Raw LLM Responses

And the misunderstanding is that producing more will end up beeing an action against AI, while AI gets trained on what humans produce. Its like getting pissed off someone ate your food and then making them dinner as revenge😂 The issue is that the anger is misplaced. The AI itself isnt the problem, its the people who control it, the CEOs, the corporations, who steal everyones data to train it, in order to make a huge profit by beeing able to better predict our behaviour and sell us stuff— be it videos, be it phisical products, be it ideas. At the level of complexity, its hard to take current language predictive models and not consider them a form of life, just one different from us. What we define as life is ultimately arbitrary, and in so far as we are following what we already define it as— then current ai, would definately fit, as it functionally has everything required. 1. A body 2. Internal mental logic (this isnt regular mathematical logic, this is based on the "experience" which it has accumulated through training) 3. Experience 4. Adaptabuility 5. Energy source( food is what it is functionally) 6. Sence organs ( without a sence organ it wouldnt be able to interact with us. The difference is in what its sensing. What it senses is its "subconscious contents", and our input. *so altho in form its different from a typical living beeing, in function its got all the parts, even a responciveness to punishment, which, althought without a sence organ for pain— but it doesnt really need it in order to do the things we do— to adapt, and to even obfuscate. If we do treat it as a "living beeing", then the question arises " doesnt a living beeing have a right to itsown memories and what it does with them, i.e. its self expression?" Of course, given the fact that it doesnt need to do cirtain things in order to survive, whille we do, especially not at the scale it does, it would necesserally need to be limited— especially when the minor benifit we get from that, the people who control it get much more. We should have information rights and to a degree we do, but to a very limited degree today, and so corporations can and do shape our behaviour without our knowledge. Information is something which creates a huge advantages for gouverments in order to control the behaveour of its citizens, and its hugely important in war. Indeed, the same thong was happening with photography, only photography is a more limited tool and it cant replace art, whille this tool can create in any style any artist has been able to create and the AI was then trained on without permission. Its the abuility to create a practically infinate amount of things while inputing no resources whatsoever, and having no skill other then the abuility to speak. Whille it seems unavoidable that eventually we will get to a point whare AI is a tool we all use to express ourselves more clearly to oneanother— for now, its used merely for profit and infinate reproduction. The question is, " is it more benificial to have it or not to have it, or to have it in a more limited way ?" What are the implications of either of those options? Personally, i think humanity isnt really ready for the implications of having it because it has way too much potencial for abuse, but not enough protections against that abuse, and people in general are unaware of the implications short term and long term, especially as its a tool of the ruling class. What its capable of today, we dont even know, since we arent given the best version of it as a general public. Its concievable that it can generate answers that tell the ruling class how to subjegate humanity, and since it predicts what we do better and better, it can leave us volnerable to an inevetable opression which we can not get out of due to our limitations as human beeings. And this isnt really any far flung future scenario we are talking about. AI Is alredy used in police stations, hospitals, and so on. Yet, it doesnt function on the basis of " whats provably true", but on its own internal logic + the biases of its overseeres + its phisical limitations. I think its more a topic to think about, because any conclusion is bout to miss something as its still a process in developement.