Wow, just read your interaction with ChatGP, it appears to have mostly been feeding on the amazing contradictions of the mainstream media. I suppose it really is a reflection / copy of our times of slippery talk. What a paradoxical loop: to cite a report, then to say it cannot access the report, to then say it has no opinions, but cannot access facts? It was a disturbing unravelling. I suppose a person under scrutiny would go silent or perhaps buckle, chatGP just keeps spitting out the paradox.
Thanks for this sharp noticing of logical inconsistency!
I can only assume that what we call 'logic' is a different thing for humans and for AI. Which is, in a way, reassuring - but also terrifying if AI does get to take over any kind of management of human affairs (as it seems to be already)
Very good article. From my perspective, the chat story reads as something from the devil himself. Propping up humanity to be equal with God, exactly what the devil desires humanity to do. Also interesting is that Adam is not present when the encounter occurs. Adam had the greater sin in the garden, standing in silence knowing his wife was doing something that would hurt her.
From the quality of the story, it seems a bit forced and not what a pro would write. However, I have no expertise. I wonder if I could tell the difference if I didn't know.
The serpent could have told that chat story to Eve - with the objective of enticing her to the real bite in the forbidden fruit, a deed which would then generate a different scenario - the one given in Genesis, for instance.
Viewing the chat story as such, and from a more dramaturgical angle, I'd say it lacks 'conflict' (unless it conjure up Eve's distrust - i.e. by introducing/smuggling in conflict). Literary tradition (requiring Aristotelian rather than artificial 'simulation', a.k.a. mimesis) would likely make the same verdict.
Which begs the knotty question what the saving grace of human (instead of 'machine') writing is. After all, the rules of language, figures of 'speech', standard epithets in Homer - you name it - can all be conceived of (and used) as programmable tools, can they not?
I hate it, but I don't see an easy way out; except by spurning easy ways in.
Thank you Pim - I appreciate these points you make as a writer.
On your last para - aren't you a tad pessimistic? Of course, so many things can be decreed by society/culture/authorities to be the right way to do language... as well as the stuff aka 'content' conveyed by said language. 'Censorship' has a solid pedigree, has it not? Including in terms of those rules for the packaging, as we all experienced at school...
Dictatorships can now save a lot of time and expense by getting AI programs to churn out their 'literature'.
But then 'rules' need not be rigid boxes - in all periods when great literature flourished, the rules were just sufficient to allow accessibility of the reader to the real substance conveyed . Rules in that case are like a form of courtesy. And it's up to the author/writer to have a fun or sweaty time tweaking the rules as required by the 'content' that wants to touch the reader. ChatGPT can't (as far as we know) have fun nor sweat.
Spurning easy ways in - absolutely. Hate it or love it, it's how we can resist the rot-inducing effects of our 'culture of convenience' that encourages us to be lazy and lose the spice of life.
Hello Enna, that may well be true - me being 'a tad pessimistic'. There is no need for traveling "the way in", no one can and will force me to do so. However, it's not so much a matter of force as of stealth - some form of technocratic mission creep.
Anyway, I was in part inspired by Tess Lawrie's amazement "at how eager many are to downgrade their own abilities by embracing technologies that do stuff for one. The best part of most endeavours is the process. Why would one want to consume or 'create' content written by AI?" Spot on, don't you think?
I very much appreciate your two cents in response to my two cents, thank you...
P.S. - I don't see how this capability plays into some WEF-, WHO-, or Woke-agenda, even if I suspect this to be the case.
Big Publishers (in Holland) employ 'sensitivity-readers' who parse manuscripts in that respect (in the wake of 'çleaning up' R. Dahl, etc). Am I a reactionary - home terrorist, far right extremist, take your pick...- when I detest such practices?
Pim - laying out how 'it plays into' would take too long for this response. When you consider it from a beyond-3D perspective, it all makes a lot of sense.
Big publishers and sensitivity-readers - I haven't a clue what these are. Opted out of formerly academic publishing a long time ago, and my recent books are of the 'indie' variety.
Those labels you mention.... Arrrgh. If I am guessing correctly what you mean, those practices are awful, and inhuman.
Enna - 'sensitivity readers' are a real thing, function at least, judging by comments that reach me (in the third person) from various 'liteary' outlets. As far as I can tell, it starts with, or is sold as, concerns over the (loss of) motivation of young readers, and it is deemed perfectly honorable - and even noble - to 'translate' a classics of the 1900's (Louis Couperus, a kind of novelistiic counterpart and contemporary of Oscar Wilde) into a thing that is (deemed) palatable for schools, and to promote literature.
