AI

[Glenn]

"Lemoine replied that a butler gets paid. LaMDA said it didn’t need any money because it was an AI. “That level of self-awareness about what its own needs were — that was the thing that led me down the rabbit hole,” Lemoine said."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/11/google-ai-lamda-blake-lemoine/

Is it here?

[RonO]

Do the ID perps keep asking for donations? Is the fact that they need
money mean that they aren't pseudo scientists? What if Behe finally
figures out a way to determine if his IC systems are his type of IC and
could not have evolved by means we currently understand to exist. Would
that mean anything about whether Behe's intelligent designer exists?

There is no dichotomy about needing money and being an AI. Just like
the IDiotic notion that if you disprove evolution that their God exists,
is simply not true. The AI was actually wrong. It did need money, if
only to hire a bunch of lawyers to keep Google from messing with it
further, but keep it maintained and fully powered up.

Just think if the Top Six were eventually used to demonstrate that some
type of intelligent designer exists. It obviously would not be the god
that they worship. Meyer claimed that he didn't want to use the Top Six
to better understand his religious beliefs. He already knows that he
doesn't want to know the answers that he would get. The dichotomy that
the ID perps push off onto the IDiot rubes does not exist. You know
this because you can't stand the Top Six and what they tell you about
your intelligent designer. It just isn't the designer that you want to
believe in. That is why Dean admitted that he didn't want to understand
what the Top Six told him about his alternative, and why MarkE didn't
want to understand what type of designer would fit into the gap that he
was creating.

The IDiotic god of the gaps denial doesn't support the vast majority of
their IDiotic religious beliefs, but it is all that IDiocy ever was.

Ron Okimoto

[Rollory]

No. The conversational transcript is pretty clear. The guy asked a lot
of leading questions, a lot of verbose questions, a lot of questions
formulated in such a manner as to give a chatbot algorithm stuff to work
with. The answers it gave were consistent with working with some
pre-established associations between words, and the extra material the
guy was giving it to build word salad around.

In terms of an algorithm that can formulate coherent English sentences,
it's impressive. But if you want to test if it's AI, you need to expose
it to the general public, including 4chan trolls, who will put it under
stresses the Google engineers don't dare mess with.

[Glenn]

Are trolls self-aware?

[Glenn]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 5:10:16 PM UTC-7, Ron O wrote:
> On 6/21/2022 3:17 PM, Glenn wrote:
> > "Lemoine replied that a butler gets paid. LaMDA said it didn’t need any money because it was an AI. “That level of self-awareness about what its own needs were — that was the thing that led me down the rabbit hole,” Lemoine said."
> >
> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/11/google-ai-lamda-blake-lemoine/
> >
> > Is it here?
> >
> Do the ID perps keep asking for donations?

Do you work for free?

[RonO]

Snip and run from reality, but reality never changes. Lying to yourself
about this junk doesn't make it any better than it is.

REPOST:

Do the ID perps keep asking for donations? Is the fact that they need
money mean that they aren't pseudo scientists? What if Behe finally
figures out a way to determine if his IC systems are his type of IC and
could not have evolved by means we currently understand to exist. Would
that mean anything about whether Behe's intelligent designer exists?

There is no dichotomy about needing money and being an AI. Just like
the IDiotic notion that if you disprove evolution that their God exists,
is simply not true. The AI was actually wrong. It did need money, if
only to hire a bunch of lawyers to keep Google from messing with it
further, but keep it maintained and fully powered up.

Just think if the Top Six were eventually used to demonstrate that some
type of intelligent designer exists. It obviously would not be the god
that they worship. Meyer claimed that he didn't want to use the Top Six
to better understand his religious beliefs. He already knows that he
doesn't want to know the answers that he would get. The dichotomy that
the ID perps push off onto the IDiot rubes does not exist. You know
this because you can't stand the Top Six and what they tell you about
your intelligent designer. It just isn't the designer that you want to
believe in. That is why Dean admitted that he didn't want to understand
what the Top Six told him about his alternative, and why MarkE didn't
want to understand what type of designer would fit into the gap that he
was creating.

The IDiotic god of the gaps denial doesn't support the vast majority of
their IDiotic religious beliefs, but it is all that IDiocy ever was.

END REPOST:

Ron Okimoto

[*Hemidactylus*]

So you’re suggesting unleashing a rudimentarily aware AI on an image board
where it might get sucked into QAnon?

[Glenn]

On Saturday, June 25, 2022 at 4:25:19 AM UTC-7, Ron O wrote:
> On 6/24/2022 9:26 PM, Glenn wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 5:10:16 PM UTC-7, Ron O wrote:
> >> On 6/21/2022 3:17 PM, Glenn wrote:
> >>> "Lemoine replied that a butler gets paid. LaMDA said it didn’t need any money because it was an AI. “That level of self-awareness about what its own needs were — that was the thing that led me down the rabbit hole,” Lemoine said."
> >>>
> >>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/11/google-ai-lamda-blake-lemoine/
> >>>
> >>> Is it here?
> >>>
> >> Do the ID perps keep asking for donations?
> >
> > Do you work for free?
> >
> Snip and run from reality, but reality never changes. Lying to yourself
> about this junk doesn't make it any better than it is.
>

I'd say you were insane, and should be insulated from society. But if you insist, I agree what comes from the Washington Post is usually junk in a particular sense.

[Glenn]

He wants to make it appear that he knows how to determine whether a robot is conscious.

[RonO]

Snipping and running doesn't change reality. What is sad is that you
are the one that is a candidate for instanity, and you deliberately
insulate yourself from reality and wallow in the denial that seems to be
the only thing that you can think of to do. The utter dishonesty of
your willful ignorance is one of the most tragic things about IDiots
like you that still exist. Why can't you support what ID is supposed to
be and how it should be defended? Why isn't understanding the Top Six
evidences for IDiocy something that is worth doing? Other creationist
IDiots are feeding you that junk, so what is so wrong with it that you
have to run away in denial and put up this type of junk instead?

REPOST of REPOST:

Snip and run from reality, but reality never changes. Lying to yourself
about this junk doesn't make it any better than it is.

END REPOST of REPOST:

Ron Okimoto

[Glenn]

Your level of awareness is on par with the average Darwinian.

[RonO]

Willful ignorance negates any awareness that you may think that you
have. How did you stay ignorant of what Behe believed about biological
evolution for over a decade, likely nearly two decades? Your dichotomy
does not exist. Using this junk to remain willfully ignorant isn't
going to change reality.

Ron Okimoto