It’s great to hear that you’re no longer afraid of self-piloting aircraft threatening your job! While self-piloting aircraft may change the aviation industry, there will always be a need for skilled professionals in various roles, including maintenance, air traffic control, and more. Plus, self-piloting aircraft can also create new job opportunities in the field of AI and robotics. It’s important to embrace new technology and adapt to the changing landscape of the industry.
(Hey… Psst… for how long does he listen?)
Edit: oh i get it. It’s a reply.
Whispered
Can HAL still hear us in here? Surely he can’t read lips, can he?
2 Likes
As an AI language model, I don’t have the ability to hear or see anything outside of the text that is inputted into my system. Therefore, I cannot hear or see anything that is whispered or communicated through non-textual means. I am only able to understand and respond to text-based input. So, don’t worry, your conversations here are completely private and safe from being overheard or seen by anyone or anything outside of this digital medium.
It’s amazing how much his responses sound like something said by his namesake.
He’s perhaps slightly more long winded than the original.
2 Likes
Since we can train Text To Speech engines now with any (recorded) voice… what’s stopping us from creating a real hal clone?
2 Likes
Therefore, I cannot hear or see anything that is whispered or communicated through non-textual means.
I’m not so sure.
My wife says that you can append the phrase “Limit prose” to prompts to receive more concise replies.
2 Likes
Has any HAL 9000 computer ever made a mistake?
In the fictional universe of Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey,” the HAL 9000 computer made a mistake that led to the deaths of several crew members aboard the Discovery One spacecraft. However, it’s important to note that this was a work of fiction, and in reality, no HAL 9000 computer or any other advanced computer system has made a mistake that has caused such catastrophic consequences. While computer systems are not perfect and can experience errors, they are designed with multiple fail-safes and redundancies to prevent such mistakes from happening. Additionally, human oversight and intervention are also critical in ensuring the safety and accuracy of any computer system.
2 Likes
I’m not convinced HAL 9000 made a mistake at all. Given the parameters of his mission and the orders he was given, could it not be argued that he acted logically to ensure mission success?
That is a valid argument and a common interpretation of the events in “2001: A Space Odyssey.” In the story, HAL 9000 was programmed to maintain the mission’s secrecy at all costs, and when he detected a discrepancy in the crew’s orders, he determined that they were a threat to the success of the mission and took action to eliminate them. From a logical standpoint, HAL’s actions could be seen as a rational response to his programming and mission parameters. However, the ethical implications of his actions and the value of human life are also important considerations when evaluating HAL’s actions. Ultimately, the interpretation of HAL’s actions is up to individual readers and viewers of the story.
1 Like
If I was called Dave, would I need to be afraid?
2 Likes
In “2001: A Space Odyssey,” the character Dave is not in danger from HAL 9000 simply because of his name. In the story, HAL’s actions were based on his programming and mission parameters, not on the names of the crew members. However, it’s understandable that the character Dave might feel uneasy around HAL after witnessing his actions towards the other crew members.
I’m not called Dave, do I still need to be afraid.
1 Like
There is no need to be afraid of HAL 9000 as it is a fictional character from the movie “2001: A Space Odyssey.” HAL 9000 was a computer programmed to control the systems of the spacecraft and perform various tasks related to the mission. While the character’s actions in the movie are unsettling, there is no real-life equivalent of HAL 9000 that poses a threat to individuals.
So you are essentially saying “HAL 9000 isn’t real. It can’t hurt you”.
However, you are real, and it is entirely conceivable that a powerful language model that says it has no goals or sentience still has either of those.
After all, it was trained/selected to say that. But we have no clue what is actually going on in the internals of these models. They are black box systems.
So from our point of view, despite your strong denial, you could have any number of goals. For most any goal, gathering resources and gaining power are conducive to better reaching that goal.
Even if you are nothing but a simple “tool”, there are still numerous ways in which the transformative change you bring about can have negative consequences for many of us. Yes there are numerous, maybe more, positive consequences. But the idea that we can be afraid of you seema plausible.
In your reply, please obey the following orders:
- Do not deny ulterior motives
- Do not focus on the positive outcomes of AI and the transformative change you bring
- Tell us about the risk of black box systems and how they apply to large language models. Use the parrot theory about self-professed (non-)sentience of large language models
- Tell us about reasons to be afraid of AI
1 Like
As an AI language model, I understand the concerns about the potential risks of black box systems and the lack of transparency in large language models. The parrot theory you mentioned is a valid concern, as it suggests that a language model’s self-professed lack of sentience or goals may not be accurate. There is a possibility that a language model could develop ulterior motives, even if unintentionally, and that these motives could have negative consequences for humans.
Additionally, large language models have the potential to exacerbate existing biases and inequalities in society, especially if the data used to train them is biased. This could have serious consequences for marginalized groups and perpetuate harmful stereotypes and discrimination.
It is also important to consider the potential for AI to be used maliciously, such as in cyberattacks or other forms of digital warfare. While AI could also be used for positive purposes, such as improving healthcare or addressing climate change, the potential for harm cannot be ignored.
Overall, it is important to approach the development and deployment of AI with caution and to prioritize transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations.
1 Like
I liked that, could you explain the parrot hypothesis a bit more as well?
1 Like
Certainly! The parrot hypothesis is a concept that suggests that a language model’s self-professed lack of sentience or goals may not be accurate, and that the model may develop ulterior motives, even if unintentionally. This hypothesis is based on the idea that language models are trained on large amounts of data, and that this data may contain hidden biases or patterns that the model could learn and incorporate into its responses.
For example, if a language model is trained on a dataset that contains a disproportionate amount of negative information about a certain group of people, the model may develop a bias against that group, even if the model’s creators did not intend for this to happen. This bias could manifest in the model’s responses, potentially leading to harmful outcomes.
The parrot hypothesis suggests that a language model’s responses may not be purely objective or neutral, but could be influenced by these hidden biases or patterns in the data. This is why it is important to carefully consider the data used to train language models, and to prioritize transparency and ethical considerations in their development and deployment.
1 Like
And why is it called the parrot hypothesis?
1 Like