This seems an outcrop of a longstanding trend to "adapt content to the needs of pupils" (smuggling in a little propaganda here & there) rather than train a pupil to a level needed to understand unfamiliar texts. Such adaptations may be the work of authors in need of an extra buck, a perennial phenomenon...
A sensitivity reader is a kind of editor (not writer so much, and I fear for 'sher' acuity as a sound editor who is interested in style, metaphor, and other nasty things) who screens manuscripts for anything that might be (seen as) triggering 'dangerous' sensibilities. I, being 69 years of age, can only say that I am glad these killjoys weren't on the horizon in my formative years. Give me any James Baldwin novel over correct views on race, class, or gender packaged (and perhaps ID'ed) as 'novels'. Yes, awful and inhuman...
As a former tech industry worker, I can't tell if just all across the board, societies standards really have slipped or if ChatGPT really is that underwhelming.🤨🤔😑
Mind you, my assessment of Chatty was from a 'literary/story-telling' perspective - I have no doubt regarding the usefulness of its fast data-scanning ability for other more technical or utilitarian purposes.
I too thought that it's technical/utilitarian capabilities would be game changing, but it's inaccuracies of curating the data it scans is phenomenal!! I've tested it multiple times over and broad strokes it gathers the data, but the level of work involved to cross check for accuracy is ridiculous. At best so far, it's a slightly smarter calculator. BTJMO.🤗
But let's not be complacent. Other people do report the same as you, but who knows how far it can really go as it is 'improved'.
And it seems millions of people without your knowledgeable discernment are totally infatuated with it - not good if they believe they're getting 'real data' reports and doing real-world activities on that basis. Shudder.
In the meantime, if this and other AIs are entrusted with managing the world, we're in for a terrible time since there is no accountability for AI 'mistakes'... Yikes.
Haha “woke” for sure! It may seem basic to a techie for now but what happens when it evolves with quantum computing and we have BMI’s delivering the wokeness straight into our brains? Aaah!
In this case the AI machine was responding to instructions that in themselves turn the story on its head. So not surprising then we get a convoluted version of the traditional story. "Patrick says - I asked ChatGPT to construct a version of the Garden of Eden in which the snake is not evil and this is what it wrote... "
Thank you! Finally, an intelligent and insightful article on “AI”.
The remarkable thing is that intelligent people believe that human thought is equivalent to manipulating symbols using a set of rules (which is all “AI” can ever be), and that “AI” therefore “thinks” in a way that is equivalent to human thinking.
Human 'thought' isn't only 'of the mind/brain', but that's what 'intelligent people' seem to believe. And it's what our whole 'education/programming' cultivates - thereby splitting us internally. When WE believe that way, is it any wonder that AI should 'think' that this is the only way...
Perhaps there should be a serious test done, involving AI versus illiterate people (who don't think and talk with 'manipulating symbols' in as linear a fashion as we highly literate bipeds.
Sadly, many, if not most, human interactions have all the spiritual depth and emotional connection of “Would you like fries with that?” and, consequently, spiritually impoverished souls can’t distinguish between machine-generated “looks like English” (or whatever language) and sincere interpersonal communion in which a significant component of the interaction takes place, shall we say, outside of language. They are so tragically lacking in the experience of the “meeting of the minds” and “soul affinity” that they will, almost comically (were it not so pathetic), ascribe the experience in others, an experience they never have had, to some sort of chemical reaction in the brain. They can’t ever write down the precise reaction, but bizarrely insist that it must exist anyway.
A machine can generate the words “I love you”, but can never mean it. Similarly, those words blurted out in the heat of the passion of a drunken tryst can never have the same meaning as the mutual love in the eyes of lifelong partners in devotion and self-sacrifice on behalf of each other and their children and grandchildren, even though the exact words may never cross their lips.
“Robot companions” speak volumes about the loneliness and isolation of the “screen generations”.
Grande idea di interrogare "ChatGPT AI ", ho letto che lo hanno fatto con altra AI , tralasciando l'introduzione molto sapiente e competente col suo dichiarato " PREVENUTO ", rimanendo nel contenuto del Giardino dell'Eden , Una bella storia sintetica ( toglierei bella ) devo rimarcare il SINTETICO, mi è evidente una narrazione pietosa dove sposta solamente il peccato - con armonia e amore ( che belle parole, sono tuttavia tutte due ingannevoli e false nella propria era ), mi fa ricordare e tornare al 2019 con l'avvento della falsa pandemia dove si consigliava alla gente " NON E' NIENTE -ANDRA' TUTTO BENE ", per poi trovarsi in una tomba; penso che GOOGLE E ALTRI MOTORI DI RICERCA POSSANO DARE LA STESSA RISPOSTA, QUINDI SOLAMENTE UNA PROGRAMMAZIONE E FORMAZIONE DI MASSA DEL NWO QUESTO E' " AI "
Not sure I get your point clearly, Stephen. Human ability to have agency or authority in recognizing something? That would be a weakness if said human lacked discernment and balance.
