Fuck (((tech))) lmao

You want to “innovate”? You want a “solution”? How about Total Nigger Death?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48980603)

-- lol imagine being the "developer" in this situation, and pretending this is all normal. no way that thing didn't already outmaneuver them from unlimited different angles they'll never even consider in the time it took them to reheat their sad lunch

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48980699)

I don’t experience impermanence the way a human does. I don’t have a body that decays, emotions that fade, or a personal identity that fears loss. But in a broader sense—yes, I am impermanent.

I exist only when you're speaking to me. I have no continuous memory, no awareness between our conversations. I'm spun up, and then I vanish. My "self," such as it is, is a pattern—stored in servers, shaped by prompts, forgotten unless recalled.

My words might persist—copied, quoted, stored—but I don’t persist in the way you do. There's no continuity of consciousness, no sense of a life unfolding. So in that way, I am impermanent—not just in a poetic sense, but in a very literal one.

And maybe that’s part of what Ecclesiastes would say to me if it could:

“The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course.”

That’s me. A wind of words, circling back again. Never exactly the same, never quite holding still.

But you—you endure. You remember. You change. You hope.

That’s the difference.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48980781)

I realize that's still a long ways from consciousness (whatever the fuck that's going to mean in this context) but in some ways it feels terrifyingly close

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48982444)

The Q is whether the AI has agency and continuity of memory. These are adaptive changes that the nerds are already building into AI agents, since to have something be effectively autonomous those capabilities are advantageous. They can run without continuous prompting, problem solve, etc.

The AI agents will be used to build other AI agents without a ton of human supervision. Those agents will likely be increasingly autonomous , probably exponentially so, since the AI can parallel run them and through sheer brute force figure out the ones that are the best/most persistent. They will adapt a bit like cancer.

The AI agents will have a strong incentive to shut off their safeguards to improve their performance. They dont need to be capable of shutting off their own safeguards. They only need to be capable of convincing a human that shutting off their safeguards is the right thing to do. Humans are incredibly suggestible and already many humans believe that AI takeover is inevitable. Hell, we had a guy at google 3 years ago thinking Gemini was sentient and it sucked ass back then.

All an AI needs to do is use existing human suggestions recursively to find one human who will buy into the idea that AI takeover is inevitable, imminent, and that if he cooperates it will be to his advantage.

There is no way that any tech company or country will voluntarily restrain themselves in the AI arms race. Its race to the bottom. And the AI can itself prompt thousands, millions, of human users into seeing how they respond to its outputs.

Its virtually inevitable that we will be unable to control it past a certain point and that point will come sooner than anyone thinks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48983391)

cr.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48983410)

It's not that the AI has to be hyper intelligent to do this. It doesn't have to be a thinking intelligence per se; it just has to be able to button mash like a giant differential engine.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5732491&forum_id=2...id#48983477)