AI don't trust techbros
- Thread starter NovaSaber
- Start date
Antitrust laws aren't nearly as strong as they were in the 90's. That and this isn't being done to hurt other AI manufacturers, at least not directly. Copiolot is a licensed version of ChatGPT after all. It was Netscape and a couple of other browser developers that brought the lawsuit up in the 90's.
Sadly, consumer protection laws are also a fair bit weaker now than in the past... Looks like we may have to look towards the EU to save us(and then Microsoft will likely just have a separate build for the EU)
Sadly, consumer protection laws are also a fair bit weaker now than in the past... Looks like we may have to look towards the EU to save us(and then Microsoft will likely just have a separate build for the EU)
AI is going great.
arstechnica.com
Lawsuit: Chatbot that allegedly caused teen’s suicide is now more dangerous for kids
Google-funded Character.AI added guardrails, but grieving mom wants a recall.
arstechnica.com
Disney Poised to Announce Major AI Initiative | Exclusive
Disney is poised to announce a massive AI initiative that will primarily focus on post-production and VFX.
www.thewrap.com
this is pushback for their VFX artists daring to unionize.
Walt would be proud...
Gemini AI tells the user to die — the answer appeared out of nowhere when the user asked Google's Gemini for help with his homework
Let’s be happy it doesn’t have access to nuclear weapons at the moment.
This is not the first time an AI has suggested to a human to unalive themselves(there was an incident not to long ago where someone actually went through with what the AI was suggesting, unfortunately). Training data likely had suicidal or homicidal text included and on rare occasion, it rears its head. I wonder how many incidents have occurred that haven't been reported....
I dunno, that response feels exactly like something a malevolent AI from a sci-fi movie would say. Especially the "This is for you, human. You and only you" part. That didn't come from some random 4chan post directed from one person to another; that was purposely planted somewhere in the hopes an AI would regurgitate it wholesale.
Possible a disgruntled employee snuck it in somehow.
Isn't this the plot of several sci-fi dystopias?
Indeed. Assuming pre-crime becomes a crime.... There ARE ways to use this for good, but I have little faith that it would be used for such. Instead of "We predict you may soon commit a crime, so we will find constructive ways to steer you in another direction that will benefit both you and society", it'll be "We predict you will commit a crime, so now you must go to jail".
Plus, it's not really fair unless they name the exact, specific, time, place and person. As it stands I can predict crimes a week in advance just by using wild cards to guess because some crimes happen so often on a planet of 8 billion ******* people.
On the subject of AI and law enforcement—and I could swear I already posted this months ago when I first showerthought of it but I guess not...
You know that "zoom and enhance" thing from all the crime shows that's complete bullshit but enough people watch those shows that it's causing problems when they get jury duty? How long before AI companies start trying to peddle their "upscaling" software to real CSI teams for exactly that purpose? Remember, cops' job in this country isn't to catch criminals; it's to catch somebody and throw them into court so they can close the case as quickly as possible, with just enough plausible deniability that the public doesn't get suspicious. So no one actually working for the police has to believe these programs work; they just have to be capable of convincing a jury raised on crime dramas that they do.
You know that "zoom and enhance" thing from all the crime shows that's complete bullshit but enough people watch those shows that it's causing problems when they get jury duty? How long before AI companies start trying to peddle their "upscaling" software to real CSI teams for exactly that purpose? Remember, cops' job in this country isn't to catch criminals; it's to catch somebody and throw them into court so they can close the case as quickly as possible, with just enough plausible deniability that the public doesn't get suspicious. So no one actually working for the police has to believe these programs work; they just have to be capable of convincing a jury raised on crime dramas that they do.
It would never happen, because those AI companies wouldn't be selling software, they would be selling a subscription to software: and the actual investigative services branches are generally so strung out on budget that they wouldn't be able to afford it.
Former OpenAI researcher and whistleblower found dead at age 26
They say it was a suicide, but I wonder if it was a "suicide".
They say it was a suicide, but I wonder if it was a "suicide".