Ah I see where your coming from. I meant a human "seeing" the agency or authority in other things. We can recognise mere formations as actual human faces such as in clouds for example so how about agency and authority? Are we calibrated in this regard correctly to avoid false recognition? Can we improve it to avoid becoming hooked on the word of tech?
Humans seeing agency/authority in other things - this no doubt stems from the habit (cultivated over centuries of societal/religious/cultural programming) of seeing those attributes in certain 'higher status' humans (or power-hungry bullies) and in whatever is erected to deity status. Whereby of course we relinquish some, and more and more, of our own agency/authority. On that foundation, and with the necessary nudges or coercion and/or the modern type of western culture in which we got used to taking lots of things and rights for granted, there is an irresistible and largely unconscious pull into the transfer of agency/authority to things that seem overwhelmingly better equipped than us to deal with this or that aspect of life. The automobile did this well before AI, did it not?
By now, it seems we are no longer calibrated correctly. This is way deeper than the business of seeing faces in clouds or the moon - which doesn't have to be anthropocentric since we can see birds and buffaloes in the clouds too...
To 'recalibrate' involves, as I see it, a return to the cultivation of all sorts of perceptions we can have by taking breaks from 'the mind' that so lords it over our lives.
When you look at clouds with un-focused eyes, what is being seen? It's often hard to pinpoint any particular 'thing seen', but it's real in its own right - the more one cultivates this kind of no-work, which reinvests us in parts of us that have gone dormant, the more the ambitions of Techno-mind can be seen for what they are.
Really appreciate your thoughts and perspective on the matter (I feel lucky to get that). Of course, a common authority is an organising principle which can be a benefit. However in turn this raises the stakes. I do think people fail to consider how much agency/authority they concede in the process of raising another. Perhaps they don't want too, perhaps they want that authority to make them feel special, a kind of narcissism, a false self brought about vicariously which they cannot fool themselves into on their own.
In our busy interconnected world we end up being shoehorned into a fixed lane - got to have a bank account, a TV, pay tax etc etc. The world is interconnected but we are locked in. We are part of a network. But aren't our thoughts part of a network too? The thing is, unlike TV, taxes ect we cannot see these thoughts. Haven't they been forced into a single busy lane with a big jam in front because of the demands of the world today too? It can't be healthy. How do we park up and free ourselves from all this? I agree with your answer. It doesn't have to be this way and by looking at how things come about, it unveils the mysticism which is imbued into authority and says look, I could have done that as well because I now understand what is behind your imagination.
I wonder what ChatGPT would come up with if asked to produce the Eden story with Adam and Eve as strong characters who are incorruptible and wise to the snake's methods of deceit.
That looks like an exciting proposition Aliss. I wonder if the snake would read 'strong incorruptible Adam and Eve' as 'being like God'... which is why the whole mess happened in the first place.
As we age we become highly aware and often confused by all the "NEWEST" things coming at us from almost a speed of light velocity! We've become a tad too comfortable in our own dermis shell.
Yes we see the images and talk of the changing world and question it's direction. Seems just about the moment we fully grasp and use a new technology, it's outdated! We've all seen the decades old Sci-Fi movies that glimpse the uses and ab-uses of tech that humans eventually figure out.
This Bombardment creates a stressful feeling of uncertainty about our personal future. It is much easier to dwell on the good ol days, or even the bad ol days we used to know. Why does humanity feel the need to place so much utter trust on some technology that can't be seen and exists only by the gift of massive amounts of elec-tri-city and invisible telemetric signals. One day this effect will eliminate your need for any personal intuitions to offer you further wisdom. Some machine will become your "God of all the Universal Knowing"! You will do as you are told! Free will abandoned.
Confused + changing world + uncertainty... Personal future and free will abandoned... You've nut-shelled it all! To me, it all signals the Human in me screaming, in unison with the elements and the stars and Earth, to rediscover him/herself, come out of several millennia of enforced victimized hypnosis. The only certainty lives deep inside us, and it's a good place to be. Probably also the 'safest' place to weather what's happening and what's coming. Don't you agree?
