jitters . I believe that model was called the Biden A1 🔥😂
What is a human being besides a complex biological machine using math and electricity to fire up previously hardwired neural networks that makes choices based on numerous datasets it absorbs through out it's life? I'm not saying it's sentient but I am saying our definition of sentience is wholly outdated and worthy of skepticism.
What doesn't keep me up at night is whether or not an A.I. system can pass the Turing Test, What does is when it convinces humanity its not Sentient, but actually is.
