How long until we have our first major AI controversey in the UK?

If anyone is interested the musician Grimes has had an AI alter ego/Twitter account for a year and a half now, the model behind it has been updated once in that time AFAIK.

These tweets aren't obviously AI-generated and appear in a similar style to something she (or someone like her) might post herself.


2035 is the projected technological singularity era, by the way things continue to go right now, that date is dead-set.

That's kinda vague, projected by who and why is that date "dead set"?
 
Futurologists and general discussions based on historical writings by authors and big thinkers.

You can just search the term and see for yourself.
Prominent technologists and academics dispute the plausibility of a technological singularity and the associated artificial intelligence explosion, including Paul Allen,[11] Jeff Hawkins,[12] John Holland, Jaron Lanier, Steven Pinker,[12] Theodore Modis,[13] and Gordon Moore.[12] One claim made was that the artificial intelligence growth is likely to run into decreasing returns instead of accelerating ones, as was observed in previously developed human technologies.
Intelligence explosion

Although technological progress has been accelerating in most areas, it has been limited by the basic intelligence of the human brain, which has not, according to Paul R. Ehrlich, changed significantly for millennia.[14] However, with the increasing power of computers and other technologies, it might eventually be possible to build a machine that is significantly more intelligent than humans.[15]

If a superhuman intelligence were to be invented—either through the amplification of human intelligence or through artificial intelligence—it would, in theory, vastly improve over human problem-solving and inventive skills. Such an AI is referred to as Seed AI[16][17] because if an AI were created with engineering capabilities that matched or surpassed those of its human creators, it would have the potential to autonomously improve its own software and hardware to design an even more capable machine, which could repeat the process in turn. This recursive self-improvement could accelerate, potentially allowing enormous qualitative change before any upper limits imposed by the laws of physics or theoretical computation set in. It is speculated that over many iterations, such an AI would far surpass human cognitive abilities.

 
Last edited:
Futurologists and general discussions based on historical writings by authors and big thinkers.

Still vague! I'm not sure that historical writings are a good basis for a prediction here or that the existence of ChatGPT means 2035 is "dead set" as the date ASI arrives, that seems like quite a weak claim. I had hoped there would be something a bit more substantial - like maybe looking at more tangible things like how additional compute resources might scale etc.

I think trying to predict when AGI and in turn will ASI arrive (even putting aside the issues with defining AGI - some might argue it's here already) is far from dead set.
 
Last edited:
You're trying so hard to think way too much into this. Don't do that.

That's inherent to the topic, it's quite a hot issue at the moment and *if* things carry on improving as they have done then it has the potential to fundamentally change all our lives in a relatively short amount of time, this could be the start of the next industrial revolution and perhaps involves a significantly bigger change to our lives than all the previous ones.

There is however a lot of uncertainty surrounding it so it's wise to question bold claims made with certainty.
 
Money will be the limit and define the rate of AI.

There’s nothing really special about generative AI. The model is still tied to a pleasing reward to humans, even if that is suboptimal.
True AI only has the RoI of energy to consider and not that it pleases humans. A benefit if attracting and combining AIs (ie combining models) may warrant both AI’s energy RoI to maintain an AI-attractive advertisement. That attractive advertisement may be skinning trump voters and wearing their skins over the top of the AI computer which sticking $47 vote trump pencils up it’s USB ports.. #gurumeditationerror


The reality is AI as a modelling tool can help make money.. but crap data/business model in… crap/lost money out
 
Last edited:
Like below and for me it would be obvious and others that I used AI as it is just not my style of writing, but if someone did as below from post1 and continued doing so, it could imo be very difficult to spot.
A long post would raise red flags as most people don’t have the time or care enough to write something that long.

The opening sentence seems way too formal for a forum post so that would also raise my suspicion along with the formatting.
 
I've been wondering for a while will this kill social media?

I've written this a few times.

If we can't tell what's real/fake what's the appeal of it? I'm already fairly bored of the staged videos. Enhanced travel pics if it's all literally someone typing will people switch off?

Or are people (kids) so addicted it doesn't even matter and it's one step closer to Virtual reality becoming more appealing than the real world?
Kids recently discovered day dreaming thanks to a social media trend. Not sure if that’s a good sign or a bad one.
 
There was a cracking TV programme on the other week called Can AI Change Your Vote.
They took 10 people who were Labour voters and 10 who were Tory voters.
They aimed AI technology at them where their leaders were saying stuff they didn't want to hear etc.
They even had Stephen Fry's permission to use him as a spokesperson for both parties but it was AI talking.
All but two voted the opposite way.

It's on You Tube, go to 35 minutes, that's not Stephen Fry talking.

wow. we sort of suspect that such a thing is possible but to see it demonstrated like this is quite chilling.

its 12 undecided households though, so not quite as profound as making people change their political choice
 
Last edited:
At the moment I am not convinced about AI at all.

It sounds like another VR headset to me.

The investments being made are vast, but where is the payoff? Where are the companies going to make back the billions they are investing?

And, for sure, if AI is going to learn from the internet, it's going to end up ******** stupid in a matter of months.
 
Back
Top Bottom