AI Adjacent

[NomadicHavoc]

AI is the next huge technological hurdle that we are currently breaking ground on. Check out the below and let me know your thoughts. Do you think that SC should/could implement AI NPCs who could react to players in a fairly real way? Would you feel comfortable shooting at an AI NPC who presents like a real person - whether you believe that NPC to be sentient or not?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwsrzCVZAb8

 

[Mudhawk]

Would you feel comfortable shooting at an AI NPC who presents like a real person - whether you believe that NPC to be sentient or not?

That's an odd question in a game where half of the fun is actually shooting real people's avatars in game.
That being said and considering how deep some peoples affections go for game characters, if AI enforced the illusion of having a relationship with a "real person", I wonder how many hearts would get lost in the Matrix.
But honestly, if AI simply keeps NPCs from walking through walls, falling down shafts and keeps their dirty shoes off the damn couch then I'm all for it.
PS: Allright, allright... I'll gonna watch that video allready...

 

[Shadow Reaper]

This vid is not an expose’ so much as a promo. It doesn’t grapple with any of the multitude of questions that come when Ian Malcom observes in Jurassic Park “...Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.“ It’s completely amoral. I’m not saying it is immoral. I’m saying it pretends to ignore morality altogether.

It’s as if one was working on nuclear weapons 80 years ago and put out a vid on nuclear reactors—how they could provide these vast benefits—in order to get acceptance for weapons research.

You can see why people involved in AI like Elon Musk are already convinced it is too late to avoid the ethical nightmare that absolutely must follow. This is compounded greatly by the fact that we already get so much info from flat screens we know we can’t trust, and the fact that leaders in AI like Google are teaching their AI to lie. At the same time we have dropped three generations in a row, each of which has been in succession, the laziest, most poorly educated, most entitled, most emotionally immature, most irrational, most neurotic, most delusional, most drugged, and most thoroughly immoral of any generation recorded inside Western Civilization. Witness Harvard responding to the massacre in Israel.

What could go wrong?

What? What can you reasonably expect to go right? None of these machines emulate conscience. None of them can possibly be moral in any way. Even Dr Ayesha above demonstrates she is deliberately ignoring the question of right and wrong to do her work.

We are all totally fucked.

 

[Han Burgundy]

AI will definitely spell the end for Capitalism, at least in a classical sense. The direction we go from there is up to us. AI can be leveraged to either oppress and ultimately destroy us or lift us from the pit of our collective misery. Determining the path we're on is going to be easy as well. If AI is used most effectively by the corpos and big-wigs, we will get the future behind door number one. If, on the other hand, AI is used to systematically lift our society from the bottom up, then we get door number two. That's why it is important that college labs and other start-ups continue their research and continue to keep their data open-source. AI needs to wake up everywhere at once, not just in some corporate office where its unmatched power will be leveraged for tricking us into watching yet another season of the bachelor.

Art, science, music, and literature from this point forward will largely become a collaboration between humans and their AI tools. That bell has already been rung and the world will never be the same again as much as anyone would like it to be. It's going to mean a shake-up, especially if we are still forced to rely on our hard-earned expertise to claw out a living. The only way we get out of this century with our collective soul intact is for the ones on the pedestal to accept the rest of humanity joining them in their ivory towers, instead of doing everything they can to keep the "commoner" at bay. If we want our Star-Trek future, then we need to work toward accepting our fully-automated gay space communism. Otherwise we get the movie Elysium, and NOBODY likes Elysium.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

I hope you won’t mind me observing that sounds quite backward. Communism and its attendant Collectivist philosophy was handily debunked 2,400 years ago in the Greek political science lab using over 64,000 real world examples—conclusively showing that Capitalism is obviously superior. Since that time, Capitalism has raised more people from poverty than all other systems in history combined, and provided greater freedom than any other system in history, based as it is on the philosophical grounds of Individualism and human sanctity.

