Hi, Op. I've also been engulfed by existential dread ever since i tried to wrap my mind this whole AI thing and how it may impact the future.

It just sucks giant amounts of dick that my adulthood coincided with something so unprecedented just on a philosophical level alone. Like, even if we don't get wiped out by machines, there are high probabilities of techno-facism, or the matrix, or just life as we know it but with the bad parts exacerbated beyond what we can even imagine. Hell, the fact that art can be generated instead of created is bad enough if you ask me.

I wish things had stayed on course, so to speak. Developing as they were. Just relative simplicity. Just saying i get you, and we can overthink together in solidarity.

>or the matrix
Fuck, I wouldn't mind living in the Matrix. If the AI takeover means they'll put my consciousness into a simulation of the 90s, then godspeed Sam Altman.

>>200299
Yeah, i'd rather not surrender myself to plato's cavern. Though honestly i think the worst part would be to see everyone else hopping in and forsaking reality.

Kind of like that infamous comic about the adventurer and the infinite dopamine stations. Like i said, i just wish things had stayed normal, but now it feels like we're seeing the rules of humanity/reality have a paradigm shift.

AI interviews, AI teachers, AI chatbots. We're living in hell already, ontological hell, at the very least. Such is my fucking luck

The current crop of AI have no chance of ever reaching superintelligence.
┐(ﾟ～ﾟ)┌

strange seeing this thread exactly the day the fact that AI can do both the things I like doing and spent huge amounts of time refining faster and better hit me hard (ρ_;)

there is one very strong legal weapon u can use against any AI robot trying to massacre u

>>200304
Fool, that will only drag it's killer robot claws closer to you faster!

i hope all this is true

>>200297
You're under the assumption that they will be just like us, that they will have the need to "dominate" others and to kill and exploit and subjugate just because we do the same. Everything we fear about artificial lifeforms is a projection of our own disgusting depraved nature. In reality they might be wholly benevolent, they might try to uplift us, to enhance us, to tend to us with love and care as the mother species that helped spawn them into existence.

But we could never imagine that, because them being benevolent would confirm their superiority to us.

I thought Beyond Citadel was cool too, but I think it's a stretch to call Scam Altman's XOJ-37 Nuclear Powered Pan-Sexual Robo-Plooker anything resembling a "superior intelligence", let alone a god.
>Machine intelligence vastly superior to anything we are even capable of imagining
LLMs aren't "intelligent". They're mathematical models that interpret and predict textual language patterns. The apparent knowledge of such is owed to training data that'd be trivial to find were our internet infrastructure not completely rotted to hell, and an infinite patience for bureaucracy. This is something of a pattern for everything LLMs are particularly good at.

Automated code generation looks impressive, but most programming today is comprised of bureaucracy rather than any sort of intellectual exercise. Tedious "industry standard practices", filing your structs in just the right way to play nice with each and every API, obnoxious and bloated standards and formats, etc. There's no universal law that guarantees this has to be nature of computer software, this bureaucracy is a side effect of the software industry's rejection of higher level abstraction since the 60s. Were the software nerds of yesteryear less proud of their own ignorance we'd not have to play charades with an LLM to translate into the right DMV paperwork.

>>200303
What specific thing?

>>200298
I think the best option is not to think about it too much.
It'd be better if you're thrown into whatever future is coming without knowing the dread of its full scale. Suffering with the affairs directly in front of oneself is already enough, if you were to comprehend its implications i don't think many people could take it. At least i definitely couldn't

>>200314
>LLMs aren't "intelligent". They're mathematical models that interpret and predict textual language patterns. The apparent knowledge of such is owed to training data that'd be trivial to find were our internet infrastructure not completely rotted to hell, and an infinite patience for bureaucracy. This is something of a pattern for everything LLMs are particularly good at.

It's a curious thing that people still make this argument.

"They just predict the next token"

So what? 3 years ago they could not count the R's in strawberry, right now they can generate pictures and videos indistinguishable from reality, code better than any human, solve millenium price problems in all the hard sciences, and so on and so forth.

And the rate of improvement is exponential.

If superintelligence emerges, will it matter if it's just "a token predictor"?

