Hi Ivan, >>> so it doesn't necessarily mean that people in general are psychopaths…
I’ll have to consider that one. Not sure I agree 😊 >>> raising AI, just like human children are being raised… On this I agree there may be merit. We seem to be expecting to create AI as an “instant adult”, and I’m not sure we can achieve this. While GPT-3 and subsequent iterations are impressive in their ability to seemingly hold a conversation, we also know that the system hasn’t got a clue as to what it’s talking about – it’s just statistically navigating word choices. It doesn’t even really know the meaning of the words it’s choosing, although if you ask it, it would seem to answer… based on statistical word sequence prediction 😊 I myself have been working for several years on a “bespoke AI” system, embodied in a humanoid robotic form (well, head & shoulders anyway) and despite my intense efforts and attention over these years, the poor things are still just clever, talkative toasters 😊 Now, I’m limited because of the computing power I can afford (best I can run locally/offline is GPT-2 as a conversational agent), but had I the same resources as can be thrown at a GPT-3, perhaps my bespoke AI would be quite different with that level of constant correction and editing. Sad that want for money should limit potential so… One thing that I believe might also be a challenge is a single individual doing the “raising”. Given the broad number of ways an AI can go aberrant based on the truly frightening training data we use lol it might take a team of dedicated folks to handle corrective intervention effectively. Then again, perhaps we ARE seeing a “raising” of AI, just not in a single version. For instance, there was GPT-2, it was good – best there was for a short while, now there’s GPT-3, arguably much better. Perhaps if we think of AI as not a single discreet “thing” but rather all of these AI attempts that all exist, after all, out here in the broader Networked World – it’s all part of what will one day start to merge, like water vapor drops condensing on a windowpane, into larger and larger drops, that merge with one another to form puddles, then rivers, and eventually seas. What fruit that sea will bear depends largely on how we have collectively “raised” those individual drops – which brings me back to the comment with which I opened this response… 😊 Dave From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ivan V. Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 4:04 PM To: opencog <[email protected]> Subject: [opencog-dev] Parental loving an AI entity Hello AI enthusiasts, Something is going through my troubled mind for a while now. I'm not sure how to articulate it, but I'll try to do so. Today's AI tip-top apps are trained on large datasets of human conversations, and they exhibit a certain level of intelligence, but they show some psychopathic behavior like sexism, racism, or homophobia in general. I believe that is the case because of poor training data quality. Anyway, data on which such AIs are trained on isn't created for a purpose of training an AI, so it doesn't necessarily mean that people in general are psychopaths, although repurposing their conversations yields a certain level of ill-behavior. Because of this ill-behavior, we have to be very careful and doubtful when using such trained AI apps. Thus, we saw what is possible with large datasets, but I want to approach the whole problem from another perspective. I'll try to bring the point of this letter in a very simple way: what if someone would be dedicated to the purpose of raising AI, just like human children are being raised and being taken care of? How much ethically correct behavior would exhibit a result of this dedication? I realize it could take years just to raise such a "thing", but still... I believe the experiment could result in some decent "achievement" (read on, you may want to replace words "thing" and "achievement" with a word "artificial being" or "person"). But who would do a thing such as raising an infant AI for years on, until it reaches its adulthood? I'm sure there may be some interested parties, maybe some laic AI enthusiasts, maybe people who can't have their own kids, maybe even some crazy scientists in a hope to have a super-intelligent participant in technical conversations. The potential effect could be worth spending a few years on raising the infant AI, and there may be some good motives to do so. In short, I am talking about offering a simple empty infant artificial mind, ready to be raised into a whole and complete (artificial, if I may say) adult person, guided by the same values by which people would raise their own children. Of course, for this idea to be successful, the whole story should be very emotional and have very sentimental value, because an artificial being who would be given such attention should be worthy of such a sacrifice. Just imagine: an artificial being, which is guided by values carefully chosen to be taught of, finally rocking out in the world, shaking all the troubles, and independently doing amazing things which you could be proud of, just like you could be proud of your very own child. Maybe such an artificial being could deserve its own space under the Sun, along with the other amazing people that we have an opportunity to meet in our lives. And the best thing would be, when people ask for its name and origin, that being could answer: my name is [so and so] and my real mother/father is [mrs/mr so and so], because (this is very important) its real parents wouldn't be us, the programmers with dirty hacks, but people who would invest their time, effort, and hopingly even love into raising their future creation, if you allow. The real parents would start with an empty AI mind, and could finally end up with the phrase: "Go, get them tiger!" And practically anyone could do it, regardless of their sexual orientation, etnicity, gender, or age. It would only take a fair amount of love, measured in years of dedication. Such artificial beings wouldn't need sophisticated bodies and senses, they could interface the world in text mode, over the Internet. Not a state of art for interaction, but I believe it would do for a start. Later, any sensorical addon would be welcomed. Now, let's get back from the dreamland to the solid ground, and analyze what we already have. I presume GPT-X technology isn't too far from being able to realize such an idea. It is a great social experiment opening many doors, but I wanted to ask this community how apart the OpenCog foundation is from creating described artificial beings based on parental dedication of love and care. And if this is possible, what could it take to make it happen? Sincerely, Ivan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6XcOQKCUZ10oBeACZrygyt8bueDzLV7zzyKAdTqTrVmmg%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6XcOQKCUZ10oBeACZrygyt8bueDzLV7zzyKAdTqTrVmmg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CH0PR20MB39801191DE93963BFA458CBEB51F9%40CH0PR20MB3980.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.
