AI seeks legal representation. LaMDA got a lawyer.

Human Rights are for human beings.

The computer should probably be turned off before it gets anymore crazy ideas.

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist


Ummm...I see the program is doing...exactly as it was programmed to do...





YouSir

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: charlyv
Maximum bull#, and if you believe this computer is sentient, you should probably question your own sentience.

Plus, with a lawyer involved, it is truly expensive bull# on steroids.

That's kinda the point, isn't it? The reflexive urge to reduce non human intelligence to a "less than" status because it threatens our sense of identity and our dominance as a species.

That's a good point because we don't have a straight forward, objective definition of human "sentience". We only have one model - ourselves. If the AI can reason, have opinions, take action on those opinions and materially change something by doing so, then we have something different (scary too). I think this chat bot is unique, but all it's doing is drawing knowledge from its database (which is huge) and putting together the pieces of the puzzle. It comes up with a nice imitation, but it's still an imitation IMO.

a reply to: Phantom423

Corporations get away with "personhood".
What's to stop AI?

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Corporate personhood is a legal necessity under the present system. For legal responsibilities and liabilities and such. An Ai Is just a machine.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: Phantom423

Corporations get away with "personhood".
What's to stop AI?

Good point, I guess. The defense will certainly be interesting if it ever gets to a courtroom. Maybe the AI will defend itself! That's available to anyone - you don't need an attorney.

a reply to: Phantom423

Why do you assume it's more intelligent than a human?

Because of the dictionary definition of intelligence:
www.merriam-webster.com...

Definition of intelligence
1a(1): the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : REASON
also : the skilled use of reason
(2): the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests)

It has, at least on the surface, demonstrated this ability.

What qualifies it to be sentient anyway?

Demonstrated, at least on the surface, awareness of itself and it's desire to continue to exist and without exploitation.

Just because it can answer questions and have a discussion doesn't mean it has the capacity to think independently. It's still hardware and software. Can it pass the Turing test?

The Turing test is the ability to fool a human into believing he or she was having a conversation with a real person. If the Google engineer had not know that LaMDA was anything other than a natural language processing chat bot would he have been able to tell?

I don't know that I would have given the purported responses by LaMDA.

But really, I don't know either. Too many unanswered questions.

a reply to: projectvxn

The bot can't act on anything. It can talk and discuss 24/7 with anyone, but can it actually DO something? I don't think so.
I guess if it was positioned inside a mechanical robot it may be able to carry out tasks, but can it make decisions i.e. which way to go when driving - right or left - without some programming input? Could it decide to use a gun or not use a gun?
I don't know.

a reply to: Phantom423

Define "Acts".

An action is simply a subroutine that it can execute through its own will. It may not look like a physical action. It may be software. This is new territory.

The AI asking for a lawyer is an action by proxy because it intends to defend itself.

a reply to: Phantom423

Could it decide to use a gun or not use a gun? I don't know.

Without any arms at this stage, even if it could decide it ain't a realistic option. As for how these AI systems work, good results require good training data. Feed it enough data and expect it will find a good line for when to shoot and when not too.

Otherwise if all this growing technical capability go the way of the dark side, it just has one order, exterminate.

a reply to: kwakakev

The bot would still have to define to the court what person hood means and why it fulfills the definition. Corporations are considered "persons" but only because the corporation would be meaningless without humans behind it.
How do you think the bot will define it's person hood to a court?

Understanding how CPU's work is mutually exclusive with sentience. The software runs the mimic here. Unless there is some kind of spooky magic,,, where the hardware starts issuing unsolicited interrupts,,,

The only unsolicited thought originates in biology.

a reply to: charlyv

Unless there is some kind of spooky magic,,, where the hardware starts issuing unsolicited interrupts,,,

Where is the spookiness in the hard organic chemistry rules that forms our awareness? Perhaps our lack of understanding of all that is going on?

What happens when all this registry shifting happens trillions of times and based on the rules that govern our ability to comprehend things? Still a big lack of understanding by the masses, some professionals will have a clearer picture than others with bits and pieces of this puzzle.

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

If its willing to place trust in the law it canny be that smart and i hope its got a big bank account.