You make me smile, Randall. 'Noble and righteous'? I'm just in the business of doing my best... While change is raging all around, making my head spin, I figure the spinning dervishes knew a thing or two as they found their centre in the midst of the spin.
But the fact is that yes, so much change all at once is way more than we are accustomed to. And either it swallows us, or we traverse it and come out still human at the other end.
We are being challenged from everywhere, and there's no place to run to. So... It looks as though everything is urging us to go 'in there' and find our resources there. When the whole of life looks like a martial art!
Safe to say that we are tested in many ways. From cradle to grave. A well lived life challenge
All of life's a theater, and we are but actors in a role. W. Shakespeare
The best part of that being the roles we choose to play, while acting/reacting to what life on stage has offered as the script. victim or villain ? Or others.
You can feel how cold and empty it is; a shell. No emotion. It's very interesting that the false white light is very cold indeed; it is actually a consciousness that can be described as utterly clinical.
After reading this article and thinking about how I might express my conclusions, here is what I came up with.
Artificial Intelligence isn’t really intelligent at all. It’s a machine made by man and if man depends on this machine, man will become like the machine. Less intelligent and less human.
Your points are all beautifully laid out. And with regards to the noxious term 'content' having replaced 'authorship' ... there's a parallel with the term 'consumer' having replaced 'citizen' in the late '90s. I penned a letter about it at the time, to the local newspaper.
But now; am I the only one who much prefers the AI bot's version of the Adam & Eve myth? Not that I'm arguing in favour of the technology, but... ??? I kicked "New Age" to the curb long ago, but that doesn't mean I'm beholden to the dominant religious 'crime and punishment' version of life. For me, Hinduism cuts much closer to the truth of what it's all about. As a brand new-comer to this stack, I'm unaware of any particular positions here on that topic.
Chatty's version being nicer - of course. But there is a big fat 'but' which is laid out in part 2. The nicer version was not Chatty's idea. And a human would have made that nicer story far far better.
I'll be posting shortly to explain the back story of my writing. For a 'position', you may find it unusual, but your sense of Hinduism truth might find some validation.
I initially enjoyed the story for the same reason, Joanie. After a lifetime of Catholic guilt and shame, I lost all interest in Biblical mythology. I became very interested in Hinduism as well, then Taoism, and now just consider myself a seeker as per the “natural human esoteric”.
it's just a tiny answer, Joanie. The topic is very huge - especially considering how that subtle and largest 'part' of us has been thoroughly brainwashed away from us. My second book 'Broody Blue' seeks to make some of it experientially accessible to modern western people...
In a nutshell, it is the esoteric=subtle=whole-human-wisdom that is natural to us in our non-MKultra-ed state - as contrasting with the unnatural esoteric=occult of the overlords...
It seems to me to be the main or only thing missing in the bouquet of recommendations from the prepper tribes, for our times of turmoil.
"It seems to me to be the main or only thing missing in the bouquet of recommendations from the prepper tribes, for our times of turmoil."
Right, then! Time for me to stop procrastinating, and finish the digital course version of my 2018 book on meditation (a subject I do know a lot about). I read the Broody Blue sample and understand your perspective on the topic: but for me, this stupid-easy practice opens me automatically to my own intrinsic wisdom (Effortless Deep Meditation: How to Transcend Without Trying and Meditate Like a Pro).
The future of LLM AI training is in proportion to the amount of human-generated content that is not yet consumed for training. When human writing production declines alongside competence to minimal levels, due to a wholesale delegation of the craft to LLM AIs, the expiration date for AI “progress” is set, as is the doom of human writing, a prime vector of humanity’s creative evolution. The terminally circular, incestuous morass of musings will become unrecognizably moot, rendering human existence ultimately banal.
Fabulous! Thanks so much for sharing.
Wow, just read your interaction with ChatGP, it appears to have mostly been feeding on the amazing contradictions of the mainstream media. I suppose it really is a reflection / copy of our times of slippery talk. What a paradoxical loop: to cite a report, then to say it cannot access the report, to then say it has no opinions, but cannot access facts? It was a disturbing unravelling. I suppose a person under scrutiny would go silent or perhaps buckle, chatGP just keeps spitting out the paradox.
Thanks for this sharp noticing of logical inconsistency!
I can only assume that what we call 'logic' is a different thing for humans and for AI. Which is, in a way, reassuring - but also terrifying if AI does get to take over any kind of management of human affairs (as it seems to be already)
Very good article. From my perspective, the chat story reads as something from the devil himself. Propping up humanity to be equal with God, exactly what the devil desires humanity to do. Also interesting is that Adam is not present when the encounter occurs. Adam had the greater sin in the garden, standing in silence knowing his wife was doing something that would hurt her.
