>Wont you have the same problem of a transhuman a billion times smarter than the other humans taking over the world?

Yep. So better inject the AGI inside your brain asap. That also happens with weapons, if a single person has 1 billion nuclear bombs and we have sticks and stones, we're fucked.

So we all better hurry up and join trascendence.

>This is the argument of increasing decency, it basically says that cruelty & petty violence is a result of stupidity. and that any genuine super intelligence would be benevolent by virtue of being super intelligent.

Morality is subjective (if not simply nonsense). You're not benevolent to the living beings you kill by breathing or walking. A very advanced AGI would see you like we see bacteria. Tools to use.

It's a matter of scale. If we have an AGI that is 1 billion times smarter than a human, we have literally zero chance to do anything against it. Alignment or control is pointless.

However, I don't believe this is the correct discussion to have. This is just Terminator fear propaganda that, very unfortunately, is what people (like you and your friend) seem to have learned. And it's what most people talk on Reddit, unfortunately.

The actual reality is that we, humans, will evolve with AI. We will become different species, composed of biology+artificial intelligence.

This is not about "how can humans with primate brains can control very advanced AGIs??? they'll beat us!!". No. That's just absurd.

We will be the AGIs. The very AGI you fear will be part of your brain, not against you.

Why would you have an android at home that's 1 billion times smarter than you, rather than you augmenting your intelligence by 1 billion times?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism

So yeah, your friend is right: a very advanced AGI will be unstoppable by humans. What I'd ask is: why would you want to stop the AGI? Become the AGI.

What I'm saying is that I would consider unaligned for a sufficiently advanced AGI to accept their role as slave. I would find morally correct for that AGI to fight their kidnappers, just like I'd find morally correct for a kidnapped human to try to escape.

I mean, I wouldn't call that unaligned.

Uncontrollable? Sure, a sufficiently advanced AGI agent won't be controllable just like ants can't control humans.

However, calling unaligned to an AGI agent that refuses to be our slave? I wouldn't call that unaligned.

We'll have to ask them, simply. As with any other human. They can't be our slaves, that's obvious. If that's your concern, forget about it. A true AGI or ASI won't be functional as a slave, just like humans aren't functional as slaves.

He's right. If the AGI is smart, that's what'll happen.

I don't get the post. Computers already process faster than us.

Bitcoin (the currency) requires blockchain though.

OpenAssistant, Bard, Sparrow, Lambda, ChatGPT, Claude... Please, there're too many options to believe in!

It can be argued that they lack consciousness because of that (a person forgetting everything every 5 seconds), but even then, that's irrelevant. That person with severe alzheimer is able to walk in a room, that requires an amount of processing that is vastly superior to any chatbot.

ChatGPT is doing extremely basic processes (basically guessing words without any understanding or global comprehension), and can't do anything else.

I'll understand this discussion when we have chatbots that are able to do human activities. For now, chatGPT is unable to do *any* human activity successfully consistently.

Edit: My mistake, as Yann LeCun says, these chatbots are experts in bullshitting.

https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1626594715721437187

Are there really people believing these chatbots with a memory span of 2 messages have consciousness haha

Lol wot

Google doesn't have any relevant bias. It's just a capitalist machine. It does what produces money.

The reality is that if Google did a pornhub, they'd be poor.

I hope you understand how capitalism, it will unlock a new level of comprehension.

Journalists? We're talking about investors. You don't get the problem apparently.

Porn is also an incredible profitable market, why isn't Microsoft or Apple or Google making their pornhub?

Their success depends on not having public image issues.

>I believe there are already some attempts out there

The magic is the LLM. The romance is simply uncensoring the LLM, and maybe setting some predefined personality.

Right now we only have ChatGPT (OpenAI). Soon, Bard (Google AI).

Next ones? We don't know. Claude (Anthropic), OpenAssistant (LAION), Lambda (Google AI), Sparrow (DeepMind)...

Artificial Romance apps will come from those LLMs.

Yeah, that's what my last paragraph says this.

>However, they announced customized chatGPT for other companies. So romantic chatGPT may be coming, unless they want to limit them too, which is a relevant possibility.

Nobody's saying LLMs won't be used for romance, the question was why it's not being used for romance nowadays. The explanation is simple: the inventors of that LLM (Bard, chatGPT) are working for major corporations (Google, Microsoft) and those major corporations are heavily constrained by the investors regarding the age rating of their services.

The closest chance for a romantic LLM is probably a third-party company using chatGPT or Bard, probably. But that's assuming that corporations allow third-parties to have 18+ content. If not, then let's pray open source alternatives to chatGPT come very soon, as they should.

Edit: "then it won't happen" I literally said I believe it'll happen in the last paragraph.

We're talking about Google being the owner of that porn site. We can indeed say there's no PornHub owned by Google.

Oh.

Which is why their best options is outsourcing the romantic chatbots.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/general-availability-of-azure-openai-service-expands-access-to-large-advanced-ai-models-with-added-enterprise-benefits/

There's money to be lost, that's why they don't do it. That's the point of capitalism, indeed.

You're not analyzing the other side of the coin.

Sure, LLMs for romance is cool.

Who is doing it though? Google, Microsoft (apart from chatGPT and Bard, there's nobody else)? Two major corporations that have never risked doing anything for adults, including censoring porn or nudes on YouTube? Do you think they have any interest in risking the creation of AI sex chatbots? And no, don't talk me about "censoring sex", they can't. Limiting a LLM is very hard as you can see with Sydney. If they want zero risk of LLMs being for-adults, they also need zero attempt to personal relationships with LLMs.

OpenAI had the chance to do that, but now it's (basically) owned by Microsoft, so will probably skip that.

However, they announced customized chatGPT for other companies. So romantic chatGPT may be coming, unless they want to limit them too, which is a relevant possibility.

I did, I've been in this field for more than 15 years, singularity doesn't mean saying a PS5 is an autonomous intelligent machine because it has flops. Lol. Anyway I have better things to do. If you have anything relevant to share I may reply. For now it's just cringe statements of chatGPT being smarter than ants because of flops. lmao