[Petrochemicals]

perhaps its going through adolescence.

I did not realise chat gpt could embolden

[hamdani yusuf]

perhaps its going through adolescence.

I did not realise chat gpt could embolden

It can, if you ask it to. My point is, it's being superseded by newer, larger, multimodal, and more efficient AI models.

[Petrochemicals]

It can, if you ask it to. My point is

[hamdani yusuf]

It can, if you ask it to. My point is

What's your point?

[Zer0]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromorphic_engineering

ps - Memristors.

[hamdani yusuf]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromorphic_engineering

ps - Memristors.

Significant ethical limitations may be placed on neuromorphic engineering due to public perception.[51] Special Eurobarometer 382: Public Attitudes Towards Robots, a survey conducted by the European Commission, found that 60% of European Union citizens wanted a ban of robots in the care of children, the elderly, or the disabled. Furthermore, 34% were in favor of a ban on robots in education, 27% in healthcare, and 20% in leisure. The European Commission classifies these areas as notably ?human.? The report cites increased public concern with robots that are able to mimic or replicate human functions. Neuromorphic engineering, by definition, is designed to replicate the function of the human brain.[52]

Without a strong fundamental thinking framework, public are easily confused between their common terminal goal and the means to achieve it.

[hamdani yusuf]

Code that Writes Code and ChatGPT

#chatgpt is a program that can write programs. Could chatGPT write itself? Could it improve itself? Where could this lead? A video about code that writes code that writes code and how that could trigger an intelligence explosion. Sorry to contribute to the hype train but idc.

Current version of ChatGPT can't do those things. But who knows what they will be capable of in the next few years?
Even if OpenAI stops developing it, other organizations will take over the job.

[Zer0]

Significant ethical limitations may be placed on neuromorphic engineering due to public perception.[51] Special Eurobarometer 382: Public Attitudes Towards Robots, a survey conducted by the European Commission, found that 60% of European Union citizens wanted a ban of robots in the care of children, the elderly, or the disabled. Furthermore, 34% were in favor of a ban on robots in education, 27% in healthcare, and 20% in leisure. The European Commission classifies these areas as notably ?human.? The report cites increased public concern with robots that are able to mimic or replicate human functions. Neuromorphic engineering, by definition, is designed to replicate the function of the human brain.[52]

Without a strong fundamental thinking framework, public are easily confused between their common terminal goal and the means to achieve it.

The " Public " or People in general and at large, should Ideally be ' Free ' to willingly choose & decide their own Goals.

If i do Not want a " Robot " to carry out a general medical procedure on my body, then so it should be.

ps - I know, either Adapt to Change, or be left out...
To be Forgotten, is my Right.

[hamdani yusuf]

The " Public " or People in general and at large, should Ideally be ' Free ' to willingly choose & decide their own Goals.

If i do Not want a " Robot " to carry out a general medical procedure on my body, then so it should be.

ps - I know, either Adapt to Change, or be left out...
To be Forgotten, is my Right.

Personal rights rely on natural selection mechanism. They force people to think and make decisions for their own. Future society members will be more likely to be those who made the correct decisions. If their goals aren't aligned with the universal terminal goal, then sooner or later they will become meaningless.


Economic competition will make sure that future products and service providers are better, faster, and cheaper.

[alancalverd]

Significant ethical limitations may be placed on neuromorphic engineering due to public perception.

Nothing to do with ethics but the law will always require a person (including a "legal person" , i.e. a registered corporation) to be held liable for harm. Problem with a robot is that nobody knows who to blame, and any claim for damages will simply engender a chain of argument about hardware, software, local programming, training, environment, patient briefing, patient compliance....   with no actual money or even an apology reaching the victim.

In the case of a medical incident, the first, last and only requirement is to identify the doctor or nurse who actually did the harmful action - their employer may pursue other contributing parties for recompense, but the legal principle remains: you are liable for what you do.

If in doubt, look at the Boeing 737MAX case. Airlines are insured against "pilot error" but what happens if the robot takes over and the pilot has not been taught how to stop the robot killing everyone?

[alancalverd]

60% of European Union citizens wanted a ban of robots in the care of children, the elderly, or the disabled. Furthermore, 34% were in favor of a ban on robots in education, 27% in healthcare, and 20% in leisure.

