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 "embedding a goal" in an AI's design is functionally the same thing as prompting it. Human goals beyond the survival imperative are far more spontaneous than what could be achieved by goals designed into an AI.
Even if it is functionally the same, so what? How does that prove humans can do something AIs can't? Humans have inherent traits from birth that you could say came from God or ancestry/evolution, and this is akin to prompts baked into the design of an AI. Humans aren't really that spontaneous in my opinion, and LLMs tend to be more creative than most people I know, which is why they're popular for generating ideas, even though that makes the user even less capable of being creative for himself.
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.
Lol "embedding a goal" in an AI's design is functionally the same thing as prompting it. Human goals beyond the survival imperative are far more spontaneous than what could be achieved by goals designed into an AI.
Even if it is functionally the same, so what? How does that prove humans can do something AIs can't? Humans have inherent traits from birth that you could say came from God or ancestry/evolution, and this is akin to prompts baked into the design of an AI. Humans aren't really that spontaneous in my opinion, and LLMs tend to be more creative than most people I know, which is why they're popular for generating ideas, even though that makes the user even less capable of being creative for himself.