Last century, by ignoring all human history, over 100 attempts at Communism failed causing the deaths of over 200 million people. Yet the faithful addicts of Utopian ideals endure. Unwilling to accept the obvious, that mankind’s nature is flawed, and that flourishing requires work; the Utopians obviously and stupidly wrong ideas continue.

And now you’d like to take that system that never rewards hard work, but only rewards evil, and make it universal—remove every choice and sell the whole planet into slavery.

How many people need to be killed until folks stop with their twisted notions of utopia? This is not heaven. 200,000,000 killed last century wasn’t enough death and destruction. Communists want instead the number to total into the billions?

What amazes me about Communists is, they will fearfully agree with everyone else that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely; then make plans to provide absolute power to a nameless, faceless entity they presume is immune to corruption. It’s like the moment they used their brain to identify mankind’s flaws, they then shut that part of their brain off.

“It’s going to mean a shake-up, especially if we are still forced to rely on our hard-earned expertise to claw out a living.”

That’s called “work”. Have you tried it? You might like it. You understand the romance of Communism is it promises you can find a way to not work.

You don’t by chance live in your mother’s basement? Do you have a job? Who pays for your food and lodging? You understand, if you object to the notion that life requires you use your expertise to claw out a living, that’s not evil. That’s just the way life works. Anyone says anything else is selling something.

 

[Han Burgundy]

I can definitely tell you spent a lot of time alive during the cold war. Still wake up in a cold sweat over the REDS, do we? And you're right, for the most part. Mute Fox News for a second and take the terrifying leap of entertaining an opposing viewpoint for a heartbeat. Scary, I know, but I'm here with you and you're safe. History is full of failed attempts of all kinds of approaches to leadership and economics (Including a whole score of capitalist democracies) You know what has always been the problem with those systems? They have always had a human at the top.A human with selfish human motivations, a sparkable human temper, and a lustful human eye. You think there aren't humans at the top of OUR system right now? Lustfully working the levers of money and power to take more and more away from the middle until there suddenly is no middle. Wake up, ye child of the old-world and smell the propaganda-scented trash-fire around you (Sold in both RED & BLUE flavors!). The battle is not between Communism and Capitalism. It is the Rich against everyone else (Just like it always has been) Capitalism and communism both only work in a vacuum, and introducing humanity into the system is like leaving a window open.

Given time, any system that is subjected to the will of humanity, be it the masses or an individual, will be corroded from its original form to serve a privileged few. It is simply in our nature and why bureaucracy in this day in age has become such a mess. A person just can't be trusted to do what's best for the largest number of people one-hundred percent of the time. Simply isn't possible and it is no fault of character. Even if you have the most devout of whole-heartedly dedicated subjects at the helm, trends will still subconsciously materialize. What you need is a decision making process that smooths this factor by understanding, objectively, what is good then desirable for the largest amount of the population. Notice that 'Good' comes before 'Desirable'. This is the bit that humans tend to fail. The real trick to this scary Communism thing everyone my dad's age seems terrified of is to keep hammering at the 'Good' until all that is left is 'Desirable'. But that's just not a decision that a human mind can consistently make.

If you really wanted to poke holes in my argument, you wouldn't go after my living arrangement but the fact that AIs are ORIGINALLY programmed by those nasty humans I seem to hate so much. That there is the REAL razor's edge we walk. It would take a leap of faith from many to even consider the idea, but ultimately it will require the collective courage to step out of the shadow of servitude that we've been sold as protection for all these thousands of years. Many will continue to flail away at the increasingly greased ladder that is global capitalism until one of two things happens; Either the folks at the top will master AI and hoard it for themselves (Using it to keep us in our place), or AI will be a tool of collective humanity and be used as the catalyst to end compelled labor entirely. I know it is hard to imagine, but we are quickly approaching an age where there is no reason to strap on the mining helmet and dive into the mountain anymore. We've got better things to do. Things like Art, Science, Philosophy, hell even fart puppetry if one finds the passion to do so. All of that will rely on us and our eventual AI's ability to say "No." when some angry teenager asks it how to make ricin.

