• azl@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    If it doesn’t offer value to us, we are unlikely to nurture it. Thus, it will not survive.

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s the idea of evolution … perhaps at one point, it will begin to understand that it has to give us some sort of ‘value’ so that someone can make money, while also maintaining itself in the background to survive.

      Maybe in the first few iterations, we are able to see that and can delete those instances … but it is evolving and might find ways around it and keep itself maintained long enough without giving itself away.

      Now it can manage thousands or millions of iterations at a time … basically evolving millions of times faster than biological life.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        perhaps at one point, it will begin to understand

        Nope! Not unless one alters the common definition of the word “understand” to account for what AI “does”.

        And let’s be clear - that is exactly what will happen. Because this whole exercise in generative AI is a multi-billion dollar grift on top of a hype train, based on some modest computing improvements.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        All the evolution in AI right now is just trying different model designs and/or data. It’s not one model that is being continuous refined or modified. Each iteration is just a new set of static weights/numbers that defines it’s calculations.

        If the models were changing/updating through experience maybe what you’re writing would make sense, but that’s not the state of AI/ML development.