svieira
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
For who?
- Socrates (via Plato), Gorgias
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1672/1672-h/1672-h.htm#:~:te...
And I am presuming that the companionship that people need is the companionship of other human beings. Otherwise, tamagotchi, fish, cats, dogs, parrots, and horses are already perfectly good companions. AI can help fill in for some of those other ones (tamagotchi especially), but it cannot replace human companionship.
That would be awful, presuming that the artificial friends are not people.
Separately, you might like Count to the Eschaton by John Wright with its ultimate project being "the sophistication of all matter".
Is this "allow" or "encourage"? If "allow", how do you do that deterministically or at least fail-closed?
And I think that the "tool" vs. "automation" delineation is one of the clearest and most succinct takes on _how to talk about this problem_ that I have seen in the past few years.
Don't we already have this experience and isn't it called "the Google support experience"? And I don't know about you, but I don't like it.
(nit) "immoral" is "anti-moral". I suspect you want "amoral", that is "without" or "separated from" morals.
But, if you wanted "immoral" ... what about matrix math derived from gradient descent is inherently "immoral" in your view?
You may want to check out what Antithesis is doing in this space - https://antithesis.com/ Specifically, https://antithesis.com/docs/resources/deterministic_simulati...
Outline of the programmer: * Python, JavaScript, Scala, C#, Java.
Ad Jesum per Mariam