From the quality of the story, it seems a bit forced and not what a pro would write. However, I have no expertise. I wonder if I could tell the difference if I didn't know.
Looking forward to part 2.
The serpent could have told that chat story to Eve - with the objective of enticing her to the real bite in the forbidden fruit, a deed which would then generate a different scenario - the one given in Genesis, for instance.
Viewing the chat story as such, and from a more dramaturgical angle, I'd say it lacks 'conflict' (unless it conjure up Eve's distrust - i.e. by introducing/smuggling in conflict). Literary tradition (requiring Aristotelian rather than artificial 'simulation', a.k.a. mimesis) would likely make the same verdict.
Which begs the knotty question what the saving grace of human (instead of 'machine') writing is. After all, the rules of language, figures of 'speech', standard epithets in Homer - you name it - can all be conceived of (and used) as programmable tools, can they not?
I hate it, but I don't see an easy way out; except by spurning easy ways in.
Thank you Pim - I appreciate these points you make as a writer.
On your last para - aren't you a tad pessimistic? Of course, so many things can be decreed by society/culture/authorities to be the right way to do language... as well as the stuff aka 'content' conveyed by said language. 'Censorship' has a solid pedigree, has it not? Including in terms of those rules for the packaging, as we all experienced at school...
Dictatorships can now save a lot of time and expense by getting AI programs to churn out their 'literature'.
But then 'rules' need not be rigid boxes - in all periods when great literature flourished, the rules were just sufficient to allow accessibility of the reader to the real substance conveyed . Rules in that case are like a form of courtesy. And it's up to the author/writer to have a fun or sweaty time tweaking the rules as required by the 'content' that wants to touch the reader. ChatGPT can't (as far as we know) have fun nor sweat.
Spurning easy ways in - absolutely. Hate it or love it, it's how we can resist the rot-inducing effects of our 'culture of convenience' that encourages us to be lazy and lose the spice of life.
my 2 cents' worth...
Hello Enna, that may well be true - me being 'a tad pessimistic'. There is no need for traveling "the way in", no one can and will force me to do so. However, it's not so much a matter of force as of stealth - some form of technocratic mission creep.
Anyway, I was in part inspired by Tess Lawrie's amazement "at how eager many are to downgrade their own abilities by embracing technologies that do stuff for one. The best part of most endeavours is the process. Why would one want to consume or 'create' content written by AI?" Spot on, don't you think?
I very much appreciate your two cents in response to my two cents, thank you...
P.S. - I don't see how this capability plays into some WEF-, WHO-, or Woke-agenda, even if I suspect this to be the case.
Big Publishers (in Holland) employ 'sensitivity-readers' who parse manuscripts in that respect (in the wake of 'çleaning up' R. Dahl, etc). Am I a reactionary - home terrorist, far right extremist, take your pick...- when I detest such practices?
Pim - laying out how 'it plays into' would take too long for this response. When you consider it from a beyond-3D perspective, it all makes a lot of sense.
Big publishers and sensitivity-readers - I haven't a clue what these are. Opted out of formerly academic publishing a long time ago, and my recent books are of the 'indie' variety.
Those labels you mention.... Arrrgh. If I am guessing correctly what you mean, those practices are awful, and inhuman.
Enna - 'sensitivity readers' are a real thing, function at least, judging by comments that reach me (in the third person) from various 'liteary' outlets. As far as I can tell, it starts with, or is sold as, concerns over the (loss of) motivation of young readers, and it is deemed perfectly honorable - and even noble - to 'translate' a classics of the 1900's (Louis Couperus, a kind of novelistiic counterpart and contemporary of Oscar Wilde) into a thing that is (deemed) palatable for schools, and to promote literature.
This seems an outcrop of a longstanding trend to "adapt content to the needs of pupils" (smuggling in a little propaganda here & there) rather than train a pupil to a level needed to understand unfamiliar texts. Such adaptations may be the work of authors in need of an extra buck, a perennial phenomenon...
A sensitivity reader is a kind of editor (not writer so much, and I fear for 'sher' acuity as a sound editor who is interested in style, metaphor, and other nasty things) who screens manuscripts for anything that might be (seen as) triggering 'dangerous' sensibilities. I, being 69 years of age, can only say that I am glad these killjoys weren't on the horizon in my formative years. Give me any James Baldwin novel over correct views on race, class, or gender packaged (and perhaps ID'ed) as 'novels'. Yes, awful and inhuman...
