A.I delusions megatheead.

[Danioover9000]

   People who suffer from what I like to call dunning Krueger, and the dick head effect when it comes to thinking they are the best all of a sudden using A.I programs, and avoid being truthful to themselves and to others. Please share examples of people who are deluded  by A.I technology thinking they're a know it all and above critique:

   Based on many developmental factors like spiral dynamics stages of development, cognitive and moral development, personality typing and traits, ego development, Integral theory and other lines of development, ideology beliefs indoctrinated by culture and family upbringing, information ecology that manufactures consent, self bias and preferences of being an Australian nationalist. Shad is peak stage orange individualism, and intellectual hubris and too logical and too egotistical to know that he's bad at artz even when his brother Jazza has 4 years of professional art skills and techniques he could have learned from, but no he double downs on his hubris, using A.I programme to upset him.

   Because of all of that I think Shad is lower in cognitive development, at catetorical thinking similar to atheists and skeptics, lower in moral development as a moral objectivist and modernist, otherwise he would have moe compassion, love and circle of concern, and actually listens to his brother's feedback and be open to being wrong and willing to get the correction, typically a more left brain than roght brain type. I think his personality typing and traits is that of more close mindedness, conscientiousness, disagreeable, probably an extrovert and body intelligence bias due to his interest of HEMA, and neurotic. 9 stage of ego development, I think he's mostly at conformist stage with some opportunist stage ego, and he is egotistical towards even his brother. I suspect a traditionalist/conservative/nationalism bias even though he's from Australia he talks proudly of his HEMA and his family, proudly of his books and him being a writer and how he rrames it is definitely heavy analytical thinking, and his love of historical European martial arts, while having more dominant kinesthetic bias, I think he's more in his head, more active headspace energy than body and heart space energy, which gives this sense of him being a dick haed. I feel like his line of thinking is similar to religious fundamentalists, some aspects of pre rationale stage but also rational stage in that his values are at stage blue to orange, and he gets defensive and unwilling to admit faults genuinely, and if at all is a distraction and faking of genuine willingness to learn.

   This man even made a video on Nun Chucks whicb is blatantly wrong and highly biased, discounting the striking power and martial arts applications for locks, choke holds and versatility in Nun Chucks, even the 70's Nun Chucks were used by police and criminals who enjoyed the lethality of them such that the government banned nun chucks later on.

[Danioover9000]

   Great coverage of this issue:

 

[Sucuk Ekmek]

I know this is going to be a small thread but here is my take. We abondoned old gods and now we'll crown technology as new gods. Now how we do things? We'll do according to technology which is also the definition of  science. Forget about other science paradigms like Kropotin's evolution theory, or german's wissenschaft. We are integrated into aristotelian closed universe model. Where every option is ultimately dualistic. What is going on is  essentially scholastic thought. Which is also empirical measurement problem, what we do? We further reduce and mythologize technology.

 Sorry I don't have time to finish this but I'll also add this video.

 

[bebotalk]

People are too blaze about AI's impact. 

Granted, a Terminator-esque scenario isn't likely. This doesn't mean that the ramifications of such cannot be accounted for. Or that we've never before created technology that can literally think for itself. People compare it to nuclear weapons. Yes, they are destructive but they've only ever been used twice in warfare and require human actions to launch. It's not the same imho. 

[DocWatts]

I'd highly recommend John Verveake's recent book on the subject, Mentoring the Machines, where he helpfully differentiates three types of AI, and the domain of problems each is suited to.

1) Narrow AI is suited for well defined problems. Makes use algorithms to solve problems. Self driving cars are a good example of this.

2) Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is suited for ill-defined problems that are combinatorially explosive (ie can't be brute forced), and require a novel approach. Makes use of heuristics to solve a wide range of problems. All animals (including humans) are examples of general intelligence.

3) Super Intelligent AI is a hypothetical type of AI that would purportedly be able to address undefinable or existential problems that don't have a solution (ie 'what is the meaning of life'). Unlike the earlier two, this category is more akin to religious belief than something that we need concern ourselves with in our lifetime. Ray Kurtzweil's 'technological singularity' pseudo religion is a good example of this.

 

I've found that this differentiation can be helpful in how discussions around AI are framed. For example, it's helpful to keep in mind that the forms of AI that are already having a noticable impact on our society are Narrow AI. It's an open question as to whether we'll see AGI in our lifetimes, but it's impact on the world has the potential to be orders of magnitude more consequential than Narrow AI. IMHO super Intelligent AI is a fantasy and not worthy of serious discussion or consideration, when it's not even clear whether or not AGI will prove to be a practical possibility.

Edited December 8, 2023 by DocWatts