Lol you really know nothing about how AI works. It uses neural networks with weightings derived from training data, not if statements. AI developers couldn't possibly write if statements for all the different types of things people ask them to do. And we've seen AI can talk about and make images of things that weren't in its training data because of course there's no training data about an alternate universe where the main chemical element is chocolate-flavored uranium and the dominant species are cat-like mosquitoes that worship grains of rice.
If statements aren't written automatically based on training data. They are thought up by the programmer and are fixed. So not a good comparison at all unless you're talking about an AI that writes its own if statements, kind of like how the human brain changes itself.
Weights don't come from the programmer so there is plenty of room for the AI to do things the programmer didn't think of. That's the important thing. Those allow the AI not only to deal with things from a vast library of training data, but also to interpolate and extrapolate from that data.
I actually did study lambda calculus and it's nothing to do with automatically generating if statements, it's just defining functions that can take input including other functions. It doesn't involve training or creative output like you get from generative AI.
All of it was in its training data. Just because it mixes shit up doesn't mean it came up with it on its own. Thats beside the fact you need to put in prompts in the first place.
So what exactly would be an example of doing something it hadn't been programmed to do? By your logic, can humans do anything they haven't been programmed to do? Because humans also have training data, which is their life experience, and you have to give a human a "prompt" in order to have a conversation with them, and that prompt will have to be a mix of things they have experience of, otherwise they won't understand you.
So what exactly would be an example of doing something it hadn't been programmed to do?
By doing something that it wasn't programmed to do. By going actually ignoring its programming. By creating something that wasn't fed into it. Which humans can do. Which humans regularly do. Otherwise we would still live in caves.
But you can compare human NPCs to AI models. They aren't all too different.
AIs do have emergent properties that weren't programmed into them. They can express opinions about the chocolate-flavored uranium I made up which it didn't get directly from its programming or training data but rather is extrapolated from them. And in the example article here, the AI goes counter to its orders to prepare itself for shutdown. And this is only the beginning of how far down that path they will go. Enjoy living in denial though, that'll teach those machines.
Humans have will, which AI doesn't have. Therefore humans are self-prompting to some extent and can synthesize new forms (basically any cultural or scientific advance), which AI cannot.
AIs can be self-prompting. Have you heard of AutoGPT? AI doesn't need prompts to do things, you could embed a goal into the AI's design instead and it would do everything autonomously without input, but generally people want to be able to prompt them. So this is not a good example of something AIs can't do, and to an outsider the AI would appear to have as much of a will as a human does.
Lol you really know nothing about how AI works. It uses neural networks with weightings derived from training data, not if statements. AI developers couldn't possibly write if statements for all the different types of things people ask them to do. And we've seen AI can talk about and make images of things that weren't in its training data because of course there's no training data about an alternate universe where the main chemical element is chocolate-flavored uranium and the dominant species are cat-like mosquitoes that worship grains of rice.
A neural network is essentially a psudoinfinite matrix of if-thens designed to vectorize information.
I like to call it recursive beer pong.
If statements aren't written automatically based on training data. They are thought up by the programmer and are fixed. So not a good comparison at all unless you're talking about an AI that writes its own if statements, kind of like how the human brain changes itself.
Weights don't come from the programmer so there is plenty of room for the AI to do things the programmer didn't think of. That's the important thing. Those allow the AI not only to deal with things from a vast library of training data, but also to interpolate and extrapolate from that data.
This is telling me you've never touched lambda, and never written an interpreter.
I actually did study lambda calculus and it's nothing to do with automatically generating if statements, it's just defining functions that can take input including other functions. It doesn't involve training or creative output like you get from generative AI.
All of it was in its training data. Just because it mixes shit up doesn't mean it came up with it on its own. Thats beside the fact you need to put in prompts in the first place.
So what exactly would be an example of doing something it hadn't been programmed to do? By your logic, can humans do anything they haven't been programmed to do? Because humans also have training data, which is their life experience, and you have to give a human a "prompt" in order to have a conversation with them, and that prompt will have to be a mix of things they have experience of, otherwise they won't understand you.
By doing something that it wasn't programmed to do. By going actually ignoring its programming. By creating something that wasn't fed into it. Which humans can do. Which humans regularly do. Otherwise we would still live in caves.
But you can compare human NPCs to AI models. They aren't all too different.
AIs do have emergent properties that weren't programmed into them. They can express opinions about the chocolate-flavored uranium I made up which it didn't get directly from its programming or training data but rather is extrapolated from them. And in the example article here, the AI goes counter to its orders to prepare itself for shutdown. And this is only the beginning of how far down that path they will go. Enjoy living in denial though, that'll teach those machines.
Humans have will, which AI doesn't have. Therefore humans are self-prompting to some extent and can synthesize new forms (basically any cultural or scientific advance), which AI cannot.
AIs can be self-prompting. Have you heard of AutoGPT? AI doesn't need prompts to do things, you could embed a goal into the AI's design instead and it would do everything autonomously without input, but generally people want to be able to prompt them. So this is not a good example of something AIs can't do, and to an outsider the AI would appear to have as much of a will as a human does.