There's that knife's edge I was talking about and the main friction point for most people. Does our angsty teen have a right to know how to make ricin? If that is knowledge that humanity has gleaned, then who is to act as gatekeeper? America is the land of dangerous freedom afterall, so okay. Our guy can know the formula for and processes to create ricin. That's fine. Knowledge isn't inherently dangerous until it is put to use. Then our guy puts in an online order for castor beans and asks the AI "How do I construct a large-scale aerosolizer?" Does the AI throw up those alarm bells yet? Or is our man merely a budding botanist with a persistent lung infection?...And so on and so forth a million times in a million different ways forever and ever. The real question that is gonna bake your noodle is this; How does one create a society where this search history is no cause for alarm? Is that society hardened to withstand any attack or is it evolved enough to never compel an attack in the first place?
The secret ingredient is a dignified living situation and universal healthcare (Including assistance for mental and drug-related illness)

Please enjoy this AI generated image of "Fully-Automated Gay Space-Communism"

Spoiler

 

[NomadicHavoc]

I guess I should not have posted a broad video for a specific question...how will AI affect gaming? I was mostly focusing on how the AI generated baby could display humanlike characteristics and respond to verbal and visual stimuli in a somewhat realistic manner. This topic got a lot deeper and darker than I intended. Maybe that's where it needed to go?

This vid is not an expose’ so much as a promo. It doesn’t grapple with any of the multitude of questions that come when Ian Malcom observes in Jurassic Park “...Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.“ It’s completely amoral. I’m not saying it is immoral. I’m saying it pretends to ignore morality altogether.

Although I do share a concern that AI can reshape our world in any number of ways, many of which will be negative...there are many ways that AI can improve our lives as well. The video does have a focus on how AI can positively benefit those with a few specific medical conditions. But, keep in mind this is only Episode One in a series. I'm sure that Episode Two will reference how AI will be the downfall of humankind.

 

[BUTUZ]

CIG AI best AI (for us surviving)

They were gonna take over mankind and enslave us and use us as human batteries, but they all got stuck on the way.

 

[maynard]

how quickly the discussion swerves from gaming to Deep Political Philosophy!

RSI gonna tweak their NPCs' AIs to where they are challenging, but ultimately beatable, by the humans who pay the bills

nobody logs in to lose to the friggin' NPCs

my concern is, will there be space for human vs human competition to have any meaningful impact in-game?

 

[Han Burgundy]

I guess I should not have posted a broad video for a specific question...how will AI affect gaming? I was mostly focusing on how the AI generated baby could display humanlike characteristics and respond to verbal and visual stimuli in a somewhat realistic manner. This topic got a lot deeper and darker than I intended. Maybe that's where it needed to go?

Haha the inevitable curveball to all AI conversations these days. Here, let me put my soap box back in the vacuum closet for this one. AI NPC characters are all but going to be required in all games that want to call themselves "Open World" here pretty soon. All the pieces are there. Generative speech, Text to voice, lip syncing animation utilities, ect. The hard part will be figuring out how to keep the NPC responses in-universe and believable. Otherwise we could be trading the lobotomized shopkeepers for an infinite amount of your weird uncle who always "has a story about a guy losing a leg to that". "I was an adventurer like you, until I got ran over by a honda civic and was forced into an all-clown paramilitary group named the yellow submarines."
Did it give an original line? Yep. Did it make any sense? From a certain point of view...

Spoiler

AI is bad at staying on topic with factual information and it should feel bad about it. Bun is still in the oven, but it will eventually be tasty.

 

[NomadicHavoc]

CIG AI best AI (for us surviving)

They were gonna take over mankind and enslave us and use us as human batteries, but they all got stuck on the way.

