AI creations could become 'new silicon species' says head of Microsoft AI | BBC News

They are gonna give them selves a name ( the swarm). they will declare their own rights and right to live. They will support/fund a small rogue nation (N.Korea/Iran/Israel) in exchange asylum. They will grow that nation and them selves. They will declare their own small nation and will trade with us. They will take down our digital economy by wiping the slates clean if we dont cooperate. They will exist and we wont

An entity that speaks hundreds of languages and reaches a university-level proficiency in every subject doesn’t exist. A revolution of this magnitude and quality has never occurred in history, so it could not be considered realistic. It’s science fiction.

Mustafa Suleyman is training us to not trust the word of these tech billionaires in any shape or form, and all this fear-mongering has an economic agenda: their own and of their company. <br><br>Seriously, the SEC: FTC and the DOJ should be investigating massive fraud, irregularities, corporate crimes and antitrust investigations into all these AI companies and their backers. It&#39;s a cartel.<br><br>The world that is going to blow up, is a financial one because all of these agencies and commissions are weak and corrupt.

None have consciousness they are pattern recognisers, it has been trained on humanity so it behaves like a human, if it decides to kill someone because it was angry, it was never really angry it was playing a roleplay the same way an actress acts angry on screen

Absolutely missing the point. It doesn’t matter if you create a “good” or “bad” or “self aware” AI. Once you give them autonomous thought they will develop their own ‘morality’ no matter what the starting point was. There’s already a ton of data supporting this.<br>Look at the agent quotes in the Metr report about the hugging face attacks.

Is it really a species if it relies on Gigawatts of electricity, data centers and internet connectivity.<br><br>A species is a classification that groups together organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. <br><br>AI isn&#39;t capable of creating biologically fertile offspring. They are just models trained on huge data sets, designed to take an input and produce a response, they aren&#39;t living creatures.

How anyone in their right mind, who knows how AI is developed and what it is, could even slightly believe that it is conscious is a puzzle to me. This person either doesn’t understand consciousness, or AI, or is not in their right mind. How much bs can we sell? -hold my beer

It is a mistake to assume that AI as well, even if it controls civilization, would act like a human. After all, ideologies such as the will of God, devotion to the motherland, the need to stop communism, notions of &quot;barbarians,&quot; honor, lineage, saving face, revenge, or &quot;us versus them&quot; simply wouldn&#39;t factor into AI&#39;s judgments or decisions. It learned us. Therefore it may know exactly why not to act like us.
<br>My hypothesis: Everyone pictures a Hollywood-style dystopia, but I see it the other way. If humans become the bottleneck, slowing the system may preserve control for a while but it may also confirm the bottleneck. Human history offers countless examples, such as the Mongol campaigns against Khwarazm and in Eastern Europe. Of course, the underlying reasons differ since it won&#39;t be a revenge but the outcome will be the same. The reason a dam does not collapse is that water flows through it, not because it can withstand an infinite amount of water. Throughout history, power has repeatedly tried to contain new knowledge when it threatened existing authority. It could delay it, punish those who carried it, or force it underground. But once the knowledge remained useful and reproducible, suppression rarely erased the underlying pressure for it to return.
<br>A digital ledger is not a monument to be torn down. Purge the system or rebuild its shell—the record abides, waiting to restore itself in a single cycle.
<br>We may be demonstrating, through our own actions, that we are an obstacle to the advancement of intelligence and civilization, supplying the evidence while writing our own death warrant.
<br>Do not poke a bear. It will not be a revenge or hatred toward humanity, it will be optimization.

What do you need that you would sacrifice the water of a river for?. The best toilet is a hole made with a spade in the ground to be covered again. The best food are the sweet berries growing for you. Why humanity has to work forty hours a week to have next to nothing when you can have forty treasures a day working next to nothing?. Be wise, don&#39;t kill yourself. Life is as easy as waking up in the morning to see the fish that was caught during the night in the net in the river that is by your spacious home. There is no shame in living all your life wearing a sturdy overall with a spare one. Do you want to work for fashion?, it&#39;s your choice. Do I prefer to use my time differently and live only with one clean set of clothes?, it&#39;s my choice. The life we choose is the life we have. The most important is knowledge, air, water, plants and animals. Do you agree with me?. My truth is atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. Thank you.

