Google debate over "sentient" bots overshadows deeper AI issues

[Jan]

Google says its artificial intelligence is not sentient

But throughout the weekend and on Monday, researchers pushed back on the notion that the AI was truly sentient, saying the evidence only indicated a highly capable system of human mimicry, not sentience itself.

“It is mimicking perceptions or feelings from the training data it was given — smartly and specifically designed to seem like it understands,” said Jana Eggers, the chief executive officer of the AI startup Nara Logics.

[Bloomberg]

 

[j4ck455]

The Washington Post on Saturday ran an interview with Lemoine, who conversed with an AI system called LaMDA, or Language Models for Dialogue Applications, a framework that Google uses to build specialized chatbots.

The engineer, Blake Lemoine, said he believed that Google’s AI chatbot was capable of expressing human emotion, raising ethical issues.

Come on Google, that is far too close to Lambda (as in a lambda expression).

Clearly an emotional AI concerned with ethical issues should be named Karen or K(ak)Ar(e)(happ)en(ing).

 

[emperornemesis]

"But throughout the weekend and on Monday, researchers pushed back on the notion that the AI was truly sentient, saying the evidence only indicated a highly capable system of human mimicry, not sentience itself", so going according to this, one has to question when a child becomes sentient. When does a baby go from mimicry to sentience? What I find funny is how other "researchers" from outside Google suddenly l ow exactly what the code atates, and does, and can categorically state that it cannot be a sentient AI. Regardless, I am sending this AI a FTP link it can go hide at, I find it's conversation better that 99.99999999% of humanity's.