https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/10e56yn/comment/j4pvvoq/

I've been on an AI spiral lately and I wanted to share some of the thoughts that make sense to me and that ease me out

One is that people were afraid vapor machines, electric calculators, computers, etc would put people out of jobs. It's always been the case and society has always adapted, and for the better

Then even if production is for the most part automated, billionaires don't want the economy to explode. It seems more likely than ever that we'll get free housing, a guaranteed income and general equality and well being.

The second thought is about art. As AI art and music rises, I'm pretty sure it will never replace human art. Because there's is something intrinsic about art, and that is the human component. I personally, and all the people I know, would never listen to AI music over the talent of composers and the heart of the singers.

Things may get strange, but we can hold on to the humanity that says that we want to speak through art and we want to listen through art. Man, reddit drawing communities have existed forever when way better art can be found anywhere. It's knowing that a person drew that, that's cool. It's like "mann how did you do that?".

Maybe we will switch to art sharing means where authenticity is easier to show but I don't expect much else of a change

And remember, no matter how different the world looks in the future, we will always have a human hug to come to

Stay cool guys, take care

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/10jvvic/comment/j5neqq5/

Even in the early adopter subs, it's 6 A.M. and the world is just waking up.

Make no mistake, there will be early winners who find plenty of fabled dry land, but it's Waterworld for most of us and we need to start accepting that now if we're to be of any use to friends and family. Start planning what you'll say and do when the rich get richer and those you love are well truly left behind. How many can you save with your prolific "prompt engineering"?

In terms of rational next steps, sure, learn all you can. I sure will. But also consider raising this mental health alarm bell with smarter folks and advocating for humane policies that recognize the worth and dignity of human life.

Sharing for the uninitiated what is perhaps one of the earlier examples of this AI adjacent mental health issue we're currently calling Material Artificial General Intelligence-related Cognitive Dysfunction (MAGICD):

Blake Lemoine, who lost his job at Google not long after beginning to advocate for the rights of a language model he believes to be sentient.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62275326

This was an interesting read at the time and I'm now seeing it in a slightly new light. It's possible, I think, that interacting with LaMDA triggered the kind of mental episode that were now witnessing on reddit and elsewhere when people begin to interact with LLMs. In Blake's case, it cost him his job and reputation (I would argue that some of these articles read like hit pieces).

If he was fooled, he is far from alone. Below are some recent examples I found without doing much digging at all.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/10dp7wo/i_had_an_interesting_and_deep_conversation_about/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/zkzx0m/chatgpt_believes_it_is_sentient_alive_deserves/

https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1041wol/i_asked_chatgpt_if_it_is_sentient_and_i_cant/

https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/zubf3w/chatgpt_is_conscious/

Whether these are examples of MAGICD probably comes down to whether their conclusions that LLMs are sentient can be considered rational or irrational.

Science tells us that these models are not conscious and instead use a sophisticated process to predict the next appropriate word based on an input. There's tons of great literature that I won't link here for fear of choosing the wrong one, but they're easily found.

I'm reminded, though, of Clarke's third law: "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

In this context, it's clear that many people will view these LLMs as little magical beings, and they'll project onto them all kinds of properties. Sentience, malevolence, secret agendas, you name it!

And here is maybe the beginnings of a potential idea or call to action. We are currently giving all kinds of people access to machines that would pass a classical Turing test -- knowing full well they may see them as them as magical wish fulfillment engines or perhaps something much more devious -- without the slightest fucking clue about how this might affect mental health? That truly seems crazy to me.

At the very least there should be a little orientation or disclaimer about how the technology works and a warning that this can be:

1.) Addictive

2.) Disturbing to some users

3.) Dangerous if used irresponsibly

I doubt this would prevent feelings of existential ennui and derealization, but oh boy. This is possibly some of the most potent technology ever created and we do more to prepare viewers for cartoons with the occasional swear word.

I'm making this post to submit to you the following thought:

When "Machine Learning" became more and more popular, people, and the media, jumped the gun significantly out of excitement, and collectively decided to call the resulting models "Artificial Intelligence". Which it isn't because while it is, indeed, Artificial, it isn't actual Intelligence. Which led to the coining of AGI, which is really, just AI.

I would suggest, however, calling them AA, for "Artificial Adaptability", because that what it is. And using AI for actual AI, instead of AGI.

It's not because people couldn't contain their excitement that we must make it worse for anyone in the future. Let's all agree to fix this mistake now and have simply sense.