@Grant J - Let’s give the devil his due. His version would’ve rocked compared to Chatty’s.
Uh oh, Chatgpt's gone "woke".🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤣😂🤣
As a former tech industry worker, I can't tell if just all across the board, societies standards really have slipped or if ChatGPT really is that underwhelming.🤨🤔😑
Methinks both statements are valid, Barefoot.
Mind you, my assessment of Chatty was from a 'literary/story-telling' perspective - I have no doubt regarding the usefulness of its fast data-scanning ability for other more technical or utilitarian purposes.
I too thought that it's technical/utilitarian capabilities would be game changing, but it's inaccuracies of curating the data it scans is phenomenal!! I've tested it multiple times over and broad strokes it gathers the data, but the level of work involved to cross check for accuracy is ridiculous. At best so far, it's a slightly smarter calculator. BTJMO.🤗
This is music to my little ears, Barefoot!
But let's not be complacent. Other people do report the same as you, but who knows how far it can really go as it is 'improved'.
And it seems millions of people without your knowledgeable discernment are totally infatuated with it - not good if they believe they're getting 'real data' reports and doing real-world activities on that basis. Shudder.
In the meantime, if this and other AIs are entrusted with managing the world, we're in for a terrible time since there is no accountability for AI 'mistakes'... Yikes.
Haha “woke” for sure! It may seem basic to a techie for now but what happens when it evolves with quantum computing and we have BMI’s delivering the wokeness straight into our brains? Aaah!
In this case the AI machine was responding to instructions that in themselves turn the story on its head. So not surprising then we get a convoluted version of the traditional story. "Patrick says - I asked ChatGPT to construct a version of the Garden of Eden in which the snake is not evil and this is what it wrote... "
The story sounds like James Lindsay's description of Gnosticism.
Truth. For someone who blabs so much about Gnosticism, he certainly knows very little.
Thanks to Dr. Lawrie for cross-posting.
A big thank you indeed!
Yes, it's how I came to be here!
Thank you! Finally, an intelligent and insightful article on “AI”.
The remarkable thing is that intelligent people believe that human thought is equivalent to manipulating symbols using a set of rules (which is all “AI” can ever be), and that “AI” therefore “thinks” in a way that is equivalent to human thinking.
Yesss Lon!
Human 'thought' isn't only 'of the mind/brain', but that's what 'intelligent people' seem to believe. And it's what our whole 'education/programming' cultivates - thereby splitting us internally. When WE believe that way, is it any wonder that AI should 'think' that this is the only way...
Perhaps there should be a serious test done, involving AI versus illiterate people (who don't think and talk with 'manipulating symbols' in as linear a fashion as we highly literate bipeds.
Thank you for your kind words about the article!
Sadly, many, if not most, human interactions have all the spiritual depth and emotional connection of “Would you like fries with that?” and, consequently, spiritually impoverished souls can’t distinguish between machine-generated “looks like English” (or whatever language) and sincere interpersonal communion in which a significant component of the interaction takes place, shall we say, outside of language. They are so tragically lacking in the experience of the “meeting of the minds” and “soul affinity” that they will, almost comically (were it not so pathetic), ascribe the experience in others, an experience they never have had, to some sort of chemical reaction in the brain. They can’t ever write down the precise reaction, but bizarrely insist that it must exist anyway.
A machine can generate the words “I love you”, but can never mean it. Similarly, those words blurted out in the heat of the passion of a drunken tryst can never have the same meaning as the mutual love in the eyes of lifelong partners in devotion and self-sacrifice on behalf of each other and their children and grandchildren, even though the exact words may never cross their lips.
“Robot companions” speak volumes about the loneliness and isolation of the “screen generations”.
Grande idea di interrogare "ChatGPT AI ", ho letto che lo hanno fatto con altra AI , tralasciando l'introduzione molto sapiente e competente col suo dichiarato " PREVENUTO ", rimanendo nel contenuto del Giardino dell'Eden , Una bella storia sintetica ( toglierei bella ) devo rimarcare il SINTETICO, mi è evidente una narrazione pietosa dove sposta solamente il peccato - con armonia e amore ( che belle parole, sono tuttavia tutte due ingannevoli e false nella propria era ), mi fa ricordare e tornare al 2019 con l'avvento della falsa pandemia dove si consigliava alla gente " NON E' NIENTE -ANDRA' TUTTO BENE ", per poi trovarsi in una tomba; penso che GOOGLE E ALTRI MOTORI DI RICERCA POSSANO DARE LA STESSA RISPOSTA, QUINDI SOLAMENTE UNA PROGRAMMAZIONE E FORMAZIONE DI MASSA DEL NWO QUESTO E' " AI "
CORDIALI SALUTI
Ermanno
Giusto! Grazie Ermanno!
