OT: Open AI’s new model is insane
- Thread starter NJPSU
- Start date
CHATGPT indeed is another matter. My attorney was floored when I used it to be two attorneys arguing opposite sides of one case. The law references cited were innovative, brilliant and missed nothing according to him. After reviewing the arguments Chat produced he stated ... 'Good God, we'll be out of business soon.' My response, 'It's about time. No more bs billable hours, pal' lol
Wonder if I could set it up to have CHATGPT replace Airbnb, the whole damn convoluted software package with something lean, productive and tenable? 🤔
What's next, BOTS that write reviews on AMAZON that conflict with their own reviews? (Oh we have that already) Interactive Sex Therapy BOTs that create touch less orgasms? 😲 Next generation religious leader and religious movement AI BOTs that can save us from the sins for cash contributions at the speed of light. Symbolic war BOTs replacing real manly hand to hand combat. BOT operated drones that can switch sides on a BOT whim elevating incidents of espionage to a fever pitch. All of this should elevate Kurt Vonnegut's oft overlooked novel, Player Piano to the Holy Grail of literature. The possibilities are indeed endless.
Wonder if I could set it up to have CHATGPT replace Airbnb, the whole damn convoluted software package with something lean, productive and tenable? 🤔
What's next, BOTS that write reviews on AMAZON that conflict with their own reviews? (Oh we have that already) Interactive Sex Therapy BOTs that create touch less orgasms? 😲 Next generation religious leader and religious movement AI BOTs that can save us from the sins for cash contributions at the speed of light. Symbolic war BOTs replacing real manly hand to hand combat. BOT operated drones that can switch sides on a BOT whim elevating incidents of espionage to a fever pitch. All of this should elevate Kurt Vonnegut's oft overlooked novel, Player Piano to the Holy Grail of literature. The possibilities are indeed endless.
Umm…the first post is ChatGPT. ChatGPT is created by OpenAI. The new model is ChatGPT4o.
I know. The first post is not representing much revolutionary to me except the quality of artificial human voice mimicking actual human voice characteristics that comes with ChatGPT4o. The second example is more impressive of the capabilities that come with the update. Being human, I forgot the 4o.
The technology is a multiplier. The only question I have is when and how it is used against us. Some of the above links already border on suggesting that we fully outsource our thinking to the bots. I'm sure some here might prefer that, but it is extremely dangerous.
Man and Machine melting together as a new god for our time. What could go wrong?
They also have those exoskeletons that enhance our ability to run and lift. Elon is putting chips in brains now to help people regain movement. We aren't far off.
I'm not familiar with the exoskeletons but have read about Elon's brain chips and am all in favor of that as an amazing potential breakthrough in treating people's physically crippling debilities.
The crucial question is will we control the technology or will the technology control (even rule) us. On that latter point, I've heard some blathering about the possible wonders of a machine-generated "religion" that would instruct a Brave New World of supposed progress and enlightenment.
It's not a huge surprise that a philosophy that has deified the Self would logically end up deifying the Machine by attempting to create a superior semblance of consciousness in it. But that way lies madness. Then again, madness is the popular flavor of the day.
History has taught us that consumers get access to new technology well after the government has access to it. What AI capabilities actually exist right now that we do not know about?
I cannot speak to your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs beyond your question of who is in control. Humans often have a false sense of control particularly with natural systems. That doesn't bode well for this application. Further, another question is who will, when, and how are these technologies weaponized?
Current "religion" is simply men from far less enlightened times creating rules to live by, and constructing stories with a fake higher being to act as the alleged authority to ensure submission to, and compliance with, said rules.
I haven't heard anything about wonders of a machine-generated "religion' ... my guess is that's your mischaracterization of technological advancements, and your attempt to level the playing field by trying to equate "religion" with realities and facts ... but let's say that did happen ... again, I haven't heard anything about it, nor could I imagine it actually happening, but ... worst case ... what if it DID?
It'd simply be another version of man-made things, being embodied in some other form (here, machines, rather than a book of stories), to tell us what is best for us, and create rules for us to live by. You'd just be subbing out fantasy for technology. Would it be better to subject ourselves to archaic fantasies from a less enlightened time ... or subject ourselves to technological, forward-thinking overlords?
Neither seems fun, or correct, to me ... but one of those hells seems less potentially hellish than the other.
Last edited:
The ones that are controlling your very thoughts at this moment ... and that compelled you to type out your post.
And he swings and misses, strike 3 for purposelesspitch.
A recent quote from noted futurist philosopher Yuval Noah Harari on the topic of AI:
>>It's the first technology ever that can create new ideas. You know, the printing press, radio, television, they broadcast, they spread the ideas created by the human brain, by the human mind. They cannot create a new idea. You know, [Johannes] Gutenberg printed the Bible in the middle of the 15th century; the printing press printed as many copies of the Bible as Gutenberg instructed it, but it did not create a single new page. It had no ideas of its own about the Bible: Is it good? Is it bad? How to interpret this? How to interpret that? AI can create new ideas; [it] can even write a new Bible. You know, throughout history, religions dreamt about having a book written by a superhuman intelligence, by a non-human entity. … In a few years there might be religions that are actually correct. That — just think about a religion whose holy book is written by an AI. That could be a reality in a few years.<<
From a University of Athens research paper on AI published this year:
>>Artificial intelligence, with its ability to process vast amounts of data and simulate human-like interactions, presents intriguing possibilities within the realm of religious experiences. It can assist individuals in finding personalized spiritual guidance, provide virtual companionship, or even simulate encounters with divine figures.<<
There are other examples, but yeah...it's exactly as I characterized it above.
