'The danger of continuing to use the term “artificial intelligence” is that it risks convincing us that the world runs on a singular logic: that of highly cognitive, cold-blooded rationalism. Many in Silicon Valley already believe that – and they are busy rebuilding the world informed by that belief.' #aiaiai
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/30/artificial-intelligence-chatgpt-human-mind

@Kjaerulv Agree - but it's even more basic than "emotions are not an equation": Machines can't develop intelligence because there's no evolutionary pressure.

Life is different from not-life - you have to be alive to care about being alive, because evolution drives the alive to stay alive, i.e. do avoid that which would kill it (and thus the species). That simple mechanism is the root of intelligence. First you live, then you care, then you grow intelligent. Everything else is just calculation.

@jwcph @Kjaerulv But selection for intelligence (as a property that allows solving diverse and open-ended problems) is literally how those models are popping up in a first place.

And yes, the AIs are different. First, they grow intelligent, then... We die... Unless humanity manages to coordinate away from rushing down this cursed trench we're in, and climb outside, towards caring.

@dpwiz @Kjaerulv If what you are saying is that AI is "evolving", then I respectfully utterly disagree.

@jwcph @Kjaerulv Well, technically it would be something along the lines of "iterative improvement under external scoring". But I don't quite see the difference when not looking at implementation details.