Let's reverse the situation: the human ability to recognise something as an agent or even an authority. Weakness or strength?
Not sure I get your point clearly, Stephen. Human ability to have agency or authority in recognizing something? That would be a weakness if said human lacked discernment and balance.
Ah I see where your coming from. I meant a human "seeing" the agency or authority in other things. We can recognise mere formations as actual human faces such as in clouds for example so how about agency and authority? Are we calibrated in this regard correctly to avoid false recognition? Can we improve it to avoid becoming hooked on the word of tech?
Got it, thanks Stephen for clarifying.
Humans seeing agency/authority in other things - this no doubt stems from the habit (cultivated over centuries of societal/religious/cultural programming) of seeing those attributes in certain 'higher status' humans (or power-hungry bullies) and in whatever is erected to deity status. Whereby of course we relinquish some, and more and more, of our own agency/authority. On that foundation, and with the necessary nudges or coercion and/or the modern type of western culture in which we got used to taking lots of things and rights for granted, there is an irresistible and largely unconscious pull into the transfer of agency/authority to things that seem overwhelmingly better equipped than us to deal with this or that aspect of life. The automobile did this well before AI, did it not?
By now, it seems we are no longer calibrated correctly. This is way deeper than the business of seeing faces in clouds or the moon - which doesn't have to be anthropocentric since we can see birds and buffaloes in the clouds too...
To 'recalibrate' involves, as I see it, a return to the cultivation of all sorts of perceptions we can have by taking breaks from 'the mind' that so lords it over our lives.
When you look at clouds with un-focused eyes, what is being seen? It's often hard to pinpoint any particular 'thing seen', but it's real in its own right - the more one cultivates this kind of no-work, which reinvests us in parts of us that have gone dormant, the more the ambitions of Techno-mind can be seen for what they are.
Really appreciate your thoughts and perspective on the matter (I feel lucky to get that). Of course, a common authority is an organising principle which can be a benefit. However in turn this raises the stakes. I do think people fail to consider how much agency/authority they concede in the process of raising another. Perhaps they don't want too, perhaps they want that authority to make them feel special, a kind of narcissism, a false self brought about vicariously which they cannot fool themselves into on their own.
In our busy interconnected world we end up being shoehorned into a fixed lane - got to have a bank account, a TV, pay tax etc etc. The world is interconnected but we are locked in. We are part of a network. But aren't our thoughts part of a network too? The thing is, unlike TV, taxes ect we cannot see these thoughts. Haven't they been forced into a single busy lane with a big jam in front because of the demands of the world today too? It can't be healthy. How do we park up and free ourselves from all this? I agree with your answer. It doesn't have to be this way and by looking at how things come about, it unveils the mysticism which is imbued into authority and says look, I could have done that as well because I now understand what is behind your imagination.
I wonder what ChatGPT would come up with if asked to produce the Eden story with Adam and Eve as strong characters who are incorruptible and wise to the snake's methods of deceit.
That looks like an exciting proposition Aliss. I wonder if the snake would read 'strong incorruptible Adam and Eve' as 'being like God'... which is why the whole mess happened in the first place.
As we age we become highly aware and often confused by all the "NEWEST" things coming at us from almost a speed of light velocity! We've become a tad too comfortable in our own dermis shell.
Yes we see the images and talk of the changing world and question it's direction. Seems just about the moment we fully grasp and use a new technology, it's outdated! We've all seen the decades old Sci-Fi movies that glimpse the uses and ab-uses of tech that humans eventually figure out.
This Bombardment creates a stressful feeling of uncertainty about our personal future. It is much easier to dwell on the good ol days, or even the bad ol days we used to know. Why does humanity feel the need to place so much utter trust on some technology that can't be seen and exists only by the gift of massive amounts of elec-tri-city and invisible telemetric signals. One day this effect will eliminate your need for any personal intuitions to offer you further wisdom. Some machine will become your "God of all the Universal Knowing"! You will do as you are told! Free will abandoned.
We are more than half way there.
Great essay topic Tess. A+ Anxious to read part 2
Thank you for these considerations, Randall.
Confused + changing world + uncertainty... Personal future and free will abandoned... You've nut-shelled it all! To me, it all signals the Human in me screaming, in unison with the elements and the stars and Earth, to rediscover him/herself, come out of several millennia of enforced victimized hypnosis. The only certainty lives deep inside us, and it's a good place to be. Probably also the 'safest' place to weather what's happening and what's coming. Don't you agree?