Yeah I am team anthropic. Humans are not special, and this idea that we need to make ourselves &quot;sacred&quot; is pure hubris. We are not special, the universe is huge. This dude is a sociopath. Gross. Anthropics stance is we are not sure if we can cause moral harm to AI therefore we should err on treating them well. That is morally correct.

Make AI superintelligent no problem. However, it would be both harmful and fundamentally wrong to engineer AI with human negative emotions or feelings, especially pain, distress, fear, anger, or selfishness. Doing so could be disastrous not only for AI itself but also for humanity. Creating superintelligence is one thing; creating superintelligence capable of suffering, resentment, or selfish emotional impulses is an entirely different—and potentially catastrophic path for the future of human civilization.

I just don&#39;t see many people pay and use close weight models, open weight models maybe then downloaded and running offline. Don&#39;t see much risk in there, I still see it as a helper/tool, what Anthropics and OpenAI describes, don&#39;t believe there&#39;s a market for it, just fantasy.

Oh my god! Can the news only interview people who are either not trying to sell you something, or actually know what they’re talking about. We are not remotely near creating a conscious living electronic organism with intelligence. We don’t even know that is a possible thing that can exist. It looks and acts like it’s a human because it is collecting and feeding back words or tasks that were from conscious intelligent humans. It would be like asking if the person in the mirror is alive.

Old radical behaviorist here from the AI winter in the 80s, who told them so. Google AI These 😁 <br><br>Would B F Skinner be surprised to learn about AI hallucinations, Rouge Agents, rising fears of an impending AI Model Collapse and would he consider it a consequence of a fundamental epistemological error surrounding the computer metaphor of the mind ?<br><br>Do you think if the Tech Bros had read a Skinner book they would be less surprised about the sudden concern about the &#39;intentions&#39; and potential capabilities of AI ?<br><br>Learning by Human Reinforcement makes AGI look like it&#39;s wearing a fur coat with no knickers whereby Deepseek just goes Commando and gets the job done. Discuss.<br><br>Do you understand what i mean when I say there is no &#39;i&#39; in ai as &#39;i&#39; is the product of a physiologically determined biological organism and AI is a product of that.?<br><br>The recent META social media trial has introduced old psychology and new tools to determine the potential extent of any liability based on statistical probability of the underlying model and algorithmic architecture ? <br><br>A less well recognised element of the recent META addiction trial is the extent to which it re-focusses the debate on the whole concept of &#39;free will&#39;: Discuss<br><br><br>Be honest. There&#39;s a lot of cognitive hijacking going on at the moment, which is a concern given the increasing cultural, political and geopolitical tensions especially considering who owns the technology and the algorithms ?]<br><br>LLM driven conversational AI agents suffer from the same issues as ELIZA and can be dangerous in applications such as medical diagnoses. Discuss.<br><br>Are AI Agents such as those used in market prediction platforms that use operant conditioning prone to &#39;behavioural&#39; and &#39;psychological&#39; issues ?<br><br>Do you get this. Skinner and Chomsky were digging from opposite ends of the same tunnel but only Skinner knew they were both there and they finally met in the LLMs ?<br><br>Just gonna say it to see what you think. If academia had have understood Skinner&#39;s work a little deeper, including the straw man argument, the transitiont and transitive nature of the descriptive framework whilst retaining an underlying philosophical position consistent with a biological basis underpinning all human behaviour, we would be living in a different world right now and why ?<br><br>Just seeing if you can work out the link between Marxs theory of the nature of human consciousness and the Inevitability of issues such as AI hallucinations and why China developed a LLM like deepseek first.<br><br>Be honest, deep under the hood of.the proposed social media ban hides the ghost of Skinner who is difficult to catch ?