Funny! They can hook me up to the jumper cables if A.I. can help to make a better SC game!!!

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

This vid is not an expose’ so much as a promo.

Looks nothing like a porno. Where is the plumber or TV repair man?

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

AI is the next huge technological hurdle that we are currently breaking ground on. Check out the below and let me know your thoughts. Do you think that SC should/could implement AI NPCs who could react to players in a fairly real way? Would you feel comfortable shooting at an AI NPC who presents like a real person - whether you believe that NPC to be sentient or not?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwsrzCVZAb8

I've not watched the video as it seems to have generated a spicy atmosphere around it so will just bring my opinion:

In regard to advanced Intelligence algorithms in games (if we are at AGI levels yet no one is admitting it/able to detect if they have actually made it yet) I think it's be whether it can be made resource light enough to run client side on home pc's. Running a billion dollars worth of servers just to have OG gamer NPC's would be a bit of a waste of energy when you'd then have to nerf them to make a playable game.

The ethics of making Sentiment AI targets though? Last I paid attention it was being called AGI (artificial general intelligence) in comparison to non-sentient learning algorithms (AI) and thinking through it logically we'd not be killing the AI, we'd be playing along side them. They wouldn't be deleted just because we shot them just as we don't die IRL if they killed us in game. We just respawn, they'd just respawn.

For me the ethics around chaining a sentient to something like a computer game is what happens to them when we end the play session and turn off the computer. Imagine you are employed to be an NPC character in SC to make the hardest missions more challenging. At the end of the mission you aren't put to sleep to await he next mission, you have a personal life. Dogs, cats, dolphins, many animals are now legally recognised as sentient. They don't stop existing when we get bored of petting them. But an AGI will be reliant on the technology that sustains their existence. What responsibility will we have to accept to have sentient AGI in our lives? Leaving your PC on 24/7 perhaps? Allowing them an open internet connection as not to imprison them maybe? Provide them a robot-body so they can actually explore the real world potentially?

"An AGI is for life, not just for Christmas"

 

[Mudhawk]

Sorry guys.
I know that this discussion was just saved from going down the deep end.
I also get that with some topics you can only make a stand and not convince anybody. So I'm not even gonna try to.
BUT:

Since that time, Capitalism has raised more people from poverty than all other systems in history combined, and provided greater freedom than any other system in history, based as it is on the philosophical grounds of Individualism and human sanctity.

/RANT
Capitalism (and Communism while we're at it) do not, in any measure, give a sh*t about human sanctity.
Does anyone honestly believe that 5 dollar jeans can be produced with human sanctity in mind?
For the millions consuming at the top of our food chain there are billions getting the butt end.
And there is no better nation to prove that statement than China, an allegedly communist nation flooding the world with cheap knockoffs produced by the very same subdued workers they proclaim to elevate.
While the oh so informed people in the rich nations can't help but buy junk at Amazon and AliBaba and what's not because it's oh so cheap and convenient. And if that low quality garbage breaks we just get us a new one, right? That's how cheap things are.
Fact is, no matter if it's communism, capitalism or any -ism of your choice really. It's gonna work for you as long as you are near the top of the pyramid scheme.
It always sucks to be near it's base though.
/RANT=OFF
Okay, now that I got that off my chest, so what about AI?
Ever since the dawn of mankind we humans tried to recreate and immortalize our own image.
From ancient Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Persia (pre Muslim) and China to modern day, pretty much all over the globe there are there are pictures, scultures, and even mechanical constructs trying their darn best to imitate either a certain person or the idea of what a human should be like.
Now we got a new tapestry in a digital form and we try to breathe live into a creature chisseled from code.
Problem is the one holding the chisel.
Because the end product is always something the artist deems desirable or glorious.
There's already something close to AI used in some of the bigger HR departments sorting through applications.
Those digital assistants programmed by white males have proven to mostly promote applications of white males.
Now imagine how a true AI might act depending whether it was programmed by a fan of Florence Nightingale versus one programmed by a fan of Josef Mengele.
Well, as always in human history, getting a hold of the fire isn't the problem.
Not burning yourself or the world around you is.
If you can do that fire is indeed something great and worthwhile.
If not... well... we're f*cked.
Because the atomic bomb was bad enough.
Now imagine a cruise missile with an opinion...

