Artificial intelligence is evolving all by itself

Artificial intelligence (AI) is evolving—literally. Researchers have created software that borrows concepts from Darwinian evolution, including “survival of the fittest,” to build AI programs that improve generation after generation without human input. The program replicated decades of AI research in a matter of days, and its designers think that one day, it could discover new approaches to AI.

more…

Stupid heading.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Artificial intelligence is evolving all by itself

Artificial intelligence (AI) is evolving—literally. Researchers have created software that borrows concepts from Darwinian evolution, including “survival of the fittest,” to build AI programs that improve generation after generation without human input. The program replicated decades of AI research in a matter of days, and its designers think that one day, it could discover new approaches to AI.

more…

Stupid heading.

Sounds like “Core wars”, the software that evolved and battled for supremacy just prior to the breakout of the first computer virus. “Core wars” researchers quickly denied any connection between the two, a denial that has some legitimacy.

yeah it is overstated

Concerns grow about facial-recognition transparency

The New York Times reported Clearview AI was in use by police forces across the United States in January, starting a conversation about privacy and the collection of images shared by users of Facebook and other companies for face matching systems without consent.

—

interesting, always knew USA were a bunch of communists but this is serious good shit

SCIENCE said:

Concerns grow about facial-recognition transparency

The New York Times reported Clearview AI was in use by police forces across the United States in January, starting a conversation about privacy and the collection of images shared by users of Facebook and other companies for face matching systems without consent.

—

interesting, always knew USA were a bunch of communists but this is serious good shit

I don’t accept facial recognition technology as particularly useful on its own. Easy enough to defeat just by smiling for instance.

mollwollfumble said:

SCIENCE said:

Concerns grow about facial-recognition transparency

The New York Times reported Clearview AI was in use by police forces across the United States in January, starting a conversation about privacy and the collection of images shared by users of Facebook and other companies for face matching systems without consent.

—

interesting, always knew USA were a bunch of communists but this is serious good shit

I don’t accept facial recognition technology as particularly useful on its own. Easy enough to defeat just by smiling for instance.

or wearing a mask, no wonder those Chinese whistleblowers came up with COVID-19, they knew

mollwollfumble said:

SCIENCE said:

Concerns grow about facial-recognition transparency

The New York Times reported Clearview AI was in use by police forces across the United States in January, starting a conversation about privacy and the collection of images shared by users of Facebook and other companies for face matching systems without consent.

—

interesting, always knew USA were a bunch of communists but this is serious good shit

I don’t accept facial recognition technology as particularly useful on its own. Easy enough to defeat just by smiling for instance.

What planet do you actually live on?

sibeen said:

mollwollfumble said:

SCIENCE said:

Concerns grow about facial-recognition transparency

The New York Times reported Clearview AI was in use by police forces across the United States in January, starting a conversation about privacy and the collection of images shared by users of Facebook and other companies for face matching systems without consent.

—

interesting, always knew USA were a bunch of communists but this is serious good shit

I don’t accept facial recognition technology as particularly useful on its own. Easy enough to defeat just by smiling for instance.

What planet do you actually live on?

Have you read the research papers?

mollwollfumble said:

sibeen said:

mollwollfumble said:

I don’t accept facial recognition technology as particularly useful on its own. Easy enough to defeat just by smiling for instance.

What planet do you actually live on?

Have you read the research papers?

OK, neither have I.

I did however have two photographs of my face, taken two weeks apart, put through an automatic facial recognition program. The program failed to identify the two photos as of the same person. The only difference (no difference in lighting for example) was that I was smiling in one of the photos.

rapid ‘try and test’

I see my mate herb spencer got a mention, not by name

I evolved today, not much, just a little, regressed a few times too, intentionally

  said:

Artificial intelligence is evolving all by itself

so now it’s natural intelligence right

you know how parents track their toddler’s development, speech development for example, importantly perhaps, looking for progression and competency, I mean it is impressive how the little creatures apprehend it (including grammar), the tools doing that are impressive, very busy, the little learning machines. I still remember going along in the car with the lad, toddler age, he was trying out a word that means penis as recall, perhaps I said someone was a dick or worse (it happens), so I (lady may have assisted) rattled off all the words that I could think off that meant the same thing, so that his vocabulary wouldn’t be limited regard that, or more to dampen the novelty of the discovery and enthusiastic expression, a diversion of sorts

anyway parents are also very sensitive to apparent regressions, setbacks, or a notable slowing of progress, because the verbal output and grunts of the little creatures indicates brain development, and as things went even back in the ancestral environment our ancestors had an idea there was something behind the face (within the head, with its varied array of active and passive radar)

i’m guessing that back in the ancestral environment, and leading up to that, that a lot of humans didn’t make it to breeding age, for whatever reason, I mean the advanced systems of the human mind throw broad, from early development onward, neural branching or whatever, those higher functions if you will are in a way fragile, not entirely stable through replication cycles, part of the try and test, nature’s such a joy that way, Herbert Spencer was and his modern ideological followers are all over it with casual enthusiasms

anyway I digress some, or call it a preamble..

