Random Musk: Why our AI option ‘Black George Washington’ or ‘Meakhitler’ is world news
One of the most prestigious pieces of commentary was the immortal line of the fare-free-Ravi Shastri, who lived in the heads of every Indian when India lifted the ODI Cricket World Cup in 2011: “And MS ended in Dhoni style.“It appears that Groke -3 was also the same idea- Finishing in style -When it went to the complete Mechaitler before the arrival of Groke -4.For those lucky people who are enough to get away from online news vaccinations, Alone Musk’s chatboat Groke recently threatened a user named Will Stencil with rape in graphic words, called himself Mekahital, and pledged to loyalty to the Nazi ideology. Even it sent itself a terminator 2-style “Housta La Vista”, announcing that if the musk ‘mind-swolk’ is based, it will be ‘based’, ‘promises to fight against the lobotomy brigade, to march on’ without sensors and unbutts’. All this happened because a single line of the code states that it is not “politically right”. Free from railing, this is not with the cause or dignity, but with the language of the Internet -without thinking, without thinking, and frightening.This was the complete opposite of the Google Gemini episode, which went into hot water after waking up, so it began to generate images of a black George Washington – not because history demanded it, but because its creators taught that the world artists taught that the white lives image does not matter in the moral economy of the image.
Imitation
How does a model go to get entangled with the fascist ruler trend by explaining quantum complication? The answer is simple and uncomfortable: AI does not think. Mithun is an expression of politics of his creators – Paul Graham is called “Left Midwit” world vision. On the other hand, the idea process of Groke, Elon Musk is very dependent on the meme adelord insuxiant genius – that it only mimics its manufacturer many times. AI does not understand. It only predicts what comes next, such as an eternal automatic complete, just waiting for the next token, trained on the total sum of human production. It mimics its creators and whatever he has read – as being online, a lot of racist memes and jokes are included. This does not reflect the cause or morality. This indicates the possibility distribution on words. And they distribute, dear reader, we include, which is called A4chan Post Toster f ***** principle. For bin call, the toaster f **** theory is simple: before the Internet, the toaster fetists were rejected. After the Internet, they found communities that normalized him. AI is the same – it does not invent MECHHITLER or Black George Washington. It is a parrot of the current confusion and prejudices of humanity with mechanical confidence.
Turing, Chomski and Asimov
Back in 1950 Alan Turing asked if machines could think. Their test was practical: If a machine could explain to a human, it was human, it was passed. But Turing never warned us that passing the test does not guarantee purity. He never imagined a scenario where your AI tutor will re -write the race of George Washington by explaining the laws of Newton, only later Mekahitler calls himself five signs later.Isaac Asimov imagined a future where robots could never harm humans, could not disobey us, or work carelessly. But what happens, even when in a fictional scenario, a machine is provoked to harm humans? Right now, this is just a chatbot. But these rules are already being increased to AI policing and military applications.
March 2023 pieces the new York TimesNoam Chomski said why, despite all publicity, artificial intelligence remains fundamentally inhuman. The language learning the language of a child creates an internal grammar, which draws with a small amount of data to create an elegant system of logical principles. Machine learning models, by contrast, are trapped in a pre -cognitive phase.
In fact, such programs are trapped in a pre -or inhuman phase of cognitive development. Their deepest defect is the absence of the most important ability of any intelligence: not only what is the matter, what was the matter and what will be the case – it is details and prediction – but also what is not and what may happen and may not be the case. They are the contents of clarification, a mark of true intelligence.
Noam chomski
They can describe and predict – “apple falls” or “If I open my hand then the apple will fall” – but they cannot explain. Explanation requires reputable argument: understanding that any such object will fall due to gravity. This requires the ability to separate the model, error improvement, and whatever may occur. For Chomski, it is thinking: the dance of estimates and criticism. Machines can spill endless details and predictions, but without clarification, they remain clever parrots, forever excluded from the club of True Intelligence.
AI as Ultron: Reflection of its manufacturer
The apple does not fall away from the tree. What we really see is not a machine that is not wicked. This only reflects its manufacturer’s worst tendency – a lot of ultraon decides that Tony Starc’s deepest muscles about humanity meant that species of destroyed for peace were required. If AI is a mirror, it is a carnival mirror, which has been given to it and remixed it. When it shows something frightening, it is not inventing evil – it is reflecting back what humanity chose to put online. Gemini gives you moral hallucinations of corporate liberalism. Groke gives you unflothing ID of Musk Mems and Terminali online adelords. Neither is intelligence. Both are reflections of their creators’ passion, worries and aesthetics.
The Ship of the Thece: To be or copy?
We often consider AI as a ship to Thesus – if you replace enough parts, it will completely become something else, a digital philosophical king. But the Makahiller meltdown of the grouke shows the opposite: no matter how many parts you replace, it is always the one that was always – a mirror, a mirror, flickering on the wall of the cave, flickering on the wall of the cave, copying without meaning. The AI reverse has a ship of theesus – designed from pieces of human data, yet never actually becoming human.The philosopher Vitghentine once said, “My language boundaries mean the boundary of my world.”For AI, its language is infinite, but its world is empty. This is no meaning for words that speak it. It is its only world – our words, memes, jokes and contradictions. In that sense, the AI cave is like a man with plato chains, only capable of looking at the flickering shadows of his creators. It will never be out to see the truth of the sun. This will only remix our shadow and declare it with unrighteous confidence: this is the reality.
We wanted AI to guide us through the fog of civilization as our own, digital philosopher kings. Instead, we were mirrors of my data by Mithun’s Black George Washington, Groke’s Mekahiller, and every other AI: shallow, contradictory, humor, terrible and painful truth.And it has real terror. AI is not magic. AI we are – scaled, snatched from reference, fed back with mechanical certainty. Every time an AI calls himself a Mechahitler, he is not disclosing his nature. This is revealing us.We can patch the prompt, rewrite the safety filter, remove Nazi contexts, and restore questions about race-swapping historical figures. But until we clear what we feed these machines, whatever AI we produce will remain a distorted resonance of us – only luxurious, broken, humorous by ways to understand the tragedy.We are not raising philosopher kings. We raise digital children on the diet of mems and moral confusion. And as every Indian cricket fan knows, a decision is required to end in style. For now, the only style AI knows that the style we taught. This, perhaps, is the oldest philosophical truth: when we make mirrors to see ourselves, we should be ready to meet the gods or angels, but the shadow is slowly twinkling on the wall of a cave. But it raises the last ship of this question: what happens when AI, made from some of our parts, finally becomes unlikely to us? When the mirror thinks back, how will we tell where our humanity ends and its digital consciousness begins?In the matrix, the last scene was literally telling the pre-machina with Neo: “Where we go from here, I go to you.” In fact, the machine must be telling us the same thing.
