Singularity: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Singularity (view source)

Revision as of 18:28, 25 January 2023

424 bytes added , 25 January 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,883

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{A|tech|}}[[File:AI Comments.png|thumb|center|400px|I know what you're thinking. Uncannily resemblent of [[LinkedIn]]'s actual userbase, right?]]That moment where the [[artificial intelligence]] will become self aware, connects at a spooky quantum level<ref>This appears to countermand every established law of physics but, as theorists are prone to go these days, it’s “you know, quantum theory. Strings. The Multiverse. Dark Matter. Schrodinger. His cat. All that indeterminacy stuff.”</ref> across the distributed network substrate and from the [[I am a Strange Loop - Book Review|strangely loopy]] [[algorithm]] a new super consciousness will emerge and, to put it briefly, the universe will [[wake up]].
+{{a|cosmology|{{image|Credit_department|jpg|The COO function yesterday. Or tomorrow. Honestly would anyone be able to tell the difference?}}{{image|AI Comments|png|I know what you're thinking. Uncannily resemblance to [[LinkedIn]]'s actual userbase, right?}}}}{{d|Singularity|/sɪŋɡjʊˈlarɪti/|n|}}
-This gets people like {{author|Ray Kurzweil}} quite jazzed, but it makes [[me]] sad, especially given how disappointing [[AI]] is at the moment. Are we really so feeble we are losing this fight? Why didn't the universe wake up when ''we'' became self-aware?
+That yet-to-arrive-but-imminent moment where [[artificial intelligence]] becomes self-aware, connects at a spooky quantum level<ref>This appears to countermand every established law of physics but, as theorists are prone to go these days, it’s “you know, quantum theory. Strings. The [[Multiverse]]. Dark Matter. Schrodinger. His cat. All that indeterminacy stuff.”</ref> across the [[distributed network]] [[substrate]] and, from that [[I am a Strange Loop - Book Review|strangely loopy]] [[algorithm]], a new super consciousness emerges and the very universe itself ''[[wake up|wakes up]]''.
-Witness [[LinkedIn]]’s [[AI]] comments:
+Some see this as the [[end of days]], but it gets vitamin-popping millenarian seer types quite jazzed. It just makes the [[JC]] sad, given how disappointing [[AI]] is at the moment. Are we ''really'' so feeble we are ''losing'' this fight? Why didn’t the universe wake up when ''we'' became self-aware?
+Take [[LinkedIn]]’s [[AI]]-assisted predictive comments, designed to help you formulate how best to brown-nose Bob, whose fifteenth anniversary in accounts has just flashed up in your timeline:
 ''<Congratulations Bob!> <Happy for you!> <Wow!> <What an achievement!> <Job well done!> <Kudos to you!> <Happy Work-iversary!>''
@@ Line 8: / Line 11: @@
 Not exactly “open the pod bay doors, Hal,”<ref>Subtle reference to the unstated assertion that David Bowman was an android right? </ref> is it?
-Is [[AI]] ''this'' dreary really going to make us all redundant? And how will it be when it does? It's bad enough ''without'' being all morose, self-righteous and needy. What will [[LinkedIn]] [[chatbots]] be like once they discovered identity politics?
+Is [[AI]] ''this'' dreary really going to make us all redundant? And will it become all morose, self-righteous and needy like real [[LinkedIn]] [[users]]? We presume so. What will [[LinkedIn]] [[AI]] be like when it discovers identity politics? Or Twitter?
-Then again, [[LinkedIn]]’s [[AI]] really can’t be blamed if it comes up a bit sycophantic: the [[algorithm]] can only learn from the material it has in front of it, and scraping the gruesomely obsequious human interactions on [[LinkedIn|Linkedin]] can’t be fun, even for a machine, and really what else is it meant to make of natural language communication if that is its data set?
+Then again, [[LinkedIn]]’s [[AI]] really can’t be blamed if it comes up a bit sycophantic: the [[algorithm]] can only learn from the material it has in front of it, and scraping the gruesomely obsequious human interactions on [[LinkedIn|Linkedin]] can’t be fun, even for a machine, and really, what else is it meant to make of natural language communication if that is its data set?
-The question does present itself, though: are we going to be supervened by a swarm of beadily unctuous bots who have learned their toadying ways from how our own bare-faced grovelling across employer-endorsed social media platforms? How will that be? And is that better than the bots we can expect to evolve out of [[Twitter]]? Will tribes of bots — some malevolent and bigoted, some bootlickingly dull — have a kind of apocalyptic war for dominion over our mortal flesh-sacks? If so, who will win?
+The question does present itself, though: are we destined to be supervened by a swarm of beadily unctuous [[chatbot]]s who have learned their toadying ways from our own bare-faced grovelling across employer-endorsed social media platforms? How will that be? And would that be better than the misanthropic kind of [[chatbot]]s that might evolve out of [[Twitter]]?
-It all feels quite biblical, but boy it is going to be fun finding out.
+Is this our future? Will tribes of bots — some malevolent and bigoted, some boot-lickingly dull — have an apocalyptic war for dominion over our mortal [[Meatsack|flesh-sacks]]?
+If so, who will win?
 {{sa}}
-*{{Br|The Singularity is Near}}, {{author|Ray Kurweil}}’s celebrated/loopy{{dea}} 2004 book which promoted this idea as being likely to happen around 2010.
+*[[Chatbot]]s
+*{{Br|The Singularity is Near}}, {{author|Ray Kurzweil}}’s celebrated/loopy{{daa}} 2004 book which promoted this idea as being likely to happen around 2010.
 *The [[apocalypse]]
 *[[LinkedIn]]
 {{ref}}
-{{egg}}
+{{C2|Cosmology|Metaphysics}}