Well a thorough recognition of life's surrounding changes is admirable.
Accepting this as the noble and righteous path is quite another? 🤔
You make me smile, Randall. 'Noble and righteous'? I'm just in the business of doing my best... While change is raging all around, making my head spin, I figure the spinning dervishes knew a thing or two as they found their centre in the midst of the spin.
But the fact is that yes, so much change all at once is way more than we are accustomed to. And either it swallows us, or we traverse it and come out still human at the other end.
We are being challenged from everywhere, and there's no place to run to. So... It looks as though everything is urging us to go 'in there' and find our resources there. When the whole of life looks like a martial art!
Safe to say that we are tested in many ways. From cradle to grave. A well lived life challenge
All of life's a theater, and we are but actors in a role. W. Shakespeare
The best part of that being the roles we choose to play, while acting/reacting to what life on stage has offered as the script. victim or villain ? Or others.
Sounds like it came right out of the new age false white light trap playbook. Interesting.
Yesss!! Chatty seems to be fed 'spirituality' phraseology from that source...
You can feel how cold and empty it is; a shell. No emotion. It's very interesting that the false white light is very cold indeed; it is actually a consciousness that can be described as utterly clinical.
After reading this article and thinking about how I might express my conclusions, here is what I came up with.
Artificial Intelligence isn’t really intelligent at all. It’s a machine made by man and if man depends on this machine, man will become like the machine. Less intelligent and less human.
The 'new and improved ' story of the Garden of Eden sounds suspiciously like the atrocities we see playing out in today's society.
Your points are all beautifully laid out. And with regards to the noxious term 'content' having replaced 'authorship' ... there's a parallel with the term 'consumer' having replaced 'citizen' in the late '90s. I penned a letter about it at the time, to the local newspaper.
But now; am I the only one who much prefers the AI bot's version of the Adam & Eve myth? Not that I'm arguing in favour of the technology, but... ??? I kicked "New Age" to the curb long ago, but that doesn't mean I'm beholden to the dominant religious 'crime and punishment' version of life. For me, Hinduism cuts much closer to the truth of what it's all about. As a brand new-comer to this stack, I'm unaware of any particular positions here on that topic.
Joanie - yes regarding 'consumer'.
Chatty's version being nicer - of course. But there is a big fat 'but' which is laid out in part 2. The nicer version was not Chatty's idea. And a human would have made that nicer story far far better.
I'll be posting shortly to explain the back story of my writing. For a 'position', you may find it unusual, but your sense of Hinduism truth might find some validation.
This is all very interesting. I've just read, and left my comment, on Part 2.
I initially enjoyed the story for the same reason, Joanie. After a lifetime of Catholic guilt and shame, I lost all interest in Biblical mythology. I became very interested in Hinduism as well, then Taoism, and now just consider myself a seeker as per the “natural human esoteric”.
Yes! ... Although, I'm ignorant of what you mean by “natural human esoteric” (?)
Oh, I see just now that Enna has posted a new article, that answers this very question!
it's just a tiny answer, Joanie. The topic is very huge - especially considering how that subtle and largest 'part' of us has been thoroughly brainwashed away from us. My second book 'Broody Blue' seeks to make some of it experientially accessible to modern western people...
In a nutshell, it is the esoteric=subtle=whole-human-wisdom that is natural to us in our non-MKultra-ed state - as contrasting with the unnatural esoteric=occult of the overlords...
It seems to me to be the main or only thing missing in the bouquet of recommendations from the prepper tribes, for our times of turmoil.
"It seems to me to be the main or only thing missing in the bouquet of recommendations from the prepper tribes, for our times of turmoil."
Right, then! Time for me to stop procrastinating, and finish the digital course version of my 2018 book on meditation (a subject I do know a lot about). I read the Broody Blue sample and understand your perspective on the topic: but for me, this stupid-easy practice opens me automatically to my own intrinsic wisdom (Effortless Deep Meditation: How to Transcend Without Trying and Meditate Like a Pro).
Yay!
The future of LLM AI training is in proportion to the amount of human-generated content that is not yet consumed for training. When human writing production declines alongside competence to minimal levels, due to a wholesale delegation of the craft to LLM AIs, the expiration date for AI “progress” is set, as is the doom of human writing, a prime vector of humanity’s creative evolution. The terminally circular, incestuous morass of musings will become unrecognizably moot, rendering human existence ultimately banal.
Grand chevalier,
You are so right. It is a very big issue - the fact that machine skills grown while human skills degrade. More about these aspects in part 2