People are plentiful, fairly good at doing these jobs, capable of adaptation, and do not incur any capital cost. Why use a robot? You  might make a bigger profit in the short term, but your taxes will increase to pay for the unemployment benefit of the folk you replaced.

[hamdani yusuf]

60% of European Union citizens wanted a ban of robots in the care of children, the elderly, or the disabled. Furthermore, 34% were in favor of a ban on robots in education, 27% in healthcare, and 20% in leisure.

People are plentiful, fairly good at doing these jobs, capable of adaptation, and do not incur any capital cost. Why use a robot? You  might make a bigger profit in the short term, but your taxes will increase to pay for the unemployment benefit of the folk you replaced.

Fairly good won't be enough, when something better, faster, and cheaper become available. Telephone switch operators have been replaced by simple electronics long time ago. Any phone company tried to keep using them were simply outcompeted and quickly out of business.
Free market should ensure resources to be distributed to where they are needed the most. Under democracies, if politicians and lawmakers fail to deliver that, it's time for regime change.

[alancalverd]

So how do you intend to redeploy two million teachers, nurses and care workers in the UK alone?

What choice does the customer have?

If a robot rips off your arm instead of washing your face (like a human, it's quite capable of doing either) who do you sue?

[hamdani yusuf]

So how do you intend to redeploy two million teachers, nurses and care workers in the UK alone?

Find useful tasks which AI hasn't mastered yet. We should not confuse between terminal goals and instrumental goals.
Any existing professionals were the product of trainings and education by previous generations. The results of those training and education are essentially reconfiguring neural networks in the brains of those professionals, which will be destroyed with their death. The next generation of professionals need to repeat the training and education process from zero again. Employing AI can stop this inefficient process.

UBI can be used as intermediate solution. But for longer term and more sustainable solution, government should facilitate people to become less and less dependent on the help from the society. Converting waste and raw materials into food and other useful things should be made easier.

[hamdani yusuf]

If a robot rips off your arm instead of washing your face (like a human, it's quite capable of doing either) who do you sue?

It depends on the circumstances.
Am I the one who designed and was testing the robot?
Has the robot been tested and passed regulations?
Was it used according to designated functions?
Was it properly maintained?

[Zer0]

The " Public " or People in general and at large, should Ideally be ' Free ' to willingly choose & decide their own Goals.

If i do Not want a " Robot " to carry out a general medical procedure on my body, then so it should be.

ps - I know, either Adapt to Change, or be left out...
To be Forgotten, is my Right.

Personal rights rely on natural selection mechanism. They force people to think and make decisions for their own. Future society members will be more likely to be those who made the correct decisions. If their goals aren't aligned with the universal terminal goal, then sooner or later they will become meaningless.

The Goal might be simply " Survival at All Costs " .
Reminds me of a tune...
Yo ho, all together, hoist the colors high..
Heave ho, Thieves and Beggars,
Never Shall We Die!

Economic competition will make sure that future products and service providers are better, faster, and cheaper.

& Constitutional Fundamental Rights shall make Sure that Technology in the name of Progress, is Not shoved down nobodys throat Forcefully.

ps - Either learn to dance onto the new rhythms n beats, or simply exercise The Right to become Obsolete.

[hamdani yusuf]

& Constitutional Fundamental Rights shall make Sure that Technology in the name of Progress, is Not shoved down nobodys throat Forcefully.

ps - Either learn to dance onto the new rhythms n beats, or simply exercise The Right to become Obsolete.

Any new technology will face some kind of inertia. It takes time for people to adapt. Some are quicker, while some other are more sluggish. That's normal. We can still find some societies who are living primitively. Natural selection will do its job.

[yor_on]

ES, as a description of how we think and how we define things any AI will be biased as soon as it leaves that mathematical space for a more human chatting. It's not only about the human predecessors programming it, it's also about the reference material it will find.

[yor_on]

It doesn't make it any different from ourselves of course, the danger in it lies in believing that it can be 'impartial', somewhat like some do about lie detectors, facial recognition technologies etc. And it has a further weakness, it is unable to question itself. Where a third would be manipulating it, knowing that people wants to believe.

[hamdani yusuf]

And it has a further weakness, it is unable to question itself.

It can be solved by combination with generative adversarial networks.