Now as to whether your "technological forward-thinking overlords" of human creation are preferable to the supreme power who created the universe and authored the physical and moral laws that govern it, we have a fundamental...and unbridgeable...difference of view.
Your tin gods have been tried before...many times...and it never ended well.
Listen, pal, I'm not going down this rabbit hole with you again. We did it on the other board, and you dissolved into a puddle of hysterics. Your brand of hatred is a subject for psychiatry...not philosophy or religion.
Supposedly Open AI has technology far more advanced than what they have released to the public.. They have shown GPT5 (not released) to a select few and they were blown away.
That release is rumored to be coming within the year.
It will be interesting to see what humans do for income in the coming decades. As wonderful as the technology is, it is going to make a lot of people without purpose.
Hey, thanks for the citations ... one of those references something more akin to heightening one's current religious experiences, but the other does discuss a new AI-generated religion.
Be careful how you attempt to phrase my thoughts on this matter, as we definitely have NOT discussed that prior ... we have discussed religion, yes, and belief v. non-belief ... but we have definitely not discussed which religion I would prefer, and I have certainly NOT advocated for any ... even this hypothetical machine-generated version. I stated they're all hellish.
It's more like discussing whether you want to be drawn and quartered or left to rot in an iron maiden. I choose neither, but in a hypothetical, one might be very awful, but less awful, than the other. But still horribly awful.
Regardless, since every iteration of religion, to this point, has been dreamt up by man to control and assauge their fellow man, what would be so wrong with yet another one, which has its logic based on that of man, since it's just synthesizing that of which man is aware, and learning in the vein of that human intelligence modality? It would just be another in the long line.
It sounds like Harari is saying AI may be able to provide scientific answers to questions previously unknown.(such as the creation of the universe)
I can see how that would be threatening to certain religious factions but that’s a far cry from the “AI becoming its own religion”.
We will most certainly need to have all the bots do the work to provide a universal basic income for everyone. Elon Musk has said as much.
Right now, the only thing I can fathom to make money is to own a piece of the production. If money is to be generated by AI and computing, then I want to own the stocks and shares of those companies.
That doesn't mean that the answers are correct. Again, I can see massive dangers to AI. It can go down incorrect or immoral paths without being redirected. It can be used as a weapon for nefarious purposes. There are many scenarios that could be extremely dangerous to man.
Is it really "new" ideas though? The output of AI is based on extremely large volumes of historical data and machine learning training based on a human created dataset. Yes the computers can store, access and process massive volumes of data better than a human ever could, but at it's core and in an oversimplified summary, isn't AI output a summarization of human created thought? Is summarizing data from others considered "new" thought? More of a rhetorical question, but I would say there's an argument to be had that AI isn't creating it's own new ideas.
I've interviewed a few candidates recently who use chat gpt during the interview.
It is super apparent once you are looking for it.
I even went so far as to ask a candidate if he has used ChatGpt. To see the reaction.
LdN
Last edited:
Harari talks about a "new bible...written by a superhuman intelligence." The Athens study says such superhuman intelligence could "simulate encounters with divine figures." And those quotes only scratch the surface.
Superhuman...new bible...divine figures. The combined meaning of those terms is clear: a new religion with its own scriptures and "divine figures" (read: gods).
That's far more than a threat to "certain religious factions." It's a direct attack on a foundational doctrine of most religions and an echo of the most ancient (and dangerous) lie of all, first whispered into the ears of our earliest ancestors at the dawn of human history: You will be like God.
To be clear, my argument is not against AI as such but rather against its potential for abuse and corruption.
As I said in my above post, it's not AI as such but rather the potential for abuse and corruption in the wrong hands. And these days, those with power and wealth are likely to be the wrong hands, in my view.
Beyond that, I don't think any of us knows where this is going or where it could lead. We do know the tool has immense potential...for good or evil. The ultimate objective, I think, is to meld together Man and Machine, creating a semblance of consciousness and the ability to "create ideas."
That may sound like science fiction, but if you look at the big picture and how fast the train is rolling down the track, I believe we have reason for concern...or at least to ask hard questions.
Again I think he’s referring to AI disproving theories presented in the Bible. Scientific discoveries made by super intelligence replacing ancient parables. Is that considered a “new Bible”? If so, then so be it.
He could be referring to a virtual reality situation where you could put yourself back in the time of Christ and interact with him. Think of it as the reenacting the Last Supper like some churches do only on steroids.
There's a book about this. It is called The Time Machine.
Replace Morlocks with machines and voila.
It will never happen though. Machines will kill all humans well before we reach this peace.
Maybe it can help Franklin with calling time outs and when to go for it on 4th down.
Never forget.
Garbage In. Garbage Out.
The scariest thing about AI is that people might start believing that everything it produces is true.
Garbage In. Garbage Out.
The scariest thing about AI is that people might start believing that everything it produces is true.
If I was <18, I'd go to a tech school and learn plumbing or electrical skills, or if I were smart enough go into medicine.
Definitely a trade. I would add hvac and elevator technician to your list as well. Medicine, while in high demand today, is not totally AI-proof. PA or NP is likely a safer bet in terms of demand and ROI. Nursing is likely in high demand for the foreseeable future.
I can only imagine NJ sitting around asking all sorts of questions like, 'Why doesn't my wife's boyfriend like me?'
Welding is a good option as well. My thoughts pre-AI, if you aren't going for high ROI degree(s) then you are much better off in the trades without starting your adult life with $100k - $300k in loans. Now you also have to consider replaceability with AI.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Basketball Penn State vs UMBC: Preview, how to watch, and more- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
Football Three keys to victory for Penn State against Washington
- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley