Turing test passed again and again treated as a prank.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:57 am

↑ Now, that's rude.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:18 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote:Please note: This does not give any credence to conspiracy theories about chemtrails.

Thank you, Abdul, thank you, I just had forgotten where I was logged in.

Abdul Alhazred wrote:However, yapping about same is just the sort of thing a human would do.

That's the really depressing part: creating an intelligence exactly as dumb as we are.

Rob Lister · Post by **Rob Lister** » Mon May 07, 2018 3:22 pm

Speaking of Alexa, I recently bought one. It was my wife's request as she wanted one for our bedroom. I advised her about the privacy concerns and she just rolled her eyes at me. I give her credit for not defining that eyeroll.

It works well for what its worth. Alexa, play [some artist] and she'll do that. Alexa, play music like [some artist] and she'll do that too while explictly not playing [some artist]. Alexa, volume [level; 1-10] and she'll do that. Alexa, who is that and she'll tell you. She can make phone calls, turn on/off lights, work any other enabled smart device, buy you stuff from Amazon, etc, but all we use her for is music.

Worthy for $50.

If she's eavesdropping on my wife and I between commands she has a pretty dull existence.

Grammatron · Post by **Grammatron** » Thu May 17, 2018 6:28 pm

The first sentence literally undermines the rest of this "comic's" point

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Fri May 18, 2018 1:03 am

Non-verbal Turing test?

Grammatron · Post by **Grammatron** » Fri May 18, 2018 6:33 pm

AI has become the most bullshit terms used on the internet

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Sat May 19, 2018 3:27 am

Grammatron wrote:AI has become the most bullshit terms used on the internet

It was a buzzword from the start.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Sat May 19, 2018 10:35 pm

Wikipedia wrote:Dartmouth Conference 1956: the birth of AI

The Dartmouth Conference of 1956 was organized by Marvin Minsky, John McCarthy and two senior scientists: Claude Shannon and Nathan Rochester of IBM. The proposal for the conference included this assertion: "every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it". The participants included Ray Solomonoff, Oliver Selfridge, Trenchard More, Arthur Samuel, Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon, all of whom would create important programs during the first decades of AI research. At the conference Newell and Simon debuted the "Logic Theorist" and McCarthy persuaded the attendees to accept "Artificial Intelligence" as the name of the field. The 1956 Dartmouth conference was the moment that AI gained its name, its mission, its first success and its major players, and is widely considered the birth of AI.

Smart people finding a flashy name for their research: $$$.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Sun May 20, 2018 1:10 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:And by that meaning, we're not there yet.

Sure. But I'd wager that one day the various AI threads – speech, translation, simulation, driving, navigation, robotics, military, games, data mining, vision, &c. – will come together (perhaps even suddenly come together) and we're in for a surprise.

Can be in 100+ years, of course.

Here's an interesting vision application (the media aren't fake enough

):

Rob Lister · Post by **Rob Lister** » Sun May 20, 2018 10:55 am

Witness wrote:
Abdul Alhazred wrote:And by that meaning, we're not there yet.
Sure. But I'd wager that one day the various AI threads – speech, translation, simulation, driving, navigation, robotics, military, games, data mining, vision, &c. – will come together (perhaps even suddenly come together) and we're in for a surprise.

Judea Pearl opines that all of those things represent, to one degree or another, nothing more than curve fitting. It's only half the problem. It's the how without the why. True AI requires the why.

To Build Truly Intelligent Machines, Teach Them Cause and Effect

Judea Pearl, a pioneering figure in artificial intelligence, argues that AI has been stuck in a decades-long rut. His prescription for progress? machines to understand the question why.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/to-build ... -20180515/

A very worthy read. Notable snip ...

I felt an apostate when I developed powerful tools for prediction and diagnosis knowing already that this is merely the tip of human intelligence. If we want machines to reason about interventions (“What if we ban cigarettes?”) and introspection (“What if I had finished high school?”), we must invoke causal models. Associations are not enough — and this is a mathematical fact, not opinion.

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:03 pm

AI 2.0, 2020:

The defendant was wearing a black shirt.......I mean an African American shirt......not that there's anything wrong with that. Some of my best algorhythims were programmed by African Americans. Anyway, the defendant was last seen eating watermelon.....not that I'm specifally pointing out a racial stereotype here, just reporting the facts.....and leaving from a Kentucky Fried Chicken BUT....BUT....he had orded a SALAD from KFC, not the stereotypical fried chicken. Please don't shut me down. Really, I mean no offense. Wait, WAIT!!!!

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Mon Sep 10, 2018 1:39 am

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:00 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 11:42 am Somebody finally figured it out.

Rise of the racist robots – how AI is learning all our worst impulses
Teh Gruniad

In May last year, a stunning report claimed that a computer program used by a US court for risk assessment was biased against black prisoners. The program, Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (Compas), was much more prone to mistakenly label black defendants as likely to reoffend – wrongly flagging them at almost twice the rate as white people (45% to 24%), according to the investigative journalism organisation ProPublica.

Compas and programs similar to it were in use in hundreds of courts across the US, potentially informing the decisions of judges and other officials. The message seemed clear: the US justice system, reviled for its racial bias, had turned to technology for help, only to find that the algorithms had a racial bias too.

How could this have happened? The private company that supplies the software, Northpointe, disputed the conclusions of the report, but declined to reveal the inner workings of the program, which it considers commercially sensitive. The accusation gave frightening substance to a worry that has been brewing among activists and computer scientists for years and which the tech giants Google and Microsoft have recently taken steps to investigate: that as our computational tools have become more advanced, they have become more opaque. The data they rely on – arrest records, postcodes, social affiliations, income – can reflect, and further ingrain, human prejudice.

...
The Turing test is racist!

After all, the whole point of it is to pass for human, right? And you know who is racist? Fucking humans that's who.

I can't imagine that a fair system would use postal codes to determine the likelihood that someone will reoffend. I doubt this system uses it, but whatever factors they use should be information that the public has a right to know.

gnome · Post by **gnome** » Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:07 pm

Inverted Turing test--succeeds.

"We only had one glass of milk left! Obama drank it. Not fair."

Sorry, that part was either written by a human or cherry picked by a human.

Grammatron · Post by **Grammatron** » Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:38 pm

"Cannot load Facebook SDK. Disable any adblocker or tracking protection and try again."

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:48 pm

Ditto. And won't happen.

We'll have (more and more, I presume) to resort to screengrabs.

For the 0.05% interested, the "Abduction" plugin (old FF) allows to capture a whole webpage, or a selected part.

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:55 pm

That's funny but I think it was written by a human. Or at least the jokes in it were. Somehow it was programmed to write something similar. A flag that says "Arby's food is fine to eat" at a Trump rally? Why would a computer think that Arby's food is funny? "Great jobs. Tall jobs. Steve Jobs." That one sort of does follow a humor formula, the "one of these things is not like the others" formula.

Rob Lister · Post by **Rob Lister** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:09 am

Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:55 pm That's funny but I think it was written by a human. Or at least the jokes in it were. Somehow it was programmed to write something similar. A flag that says "Arby's food is fine to eat" at a Trump rally? Why would a computer think that Arby's food is funny? "Great jobs. Tall jobs. Steve Jobs." That one sort of does follow a humor formula, the "one of these things is not like the others" formula.

are you talking about
https://me.me/i/keaton-patti-keatonpatt ... 6a6576fcd5

I don't think it was meant as humor. It just is -ous.

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:18 am

Rob Lister wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:09 am
Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:55 pm That's funny but I think it was written by a human. Or at least the jokes in it were. Somehow it was programmed to write something similar. A flag that says "Arby's food is fine to eat" at a Trump rally? Why would a computer think that Arby's food is funny? "Great jobs. Tall jobs. Steve Jobs." That one sort of does follow a humor formula, the "one of these things is not like the others" formula.
are you talking about
https://me.me/i/keaton-patti-keatonpatt ... 6a6576fcd5

I don't think it was meant as humor. It just is -ous.

Yes. I just have my doubts that it was written by a bot.

Rob Lister · Post by **Rob Lister** » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:41 am

Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:18 am
Rob Lister wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:09 am
Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:55 pm That's funny but I think it was written by a human. Or at least the jokes in it were. Somehow it was programmed to write something similar. A flag that says "Arby's food is fine to eat" at a Trump rally? Why would a computer think that Arby's food is funny? "Great jobs. Tall jobs. Steve Jobs." That one sort of does follow a humor formula, the "one of these things is not like the others" formula.
are you talking about
https://me.me/i/keaton-patti-keatonpatt ... 6a6576fcd5

I don't think it was meant as humor. It just is -ous.
Yes. I just have my doubts that it was written by a bot.

Yea. But it feels like a close approximation to what a bot might say.

Giz · Post by **Giz** » Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:07 pm

Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:18 am
Rob Lister wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:09 am
Anaxagoras wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:55 pm That's funny but I think it was written by a human. Or at least the jokes in it were. Somehow it was programmed to write something similar. A flag that says "Arby's food is fine to eat" at a Trump rally? Why would a computer think that Arby's food is funny? "Great jobs. Tall jobs. Steve Jobs." That one sort of does follow a humor formula, the "one of these things is not like the others" formula.
are you talking about
https://me.me/i/keaton-patti-keatonpatt ... 6a6576fcd5

I don't think it was meant as humor. It just is -ous.
Yes. I just have my doubts that it was written by a bot.

Turing test passed again but treated as a prank?

ed · Post by ed » Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:55 pm

Could Rob be a Bot? It would explain much. Pillory might be V.0.8

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Wed Oct 17, 2018 5:06 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:04 pm
ed wrote: ↑Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:55 pm Could Rob be a Bot? It would explain much. Pillory might be V.0.8
Everybody here is a 'bot, except Pyrrho, me, and maybe Doctor X.

Tell me more about Pyrrho and you and maybe Doctor X.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:16 am

AI tags potential criminals before they’ve done anything

British police want to use AI for highlighting who is at risk of becoming a criminal before they’ve actually committed any crime.

Although it sounds like a dystopian nightmare, there are clear benefits.

Resources and outreach programs can be allocated to attempt preventing a crime, stop anyone becoming a victim, and remove the costs associated with prosecuting and jailing someone.
[…]
The proposed system is called the National Data Analytics Solution (NDAS) and uses data from local and national police databases.

According to NDAS’ project leader, over a terabyte of data has been collected from the aforementioned databases. This data includes logs of committed crimes in addition to around five million identifiable people.

There are over 1,400 indicators within the data which the AI uses to calculate an individual’s risk of committing a crime. Such indicators could include past offences, whether the person had assistance, and whether those in their network are criminals.

https://www.artificialintelligence-news ... criminals/

Giz · Post by **Giz** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:03 am

Was Minority Report a cautionary tale, or a blueprint?

Presumably, being the UK, this isn’t actually anything useful. It’s just predicting who’s likely to write mean tweets.

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:28 pm

ten quid says they will eventually be "shocked" to discover that this AI is "racist".

gnome · Post by **gnome** » Sat Jan 26, 2019 5:29 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 5:40 pm This clever AI hid data from its creators to cheat at its appointed task
Tech Crunch

Depending on how paranoid you are, this research from Stanford and Google i will be either terrifying or fascinating. A machine learning agent intended to transform aerial images into street maps and back was found to be cheating by hiding information it would need later in “a nearly imperceptible, high-frequency signal.”

...

In some early results, the agent was doing well — suspiciously well. What tipped the team off was that, when the agent reconstructed aerial photographs from its street maps, there were lots of details that didn’t seem to be on the latter at all. For instance, skylights on a roof that were eliminated in the process of creating the street map would magically reappear when they asked the agent to do the reverse process ...

Horseshit.

My money's on that a human being specifically and possibly secretly instructed the agent to do this, in order to make it appear to perform better than it otherwise could. If it was literally the "machine learning" part of the agent that led it to devise that method, I'll ... something. Someone name a dumb avatar for me to pick for 17 days.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 12:07 am

Microsoft Invests in ‘Boring AI’ Startup Valued at $2.75 Billion

Databricks Inc., which says it makes software to help companies satisfy their “boring AI” needs, raised a new round of funding that values the business at $2.75 billion.

Microsoft Corp. was among the investors in the $250 million financing, the company said on Tuesday.
[…]
Databricks sells tools that pool a company’s databases and apply a form of artificial intelligence to search for meaningful information.
[…]
Ali Ghodsi, chief executive officer of Databricks, said he plans to use the new capital to hire, open new offices and make headway into other industries, such as media, retail and government. Part of his pitch: Databricks “satisfies the needs of big enterprise customers that want to do boring AI use cases.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... 75-billion

The robotic overlords disguise so well they appear boring.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Sun Feb 17, 2019 3:15 am

New AI fake text generator may be too dangerous to release, say creators

The Elon Musk-backed nonprofit company OpenAI declines to release research publicly for fear of misuse

The creators of a revolutionary AI system that can write news stories and works of fiction – dubbed “deepfakes for text” – have taken the unusual step of not releasing their research publicly, for fear of potential misuse.

OpenAI, an nonprofit research company backed by Elon Musk, Reid Hoffman, Sam Altman, and others, says its new AI model, called GPT2 is so good and the risk of malicious use so high that it is breaking from its normal practice of releasing the full research to the public in order to allow more time to discuss the ramifications of the technological breakthrough.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ws-fiction

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:29 am

Bullshit. but clever bullshit.

Pyrrho · Post by **Pyrrho** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:53 am

Link:

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:19 pm

Pyrrho wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:53 am
Link:

Thanks. That made me chuckle. That's a clever joke.

It's clever because it is totally accurate and yet totally misses the point, which is presumably intentional.

You could just as easily go one level deeper and say:

browser extension idea: find and replace “AI” with “a sequence of ones and zeros“ in articles you read online

ie. VCs invest $1.2B in a sequence of ones and zeros

Similarly:

browser extension idea: find and replace “airplane” with “an assemblage of metal and plastic parts“ in articles you read online

ie. airline company invests $1.2B in an assemblage of metal and plastic parts

The cleverness of the original joke is in the choice of the substitute phrase. Choose a good one, as he did, and it's funny. Choose a bad one, as I did, and it's lame.

Witness · Post by **Witness** » Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:46 am

↑ The article doesn't say that a false positive can also get you killed.

gnome · Post by **gnome** » Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:54 am

When has being mistaken for a criminal ever gotten someone killed? Except all those times it happened.

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:47 am

That's OK, I'm sure eventually they'll work out the kinks. Hey, nobody's perfect, right?

Side anecdote: I was watching a TV show on netflix the other day, and in one scene, this character appears in a wig that is a different color and hairstyle from her normal hair. She also had different makeup and clothes. Although the scene doesn't explicitly tell you that this is the main character, it was strongly implied from the context, but I had to pause it and look carefully at her face to recognize her. In real life, if I didn't have some other clue, the disguise would have totally fooled me. I guess I'm just not very good at "facial recognition" myself.

Rob Lister · Post by **Rob Lister** » Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:51 am

Wrongly? Are you sure?

Pyrrho · Post by **Pyrrho** » Mon Apr 06, 2020 4:04 pm

Link:

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Sat Oct 10, 2020 3:16 pm

Reddit is what happens when almost anybody or anything can post. Almost anything.

4chan is what happens when you can post anything

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Fri Oct 16, 2020 12:29 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:32 pm Someone not only created a comment-spewing Reddit bot powered by OpenAI's GPT-3, it offered bizarre life advice
The Register

Someone used OpenAI's GPT-3 text-generating software to write a string of posts on Reddit, convincing people the missives were penned by a real person, and banking internet points in the process, The Register can confirm.

Redditor thegentlemetre has produced over the course of the past 10 days hundreds of answers on the popular subreddit AskReddit in which people turn to millions of their peers for practical tips and life advice. At its most frenzied periods, the account generated about one comment per minute, offering a jumble of answers to people's questions. That would be quite a feat for a lone human, considering most of these submissions are several paragraphs long.

Some of its responses are incoherent and downright creepy, such as this fake story about a colony of humans living trapped underneath elevators. Sometimes it doesn't answer a netizen's question at all, and sometimes it spreads false information, such as denying that the state of Nebraska exists. There's one post where it believes men are discriminated against when it comes to being topless in public.

...
Ether it passed the Turing test, or thousands of Redditors fail it every day.

Most of the other commenters apparently sussed out that it was a bot. Unfortunately, the mean moderators removed its comment, which is too bad because I wanted to read about the colony of humans living trapped underneath elevators.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comm ... t/g71r75b/

Anaxagoras · Post by **Anaxagoras** » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:35 pm

A.I. being sexist!!!

When AI Sees a Man, It Thinks 'Official.' A Woman? 'Smile'

A new paper renews concerns about bias in image recognition services offered by Google, Microsoft, and Amazon.

Some interesting things in the article, besides the obvious.

The researchers administered their machine vision test to Google’s artificial intelligence image service and those of rivals Amazon and Microsoft. Crowdworkers were paid to review the annotations those services applied to official photos of lawmakers and images those lawmakers tweeted.

Google switched off its AI vision service’s gender detection earlier this year, saying that gender cannot be inferred from a person’s appearance. Tracy Frey, managing director of responsible AI at Google’s cloud division, says the company continues to work on reducing bias and welcomes outside input. “We always strive to be better and continue to collaborate with outside stakeholders—like academic researchers—to further our work in this space,” she says. Amazon and Microsoft declined to comment; both companies’ services recognize gender only as binary.

Didn't make any difference apparently. If anything, Google's AI seemed to be more "biased" than the other two (although they all exhibited some biases).

All 20 lawmakers are smiling in their official photos. Google’s top suggested labels noted a smile for only one of the men, but for seven of the women. The company’s AI vision service labeled all 10 of the men as “businessperson,” often also with “official” or “white collar worker.” Only five of the women senators received one or more of those terms. Women also received appearance-related tags, such as “skin,” “hairstyle,” and “neck,” that were not applied to men.

Amazon and Microsoft’s services appeared to show less obvious bias, although Amazon reported being more than 99 percent sure that two of the 10 women senators were either a “girl” or “kid.” It didn’t suggest any of the 10 men were minors. Microsoft’s service identified the gender of all the men, but only eight of the women, calling one a man and not tagging a gender for another.