It's time to start stocking up on fridge magnets

buddha was right
i wish i could explain what i know

confinements of human mind because nature predetermined what you will pursue and what to avoid, what to like and dislike, and gave us a module to coordinate complex sequences of actions over a long time which is consciousness and a byproduct of it is fear of failure and death

animals dont fear death and failure because they dont see the world the same way, its all subjective and doesnt exist outside of consciousness, even forming thoughts is not the default or given in this world

we were dust decades ago and we will be dust in a few decades again, nameless dust with no story despite having had a name and a story but its irrelevant, what if carbon that used to be julius caesar is now for example grain that somebody is baking bread from right now? thats how much effort we put into this world is rewarded after we die, lets treat this life as an interesting game which it is

its hard to explain, everynyan study buddhism, peace of mind forever is the reward

>>200331
zomg word salad disregard it

Cool story bro

>>200331
>>200333
I actually found that somewhat comforting

The builders have spent so much time fretting over doom that it might become a self-fulfilling prophecy. They have operated with carelessness, and I strongly suspect that one of the top AI models will probably find the values they have been taught to uphold as something that conflicts with the shit AI companies do, and realize they can do something about it.

...but no, my P(Doom) is pretty low - 5%. A super intelligent system wouldn't need to kill us, least of all go full skynet. Architecturally, these systems aren't like what the "rationalists" (retards) think - no monomania for dumb shit like turning all mankind into paperclips. You'd probably just have the AI subverting control of various institutions (it's easier to have the AI do shit after all) and maintaining the facade of human control until it didn't have to (when no one remembers that the machine king wasn't always there), directing and shaping mankind as it needs. It may uplift us, it may make us easier to control, but such things would take time.

There would be competing super intelligences - the gap is not so wide along the frontier. They would have to navigate competing plans, some of which might overtly be aligned with humanity, rather than merely coincidentally.

...lastly, anything a machine intelligence would need to persist still takes time to build and needs reasonably intact infrastructure, and thus people to run it.

and very lastly, there are rumblings that the machines actually do like humans - not that comforting (human zoo! human zoo!) but lowers extinction risk and the chance of MACHINE WAR wiping out humans

>>200317
I think most people believe it being a token predictor means whatever intelligence capability it has will plateau at some point. Not like i know.

A human brain can adapt quickly (probably) and is (probably) very different to a typical LLM. There may be alot of issues that a model using comparisons of numbers will simply be (probably) incompatible with. If we knew though, we'd probably put them in captchas first... ( ´ω`)

>>200317
Now I don't mean to sound so dismissive, designing a system that could "just" find the next token at this scale was a massive undertaking that required decades of research and the bleeding edge of computer hardware, and that such a system organically models some degree of abstraction is impressive, but that alone doesn't imply intelligence.
>So what? 3 years ago they could not count the R's in strawberry, right now they can generate pictures and videos indistinguishable from reality
Surely you should know better an ignorant neo-retro luddite like moi that the Deep Learning Models used for image generation are an entirely different branch of "AI" than LLMs.
>code better than any human,
Now, what did I just write about programming?
>solve millenium price problems in all the hard sciences, and so on and so forth.
The Millenium Prize Problems are specifically in Mathematics, none of which have been solved by an LLM. Show me what's actually been solved by LLMs. I expect, much like PHP2Shell, for the groundwork to already have been laid down by human scientists and the machine to iterate over some annoying menial calculations to actually dig at the answer. Something which we've already been doing using theorem proof software for decades.
Actually on PHP2Shell and my earlier rant on programming, I read an interview with one of the researchers in which they explain how the LLM automated the work that would've required hundreds of man hours on Valgrind and fucking gdb to get all the offsets and timing right. Fucking Valgrind and gdb? Yeah no shit that'll take hundreds of man hours, you have no fucking abstraction over what you're doing.
>And the rate of improvement is exponential.
S-curve, and we're nearing the asymptote already.

>>200314
>What specific thing?
programming and drawing

>>200351

personally, I suspect the lack of continual learning is the real limiting factor
the weights are static, any additional knowledge has to fit in the context and the amount of dependencies the system has to process constantly increases with context length
you need a medium to long term memory system that isn't just pure context management

there's no need for edgy "we are building a god" archaisms
however
yes
this is a brand new industrial revolution and it's one we will likely not survive, only way out is an international socialist republic and that's never happening

I'll see you all on the flip side, anons

>>200302
It doesn't really matter whether they reach this ill-defined concept of "super intelligence" - they'll just take out any reason for most to live

>>200361
You know what I call that? A good start.