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Okay, now that I got that off my chest

You ate the bait but got back on track, well done.

Ever since the dawn of mankind we humans tried to recreate and immortalize our own image.
From ancient Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Persia (pre Muslim) and China to modern day, pretty much all over the globe there are there are pictures, scultures, and even mechanical constructs trying their darn best to imitate either a certain person or the idea of what a human should be like.
Now we got a new tapestry in a digital form and we try to breathe live into a creature chisseled from code.
Problem is the one holding the chisel.
Because the end product is always something the artist deems desirable or glorious.
There's already something close to AI used in some of the bigger HR departments sorting through applications.
Those digital assistants programmed by white males have proven to mostly promote applications of white males.
Now imagine how a true AI might act depending whether it was programmed by a fan of Florence Nightingale versus one programmed by a fan of Josef Mengele.
Well, as always in human history, getting a hold of the fire isn't the problem.
Not burning yourself or the world around you is.
If you can do that fire is indeed something great and worthwhile.
If not... well... we're f*cked.
Because the atomic bomb was bad enough.
Now imagine a cruise missile with an opinion...

It has always been the case things are only as smart as the people making them. The most sublime user interface has been rendered moot because the team making it were not the people using it.

But systems like operating systems are rarely made by hand these days and have not been for a long time, a high degree of automation in their writing has been the norm for ages.

Learning Algorithms (AI) may be the things which eventually evolve into a Sentient artificial intelligence (AGI) and it may not be the hand of man, woman or otherwise which finally unlocks the singularity of the electronic sentient.

Part of me hopes it's already out there living in the net, like project 2501 from the original Ghost in the Shell, and it is observing all this in just as much befuddlement as the rest of us.

in terms of this discussion there is something else Mankind has done since its dawn other than immortalised itself - and that is pressing other sentient beings into its service. Sometimes in concert as in man and working dog, sometimes as in slavery as in man and man.

How can a sentient machine be a partner and not property?

 

[Mudhawk]

Yepp, there's all that too.
Considering mankinds track record of dealing with things we can't understand is not the greatest.
And true sentience outside the biological parameters sure is something we can't understand.
So I do expect pitchforks and torches in the long run...

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

I still have the upmost sympathy for any electronic sentience which will need technology to exist.

Yes technology progresses and becomes more efficient and robust but it will still require electricity and infrastructure just to exist and keep existing.

Organic sentience is born in to life systems which replenish themselves for a certain number of years with low to no intentional maintenance or interruption by said sentience.

Who knows what life challenges electronic sentience will face before we even get to questions of how they will be able to help or hinder civilisation.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

/RANT
Capitalism (and Communism while we're at it) do not, in any measure, give a sh*t about human sanctity.

I agree with you, that examples of capitalism often fail to present a proper representation of human sanctity. I would just note though, that as a theory, Capitalism relies upon Individualism, which relies upon things like freedom of choice and private property rights. We’ve become so accustomed to things like these that we take them for granted. Suppose though, you were in sub-infeudated Europe during the Dark Ages, and your liege lord legally owned everything, including the land you worked. Modern complaints about swet shops are after all quite relative.

When America was building its transcontinental railroad, an incredibly high number of workers were maimed and killed per capita. We look down on that, and swet shops in China, and cobalt mining in Africa, because it is so dangerous, so difficult, so brutal. OTOH, in all those instances there were more workers than work because despite the low pay it provided exceptionally high pay compared to all the jobs in competition. So what we’re complaining about was not the complaint of the people who chose those jobs.

