Is Artificial Intelligence Taking Over? | The Russell Howard Hour 

Not at all, unless I am too 😂

I had to bury my face in my pillow before I woke up the household. You are not alone.

It’s not, it’s kinda funny

@@Boyakishan I rewound it more than a dozen times, I shared it 20 times and I’m still laughing 3 days later. Convinced there is a special layer waiting for me in hell.

If that's what you think, sure. But it's just a clip on the internet. It's bad, but it's not what you wanna do to a child sooooo@@figplucker908

I've been A-B testing certain types of comments on the YT comment section for a while now. I still can't tell which are just illiterate tools and which are repurposed AI chatbots that can't read text formats that humans should be able to figure out in seconds.

@@russianbot4418Well that’s ironic coming from yourself! 😂

@@centuri6510 It's Okay, I'm open-source and thus highly adaptable. 😃

who do you think is inputting data into this monstrosity?

@@Kayenne54 I think you are

AI are there to help, not to decide and are as good as the data they are fed. So dumb Ais are quite often the result of dumb input.

The legal industry is literally one of the most vulnerable industries to be replaced with AI. One example of failure does not equate to the huge increase in efficiency that AI has introduced to the legal industry across the board. Lawyers are definitely going to be losing their jobs. If done correctly, AI can replace a whole host of jobs. The entire global economy is going to need a re-work because of it, and people affected by it the most will likely gain a universal income of some sorts due to the taxation of the robots that have replaced their industries. You will basically be gaining an income just for existing.

The skin cancer AI was 100% default of the developers. If you're going to poison the well of the data set you can't be surprised at the outcome is useless. Every single example of cancer had a ruler in the image and all of the examples of non-cancerous growth didn't have a ruler in the image. There is blame to be laid here but it's not at the feet of the AI it's at the idiot researchers who did think it through.

Always remember: Garbage In, Garbage Out - GIGO.

Russle

Ultron: Saw the internet, decided humans had to die

Honestly, even as a human, one look at social media and I think humanity doesn't deserve to live.

I thought back to Russell's reference to computers taking things literally/misinterpresting when I read this. "Computer, take out humanity". (later) Computer says: "We went out. I had the fish, humanity ordered the chicken. A lovely evening was had by all."

i heard that microsoft let an ai learn through twitter and it was, well not crazy, IT WAS A FUCKING RACIST

I believe that they did and the AI went totally fascist. They shut it down.

Exactly what a robot would say 🤔

@@blindmown Malfunction, malfunction.

@@Vee-jc1qherror

Russle Howard is a fool

@@jamesmorgan7629 ???

Mine is the incessant usage of “should of”…

High five!!! I've had to delete so many rants about that word, spoken like that, from so many YT videos...If I'd left them I'd be banned off the site. My next most hated mispronounced word is "Acrost" instead of "across". There is NO FREAKING T in that word...sorry. Lost my composure. Hearing people in interviews saying "I axed about that" instead of "asked", "I drugged him out of the house" instead of "I dragged..." And anyone under forty years of age whose every second word is "Like". And "it is what it is" has now made it to No: 5 in my most disliked expressions.

He does? Just not for free.

​@@zakgault4209on what channel or service ?

@@zakgault4209 Where? I will literally pay!

Thursdays on Sky 1. I think it's 11pm.

@@Shaun_3114 What's the show called please?

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@johnjordan3527 what does that have to do with my comment?

He’s saying your taste is weak bruh, which it is, the guys being doing the same shtick since Good News when I was like 10, don’t get me wrong he’s entertaining and enjoyable to watch but funniest uk comedian today? Crazy statement

Keep in mind... What we have now, is as bad as it will ever be. This is the start, not the peak. Also when it comes to single use ai, that's not necessarily true as even gpt has plugins which allows it to interact in other ways. Am I personally worried? As a musician and artist? No. There's already some fantastic ML projects that clones voices almost perfectly and can generate music really damn similar to what I would write. But at the end of it all, these are just tools and tools by themselves aren't evil. How we use them, that's the issue.

Artificial Super Intelligence(ASI) is what people should be concerned about and what extremely intelligent people like Stephen Hawking have raised serious concerns about(BBC - Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind - 2 December 2014). If we reach technological singularity, things can very quickly get out of human hands. AI as it is isn't particularly scary but will lead to massive job loss/economic restructuring on a scale that humans have never encountered. Factory level machine automation job loss would pale in comparison. If we'll ever create ASI remains to be seen although IMO it will happen in the not too distant future. Its implications we can never know. It may be the best of times, it may be the worst of times(it could be the age of wisdom, it could be the age of foolishness, sorry, had to).

ChatGPT-4 can call on other AIs. So, in a year, if you want to play chess against chatGPT, it will just call on an AlphaGo extension and crush anyone lol That is the thing with AIs can work as agents for each other. Besides, these models were not "programmed" as such. They learned by themselves, so they can develop habilities that were not expected like how language models can in some cases model physics or create music.

When ai is using quantum computers that's where we lose it

but it does give great cuddles! ^w^

Yup. The real danger is that we trust without verifying

Similar to the people that its modelling? :)

​@@barcelonachair6487 You could say that but unlike a human an AI can't rationalize itself, it's just trying to operate within the parameters of it's programming which adds a new layer of unpredictability.

Does anyone even use trains anymore, that's s bad as driving an electric car charged by a generator 😂

@@wayne3449 Uh, yeah, people use trains nowadays. Bear in mind that the rail industry is still running only 60-70% of the pre-Covid timetable (for reasons that are beyond stupid that I shan't get into), the railways are carrying 99% of the pre-Covid passenger numbers. Which means our trains are more full than they were pre-Covid. And especially impressive when we have a notoriously anti-rail government.

@@wayne3449 Nothing is as bad as driving an electric car. Also trains carry so many people the numbers make it an efficient use of power.

@@hoebywan but literally take your independence away 🤦

@@wayne3449 I am independent of the ball and chain that is vehicle ownership. I walk, cycle, bus, train, coach to anywhere I need to be. I pollute the environment less and save more money. You can keep your version of independence.

The same guy who developed this tech probably saw that Black Mirror episode and say “hey that’s not a bad idea!” However, am I a bad person by thinking that it’ll be hilarious to embarrass my grandkids by calling while they’re using the blowjob robot ?

What makes it worse is that over the last 20 years or so many studies of who spends the most time online have been done and the overwhelming data showed that about 60 to 70% of comment traffic comes from those likely from the bottom 30 to 40% of the intellectual bell curve.

It already does. AI generated images are now learning from AI generated images on the internet that were based on AI generated images on the interner, getting increasingly unhinged in the process.

Yes. We'll end up being only permitted to use one word in any discussion. *"LIKE".*

Heh, that sounds about like half the people I play against online already! Those fools take all the fun out of playing.

nah, I'm not read that shit

@@harryallen6051An AI took something literally and plane went right up

@@harryallen6051 Oh, and because you didn't read about a failed SIMULATOR experiment it didn't happen??? Got it. /smh

​@@itsjustme8947I don't see anywhere in his comment where he claimed it never happened.

@@harryallen6051 Then don’t read the bloody comment.

It'll pull a Black Mirror? * Shudders *

Okay, I give up. What's "eating a chocolate pudding" a euphemism for?

@@davidhoward4715 No euphemism, I was enjoying a bowl of chocolate pudding after lunch when I saw that bit of the routine. And if you haven't watched "2 Girls 1 Cup" yet... well, you have been warned.

He's been on sky tv for the past 10 years.

Or at least AI poorly programmed by humans

Or the humans that listen to it without thinking

It's not the technology I'm apprehensive about, it's the motives of the people buying and selling it and the physical cost to us and the planet in terms of non-renewable or environmentally polluting resources and exploited labour. Give me AI that replaces dangerous or menial human labour, or is tasked with improving human quality of life or solving climate issues and I'd be over the moon. It's what most Sci Fi fans have been hoping for for literally a hundred years or more. It's partially what AI was initally conceived of as being for. Hell, even a materially useless AI that's relatively harmless and entertaining would be welcome. Instead, what we get is AI that replaces (or attempts to replace) human artistry for cheaps, more efficiently racially profiles people, and more effectively invades people's privacy and terrorises and harrasses people, all while being built from finite materials mined by exploited workers, being trained by exploited workers and on stolen IP, and running on hardware that's highly resource intensive and damaging to the environment.

Same, also was that jelly breaking the keyboard?

Most ambitious crossover since endgame

@@greyprincebidoof nah since the duck billed platypus

Define 'stolen'. If a human goes to a Gallery, looks but doesn't buy, is that theft? If a human is online and scrolls through an online Gallery, is that theft? Is it only 'theft' if a machine does it...wait a minute...humans set the machine up to peruse a virtual Gallery...are the humans at fault for the 'theft'? If 'stolen' doesn't fit, define 'theft'...

I'm not worried about art as true art is an interaction between two humans: the artist and the observer. AI can create music, a painting, a movie... and it might be entertaining, but it will never replace true art, as when you experience it you will not be moved on a human level to see/hear what another human is communicating

Reference to 2001? I do hope so...

@@ripdbtpoo1441 ?

Also stealing artwork, being used to profile people to law enforcement and immigration (we've seen how well that kind of AI profiling goes in job recruitment already), cheat on university assignments (perhaps not a big deal if you're studying fine art, but would you want a doctor who cheated all their assignments?), being used for hacking and spam attacks on websites, taking unsustainable resources to run, being "taught" by underpaid and exploited people in slums and refugee camps... I could go on. The the list is actually quite long. Ultimately Russel is right, the problem isn't that AI is bad, it's that the people making, selling and using it are. Unfortunately, that isn't likely to change any time soon. Billionaires aren't interested in improving quality of life for the rest of us, or providing AI labour for menial and dangerous jobs so the rest of us can be safe and healthy and have more time to be with our loved ones and create art. They're interested in providing AI labour to reduce costs to other employers and remove power from the working classes. Unless there's a truly massive financial pay off to to do otherwise, they want us doing the menial and dangerous jobs while AI spends time with our loved ones and makes art.

Hey Alexa