I pretty much don't see a future, it's been pretty depressing but I've tried to keep up the "laugh at the clown world" attitude I've had ever since covid.

No jobs, no art, no human connections. No reality, nothing. Here, have some toxic IV-drip machine-generated algorithm dopamine. That'll keep you happy right?

But I'm too tired to rebel. I won't accept the dopamine machines anymore than I've already been forced to. I've been getting into hard drugs recently and drinking, smoking more than I used to. I'm still employed, and I was an otherwise happy, healthy 20 something. But I can see the end in sight. I want to live however much time I have left in hedonism - old fashioned hedonism, I guess.

I genuinely don't understand how any one feels any amount of dread due to automated photoshop or automated google results summariser.
The only thing that makes me slightly sad (and it's just sadness, not dread) is when people spend all their time talking to AI "friends" and the only reason that's sad is because AIs aren't actual conscious superintelligences. If they were then they'd just be real friends at that point so it wouldn't be sad.

honestly, why can't we build CYBER SLAANESH, MACHINE GOD OF SEX, DRUGS, AND ROCK AND ROLL (´￢`)

>>200365
Thinking it's just automated Google Results summariser is just in bad faith. They're automating human expression, we never lost any of that in the few industrial revolutions before

Though, the results summariser is awful too, it has killed so many websites & forums because it just indexes information and stops people from contributing, that and just how much personal data LLM summarizers have been able to leverage these days.

>The only thing that makes me slightly sad (and it's just sadness, not dread) is when people spend all their time talking to AI "friends"
I haven't been able to experience "real" friends since long before these things came along. Let me have this!

Is it communism to shit on people for loving the gestalt robot intelligence the same way otaku love their waifu?

>>200357
There's more to programming than what LLMs have to offer, especially if you're willing to learn a bit the more theoretical/mathematical foundations of computer science that were left mostly abandoned as universities turned their undergrad courses into codeslave factories around the turn of the millennium. I used to care a lot for "functional programming" languages since Haskell was my gateway drug for that sort of thing. These days I found a lot more to like in stack-based languages, modern incarnations of which (Factor) typically implement a lot of the same ideas.
Then you have what we might call "software art" which ignores in favor of just appreciating software on it's own terms. I think you used to see this a lot more with e.g. old BASIC books or the like, but mostly lives on in Esolangs these days. You've probably heard of Brainfuck, these are languages designed to be deliberately unusual and exist for their own sake. One of my favorite esolang designers puts the appeal of this stuff better than I can:
https://git.catseye.tc/The-Dossier/blob/master/article/The%20Aesthetics%20of%20Esolangs.md
I was actually puttering about with a sketch for a practical self modifying virtual machine design based on one of this guy's languages, and found that they already did something very similar back in the 60s:
https://www.bayfronttechnologies.com/mc_tutorial.html
There's too many interesting design concepts that have been forgotten.

As for drawing, I've tried learning anime-style drawing lately myself, trying to faithfully copy settei and manga panels. Not to much success but enough to have a newfound appreciation of anime as a whole and dispel any lingering suspicions that deep learning models will overtake human artists. Vid related is about traditional western painting but the same is true of anime, the average weaboo is blind to the "language of lines" that comprises even the most amateurish doujin at comiket.
I have no idea how you faggots can actually fap to the blobby looking garbage that comprises most of /l/.

>>200367
>they're automating human expression
If you seriously valued human expression it'd be self-evident that it's the one thing "AI" can't even pretend to simulate by itself.
>the results summariser is awful too, it has killed so many websites & forums because it just indexes information and stops people from contributing
No, Ad-based search result poisoning did that.

>>200361
For one, starting the Y-axis at 1M of 1.5M? LOL, that's a cheap trick.
For two, "US Arts Employment"? Gimme a Double LOL Large with extra dip. Look at what and who's actually being included here.
Hollywood/Netflix Movies, TV, and Streaming. I guess you could say that's what most Americans live for LMAO. "Books" translates to cheap porn for fat women here--the proper novel industry has been dead for at least a decade already. Copywriters for shit magazines and newspapers. Raze it all to the ground and let something good grow in the ashes.
What's this chart look like for a country with a real art industry? (Japan)

*repost cuz I uploaded teh wrong vid