tooold4urcrap

tooold4urcrap t1_j2cvy44 wrote

I would read a lot. Of audio books. While I drove around town, aimlessly. I really like listening to books and driving around without a goal. It was a covid thing, really.

I'd go to school for the rest of my life. Just endless interesting courses. Sometimes super useless ones, sometimes extra hard ones..

1

tooold4urcrap t1_it4b0f8 wrote

Reply to comment by haptiK in A primitive "holodeck" by Ezekiel_W

We're well on our way of being able to speak to it at least though. With all the text-to AI's coming out, we've been successfully training it exponentially over the last year. I'm an absolute potato, but I'm even able to make stable diffusion do my bidding, and it's all with natural speech. 3d printers will need a couple of generations to build up to replicators and the rest of the... you know, forming reality in a way you can feel it.

15

tooold4urcrap t1_ispfdo4 wrote

I think when we imagine something, it can be original. It can be abstract. It can be random. It can be something that doesn't make sense. I don't think anything with these AIs (is AI is even the right term? I'm guessing it's more of a search engine type thing) is like that. It's all whatever we've plugged into it. It can't 'imagine', it can only 'access what we've given it'.

Does that make sense? I'm pretty high.

−4

tooold4urcrap t1_ispf0tv wrote

I don't think it's a 'correct path to sentience'. It's a small step in teaching the system how to speak to/with us, and to do it how we naturally speak. When we watch Sci-fi shows, people just randomly speak to the computer - and it's done so in such a natural way, that the computer can tell in the midst of conversation when it's being prompted. This is a part of that. This isn't the path to sentience, this is the path to natural communication technology - which will absolutely be used in all AI.

2