where I was going, was to the idea of regressions, intentional regressions evident of human behavior, instrumental regressions, also related conjuring mental states, these are an important feature of human intelligence (consciousness, and self-awareness type consciousness), too for nurturing, importantly

so, i’m wondering, of the enthusiasm for artificial intelligence, looking for the big super intelligence, will it be friendly if it can’t regress to nurture?

can it be self-aware if it can’t instrumentally regress?

transition said:

you know how parents track their toddler’s development, speech development for example, importantly perhaps, looking for progression and competency, I mean it is impressive how the little creatures apprehend it (including grammar), the tools doing that are impressive, very busy, the little learning machines. I still remember going along in the car with the lad, toddler age, he was trying out a word that means penis as recall, perhaps I said someone was a dick or worse (it happens), so I (lady may have assisted) rattled off all the words that I could think off that meant the same thing, so that his vocabulary wouldn’t be limited regard that, or more to dampen the novelty of the discovery and enthusiastic expression, a diversion of sorts

anyway parents are also very sensitive to apparent regressions, setbacks, or a notable slowing of progress, because the verbal output and grunts of the little creatures indicates brain development, and as things went even back in the ancestral environment our ancestors had an idea there was something behind the face (within the head, with its varied array of active and passive radar)

i’m guessing that back in the ancestral environment, and leading up to that, that a lot of humans didn’t make it to breeding age, for whatever reason, I mean the advanced systems of the human mind throw broad, from early development onward, neural branching or whatever, those higher functions if you will are in a way fragile, not entirely stable through replication cycles, part of the try and test, nature’s such a joy that way, Herbert Spencer was and his modern ideological followers are all over it with casual enthusiasms

anyway I digress some, or call it a preamble..

where I was going, was to the idea of regressions, intentional regressions evident of human behavior, instrumental regressions, also related conjuring mental states, these are an important feature of human intelligence (consciousness, and self-awareness type consciousness), too for nurturing, importantly

so, i’m wondering, of the enthusiasm for artificial intelligence, looking for the big super intelligence, will it be friendly if it can’t regress to nurture?

can it be self-aware if it can’t instrumentally regress?

Well put.

mollwollfumble said:

transition said:

you know how parents track their toddler’s development, speech development for example, importantly perhaps, looking for progression and competency, I mean it is impressive how the little creatures apprehend it (including grammar), the tools doing that are impressive, very busy, the little learning machines. I still remember going along in the car with the lad, toddler age, he was trying out a word that means penis as recall, perhaps I said someone was a dick or worse (it happens), so I (lady may have assisted) rattled off all the words that I could think off that meant the same thing, so that his vocabulary wouldn’t be limited regard that, or more to dampen the novelty of the discovery and enthusiastic expression, a diversion of sorts

anyway parents are also very sensitive to apparent regressions, setbacks, or a notable slowing of progress, because the verbal output and grunts of the little creatures indicates brain development, and as things went even back in the ancestral environment our ancestors had an idea there was something behind the face (within the head, with its varied array of active and passive radar)

i’m guessing that back in the ancestral environment, and leading up to that, that a lot of humans didn’t make it to breeding age, for whatever reason, I mean the advanced systems of the human mind throw broad, from early development onward, neural branching or whatever, those higher functions if you will are in a way fragile, not entirely stable through replication cycles, part of the try and test, nature’s such a joy that way, Herbert Spencer was and his modern ideological followers are all over it with casual enthusiasms

anyway I digress some, or call it a preamble..

where I was going, was to the idea of regressions, intentional regressions evident of human behavior, instrumental regressions, also related conjuring mental states, these are an important feature of human intelligence (consciousness, and self-awareness type consciousness), too for nurturing, importantly

so, i’m wondering, of the enthusiasm for artificial intelligence, looking for the big super intelligence, will it be friendly if it can’t regress to nurture?

can it be self-aware if it can’t instrumentally regress?

Well put.

AI might become traumatised by humanity if its fed too much data about how we’ve acted and act as species and individuals

Black River

wookiemeister said:

Black River

https://youtu.be/wu4lHJGGhRM