A Guitar And Gear Support Forum

So, I've been trying to wrap my head around this whole AI phenomenon. I still have not consciously accessed ChatGP or whatever it's called, and don't intend to as it just seems too contrived a setup that everyone seems to have jumped into head first. Almost like the powers that be have created this huge human behavior lab and are watching with great interest how we handle it, I suspect it's not really about the AI but rather our reaction to it that matters. Ironically, a true AI can never answer any questions based on real expertise but simply accesses reams of online information to dole out it's wisdom. Which brings me to my question/point: are our online personas actually human directed AIs ?

I admit, on a typical day I may converse online about global weather patterns, nuclear energy, or child rearing, none of which I have any real training or experience in. Heck, I may even have commented here and given advice on an amp or two that I may never have played thru or even heard outside of YouTube's compression algorithms. But, accessing publicly available information sources, I have become the expert in these matters, albeit the human behind Tonray could never claim any of this experience. Am I actually a biologically directed AI ? Welcome to the Matrix my friends. Red Pill or Blue Pill ?

This post was made my Tonray's Ghost, ostensibly the online persona but perhaps directed by human intelligence. No Ghosts were actually harmed in the making of this post.

I know next to nothing about the subject but I think the real test is, can it replicate tube tone with SS circuitry?

I don't think so.

Popular beliefs are rarely correct understandings. So no, it is not harnessing our collective wisdom (at this point).

Digital consiousness could be mind blowing to reckon with.

BatUtilityBelt wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:30 pm Popular beliefs are rarely correct understandings. So no, it is not harnessing our collective wisdom (at this point).

This is in regards to SS doing real tube tone right ?

Tonray's Ghost wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 9:28 pm

BatUtilityBelt wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:30 pm Popular beliefs are rarely correct understandings. So no, it is not harnessing our collective wisdom (at this point).

This is in regards to SS doing real tube tone right ?

Oh no, it was purely about AI.

Good stuff.

Any intelligence I have ever been accused of possessing, is entirely artificial.

BatUtilityBelt wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:30 pm Popular beliefs are rarely correct understandings. So no, it is not harnessing our collective wisdom (at this point).

There is actually some surprising wisdom in collective beliefs, though:

At a 1906 country fair in Plymouth, 800 people participated in a contest to estimate the weight of a slaughtered and dressed ox. Statistician Francis Galton observed that the median guess, 1207 pounds, was accurate within 1% of the true weight of 1198 pounds.
...
In further exploring the ways to improve the results, a new technique called the "surprisingly popular" was developed by scientists at MIT's Sloan Neuroeconomics Lab in collaboration with Princeton University. For a given question, people are asked to give two responses: What they think the right answer is, and what they think popular opinion will be. The averaged difference between the two indicates the correct answer.

Given a goal such as "guess the weight of this ox", I think that merely shows people will err at extremes equally, so gathering an average might actually yield something useful. But I'm saying collectively, we tend to be ignorant more often than not. We resist change, so we balk at improvements because "that's not the way it used to be". Collective perceptions lead to things like the Crusades, wars, science denial, and fascism. That's why I happily take the word of a respected expert over popular notions. Trends fall away and embarrass us later.

considering how little actual intelligence there is on the internet (myself included), I don't have a lot of hope that AI is actually intelligent LOL

solteroblues wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:00 pm considering how little actual intelligence there is on the internet (myself included), I don't have a lot of hope that AI is actually intelligent LOL

Surprisingly one of the earliest signs of intelligent behavior is admitting you don't know it all...unfortunately the male brain has an override when driving a car and therefore can never admit it or ask for directions.

Some recent readings seem to say that artificial help can be useful in medical evaluations (vague term, i admit).
My own medical path tells me that a uber well informed "system'' would bring benefits.
Many medical diagnoses that seem to have missed the mark could have been flagged.
I would be glad to benefit from it, used as a help by my "expert".

I am not a hackable animal.
I possess a unique soul with moral value.
Existence has a aesthetic, experiential, ethical dimension that is not reducible nor convertible to digits, mathematics, or equations.

Any analogue to human intelligence that was created, which is not a self-aware existing towards death, that does not know pain, suffering, loss, anxiety, desire, torment of the flesh, ecstasy, thirst, hunger . . . is an abomination. I regard such a phenomenon in the same way I regard the structure of a crystalline matrix in a snowflake, or a diamond . . . as perfect, cold, unerring, unfeeling, utterly inhuman, and profoundly immoral.

@Tonray's Ghost all I have to say about this matrix/AI situation is that you guys must have some incredible weed.

I am with @redman, here, "the cristalline matrix..." stuff was almost Hendixian. Please, someone write the music to go with it!!

Isnt it amazing how consciousness seems to have sprung out of the sea's simple inanimate replicating molecules?
Or is consciousness already in all presence, fulfilling realization with the degree of evolving structures?