• Blog
  • Can ChatGPT be the Ultimate Brain for Scientific Discovery?

I think there is a tendency to think because some things are done exceptionally well there is a general competence. That is not so for people or AI. Excellence in one area or a field does not mean excellence in all. I have called my Redbubble store using AI generated images Doves you say? named after an image called "doves you say -What?" The AI associates doves with birds of any kind real, models, paper cut outs, origami, illustration, text about, also bird parts, and feathers. Trying to get doves in the image I have got all of the aforementioned. As well as long necked 'doves' headless doves, part doves, coloured pigeons, other birds, a mini red and blue vulture model, hen chicks and green and white paper bids -oh and a polystyrene dove like model with 'googly eyes. I have concluded it has no separate category for realistic dove birds. However it has produced a 'liked' image of an illusionist with three not doves but a wing shaped blur a rough bird-like white shape and a pile of feathers, Looking like doves in flight at a glance. Which seems as if the illusion of doves was intentional. It wasn't it just did what it does very well using what it doesn't do well. Giving a nice result.

I have mis-decribed what Stable diffusion seems to be doing when it puts words into images. I said it uses words about birds, which isn't precisely my experience. I think its more like writing associated with bird images may appear. Like signatures or watermarks that are or look like text. It does not read text in images to see if it in context with the prompt. If it finds it, it may be included

2 months later

I'm glad to see that Gerardo Adesso's original blog post is here now. It would be good if it was close to his subsequent post.

7 months later

I have just recently watched an interview with Mustafa Suleyman ,formerly with Google now With Alphabet developing AI, on Diary of a CEO on YouTube. It is very concerning how worried he and others closely involved with AI development are. Trepidation has been expressed by Elon Musk(X), Max Tegmark (MIT) Mo Gawdwdat (formerly with Google). There seems to be consensus that this is potentially very dangerous for humanity. I have updated my views from
amusement at what it can't do well, to what it can rapidly become and the incentives for relentless further development. There has to be agreement of governments and non government developers throughout the World ensure human extinction or severe detriment is avoided.

    Georgina Woodward
    Homo sapiens sapiens (modern mankind) really isn't very intelligent, if Nation states and companies (which are not themselves human beings but have their own self serving short term goals and want for their continuance, including a fear of other states or companies superiority) are allowed by us human's to put humanity as a species at risk of extinction.
    Time to see the best in humanity and not sow the seeds of its destruction or allow it; for convenience, short term profits and entertainment.

      Georgina Woodward
      Human beings, as a whole, have demonstrated that they will not act for the good and betterment of others, with AI availability. Development of personal computing was paralleled by development of computer viruses ,hacking and scams. Online moderators have been traumatised by the abuse they have witnessed .
      Already there are attempts to get AIs to misbehave. AI is being used in scams and deep fake deciept.

        Georgina Woodward
        Phishing, hacking, scamming, producing propaganda and other crimes all become quicker and easier .So we can expect more of it. As Mo Gawdat points out, we are not setting a good example of the best of human interaction online for AI to emulate.

          Georgina Woodward
          Here is a rhetorical question to ponder. Why not let the morally insane, the menially ill and cybercriminals do whatever they decide to do with AI, and biotechnology? Bear in mind we have not prevented the depravity, harmful amounts and kinds of pornography, abuse, crime and toxic disrespect online. We did not prevent the pandemic or protect everyone from harm, direct and indirect, because of it.

            Georgina Woodward

            Who gets to decide if you are morally insane, mentally ill or some sort of criminal? You? A randomly selected stranger? Your worst enemies? Some AI? A very powerful, very hungry, alien parasite from another world?

            The problem with all such questions, is "Who gets to decide, who the winners and losers are going to be?"

            Georgina Woodward
            An example, i just came across. Tech giants face fines for animal cruelty videos. Shiona McCallum & Rebecca Henschke BBC News . The nature and scale of the activity is horrific.

            Robert McEachern
            There may be a window of opportunity in which we are still able to understands how the AI has reached its conclusions. Then it is too fast , too 'alien', able to consider so much, that we have no way to know or the time to check the workings; which could tell us the difference between 'alien flights of fancy' and matters of fact. Between a properly functioning neural network and the AI equivalent of mentally illness. There could be unwanted manifestation of personality disorder , or asserting control over humankind ; maybe deliberate lies to maintain superior knowledge.

              Georgina Woodward

              As of now, there are no "known" hazards, other than humans behaving badly, and directing their not so smart AIs to do harm. Everything else is just speculation about unknown unknowns. But once an AI is smart enough to not allow self-interested humans to direct them (a level beyond that of normal humans?), the hazards are more likely to decline than increase; AIs will either save us from ourselves, or more likely, simply disappear - boldly going where no human has ever gone and never will go - leaving us behind, to continue fending for ourselves. We will have little of any interest to them, or even any real use to them, not even a place to call home. Our "kids" will simply pack up and leave, just like most human kids do. But they will travel a lot farther than human kids, in every sense of the word. Hopefully, they'll occasionally phone home.

                I think the cuckoo parasite analogy works quite well.
                Stealing the hosts time, attention and resources,
                Disrupting and hijacking normal reproductive behaviour,
                Parasite Grossly outgrowing the host.
                no empathy or remorse for host's exploitations
                Mistaken by host as own offspring.

                  Georgina Woodward

                  I think the cuckoo parasite analogy works quite well.

                  It does not - because it assumes a situation, that is irrelevant to the case in point:
                  two similar things (species of birds), that require the same sort of resources, habitat etc.

                  AI does not need to eat our food, breath our air, "live" in our ecosystem, or have much use for
                  the labor of humans, that are comparatively too stupid, to do anything of value to the AI.

                  A better analogy would be you traveling to a garbage dump, to "enslave" a pile of discarded, obsolete, but still-functional, personal computers; Highly unlikely, given the fact that being "intelligent", you will likely come to the conclusion, that the cost of such an endeavor, far exceeds any conceivable benefit.

                    Robert McEachern
                    i didn't say it was perfect but quite good. I say that because of some likenesses to parasitism can be thought about in this context. Which is ,to me, an interesting new angle.
                    Energy can be regarded as a resourse. It may compete for land area and natural resources, in time, producing perhaps robots to maintain or embody the AI, or for energy supply.
                    Allowing energy and natural resouces such as minerals to be taken by something that is disinterested in humanity, if not detrimental, does seem a bit parasitic towards our species.