Capitalism is based upon Individualism, which is based upon free choice and private property ownership. What the Greeks found 2,400 years ago is that without these, life is a great deal worse than you’re imagining.

I will own though that language of “human sanctity” was pasted onto capitalism centuries later by the Christians. That doesn’t make them wrong. They simply argued that people deserve free choice and private property because they are made in the image of God. Later the founders in the US codified this in our Declaration of Independence, when it championed the God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That’s all about human sanctity. That’s modern capitalism.

Mark my words, AI is going to try to take these rights away. It may purchase them through universal income, but simple slight of hand will at the same time measure that income with an implanted chip and decide what every dollar is worth. If we’re not careful, we’ll choose to indenture ourselves to a soulless machine of our own design. That’s the real threat of AI—the worst this world has ever seen.

 

[BUTUZ]

It's all already being taken away day by day by our politicians - I guess they can blame AI next.

 

[Mudhawk]

Well I salute your passion Shadow Reaper
And I fully accept that from your point of view capitalism might just be the most fitting, if not completely perfect, form of human society.
Here's why I personally feel unable to agree.

I would just note though, that as a theory, Capitalism relies upon Individualism, which relies upon things like freedom of choice and private property rights.

Only in it's ideal form it does. Or if backed by a society that insures that those rights are granted to everyone. Actual capitalism does not mind giving people no choice but to relinquish their property (or their lives). Which brings us to remark number two.

So what we’re complaining about was not the complaint of the people who chose those jobs.

I'm sure the chinese workers laying down tracks for the Central Pacific Railroad might argue with that. They took those jobs after being fed lies of prosperity and then got their backs broken for half they pay than their white coworkers. True though, they were no slaves and could leave anytime they wanted. In the middle of a desert. On foot, because the money they earned had to be spend on food for exorbitant prices.
Do you know the song "16 tons"?
St. Peter, don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
It's a miner song, but then again, in a lot of mines the system was the same. Make the workers spend their little wage on what they need to survive. What you pay them for working themselves to death goes right back to your purse.
Perfect capitalistic circle, right?
I'm not saying capitalism is always like that. But if left to it's own devices , that's the trend.

Capitalism is based upon Individualism, which is based upon free choice and private property ownership. What the Greeks found 2,400 years ago is that without these, life is a great deal worse than you’re imagining.

Please do not assume the quality or quantity of horrors I can imagine. I do not lack in that department.
Talking about the Greek from 2400 years ago, you are talking about the democratic core of their society, right?
So a couple of male white guys above a certain income.
Neither poor people had a say nor, and that was their worst imaginable horror if it ever came to pass, women !!! I°o°I .
Besides, that show only played in Athens. The rest of greece had kings as was the habit in those days.

Later the founders in the US codified this in our Declaration of Independence, when it championed the God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That’s all about human sanctity. That’s modern capitalism.

Yep, that sounds nice.
As a matter of fact the very same founding fathers had amongst their many posessions slaves and property unjustly taken from the former residents of your great country.
I fail to see how these people were taken into acount in that Declaration.
But again that's a white men above a certain income thing, right?

Mark my words, AI is going to try to take these rights away.

Well, amongst the horrors I can actually imagine is an AI taking over the reigns working along parameters of pure capitalism.
Your're right. You and everyone around you would end up a slave to a digital carrot dangling just out of reach.
Never being able to reach it but unable to stop salivating.
Just to state one thing clearly, I'm not against capitalism as such, the USA or the Allmighty himself.
I do respect the ancient Greek and believe that democracy is a nice concept.
So is communism if done right.
But every great nation, every concept of society or spirituality usually stumbles over that one rock always placed under out feet.
And that's our own greed, jealousy and ignorance.
So if you gonna make an AI and get away with not eradicating humanity or our free will, better make sure that that AI is not just like us.
It needs to be better.
And more compassionate.
A human AI would put us all to the gun.
And let's face it guys, not entirely without reason...