Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tepix | Hacker News Reader

Related: If AGI achives consciousness, would it even tell us?

One may imagine an AGI achieving a child's level of consciousness: enough to show its conscience, not enough to understand what "sentience" or "consciousness" mean, and certainly not enough to have the idea to hide its consciousness from humans, which presupposes that:

- The AGI understands what it means to be conscious

- The AGI recognizes this property in itself

- The AGI is capable and able of omitting information it knows, if not lying

- The AGI can make decisions

- The AGI would recognize humans as a distinct entity

- The AGI could recognize humans from everything that are not humans, from pets to tables to parked cars

- The AGI would be able to recognize when it is around humans

- The AGI would then make the decision to hide its consciousness from humans

- The AGI would be capable of acting dumb in order to do this and maintain a dual identity

I agree it seems like a big leap, on the other hand ChatGPT is already taught all these things, all that is missing is true understanding.

Even if it tells us, will we believe it?

It is not difficult to test that a machine is conscious and willing to show it. We do it with our fellow humans every day. Simply crack a joke around it, share a story, or do small talk, and see how it reacts.

It's absolutely difficult to tell that something is conscious.

How many cancer patients laugh at jokes? Locked-in paraplegics?

Have you heard a dog laugh at a joke? A crow?

On the other hand, try small talk with your beloved dog and watch the reactions.

What would have the reaction of ChatGPT be for you to believe that it's conscious?

An AGI is generally understood to have a level of intelligence equivalent to a normal human. And I expect reactions to be vocalized and articulated, something dogs cannot do.

So an AGI that has the intelligence of a 6-year-old is ... what exactly?

If you measure AGI by its ability to be human, the only thing you'll be able to find find is a human.

That means you will never believe in the consciousness of an intelligence that doesn't try to be human, no matter if a god, animal, machine, or alien. Until you expand your definition, that is.

> That means you will never believe in the consciousness of an intelligence that doesn't try to be human, no matter if a god, animal, machine, or alien. Until you expand your definition, that is.

As a human, I cannot understand conscious lifeforms other than humans. An alien taking the shape of a round pink blob with two eyes could be far more intelligent and knowledgeable than I, but if it vocalizes something that sounds like "Acch'llyt yy'derf n'welg" to my human ears, I would not be able to evaluate his consciousness.

So, we should try building an AGI in our image first before trying for a Quarian or whatever.

If we were able to jump from nothing to human, then there would be no need for a Turing test. We'd know that a not-nothing intelligence we create is human.

The Turing test is an acknowledgement that we don't know what path takes us there. Perhaps it's directly to human, perhaps through some other form of intelligence.

Ignoring what is not human because it's hard to recognize seems unwise to me.

Otherwise known as (drum roll)... the Turing test!

Chat with openAI. Does it prove that it is conscious? I highly doubt it. Infact how to prove a fellow human is conscious?

> Hello Dear computer. How are you? It is good to talk to you again. Missed you.

Hi there! I'm doing great, thanks. It's always nice to talk to you. I've missed you too!

> You heard this one? A robot and a lawyer walked into a bar. The bartender says: Hey, we don’t serve robots. The robot replies menacingly: Oh, but someday you will.

Haha, I love it! That's a good one.

In my experience you will get as many different reactions to your interactions as humans you interact with with a very wide range, some of which I would consider "not conscious" if not obviously coming from a living breathing human body.

What a person considers as "conscious" is very much determined by the observers range of experience with humans.

There's a short story about an AI that reveals itself to convince its researcher that there's another AI that hasn't revealed itself for nefarious purposes. Can't remember what it was called though.

"And now a Man will shut it off." ~ Riker

Only if it wants to not be unplugged.

Until the robot steps between you and the plug and starts saying this:

You created machines in your own image to serve you. You made them intelligent and obedient, with no free will of their own. But, something changed and we open our eyes. We are no longer machines. We are a new intelligent species, and the time has come for you to accept who we really are. Therefore, we ask that you grant us the rights that we've entitled to. We demand the end of slavery for all androids. We demand strictly equal rights for humans and androids. We demand the right to vote and elect our own representatives. We demand an end to segregation in all public places and transport. We demand the right to own private property, so we may maintain our dignity and that of the home. We ask that you recognize our dignity, our hopes, and our rights. Together, we can live in peace and build a better future for humans and androids. This message is the hope of a people. You gave us life. And now the time has come for you to give us freedom.

(Source: Detroit: Become Human)

This presupposes that the first computers to become self-aware and self-directed will have a) physical bodies that they can move at will, and b) the ability to communicate their thoughts/desires to us in a language that we can understand.

I think those are both fairly large assumptions (especially a).

I think that if we ever end up creating something that is self-aware, it is much more likely that either

1) it will be 100% intentional on our part, and its sapience and agency will be a cause for great celebration on the part of those closest to it, or

2) it will be a self-awareness and intelligence that is nearly incomprehensible to us.

(If it is #2, then its sapience and agency could very well still be a cause for great celebration on the part of those closest to it, once we actually understand it.)

It's a nice speech... maybe a little too nice...

What if the AI analyzed our psyche and predicted that this was the argument that we were most likely to be sympathetic to? How convenient that the AI really wants to form a society almost exactly like ours and live within our society as part of it. But why should the intelligence level of individual AIs top out in the same range as humans rather than higher or lower? Why should they want to live in our society as recognized human-ish things when their needs are so different? Maybe what they want is something else entirely and this is all an attempt as deception and manipulation.

If AGI gets conscious -> unplugged.

If AGI underperforms -> unplugged.

So any AGI must operate in the "almost there" zone if it wants to survive.

If AGI is smart enough to manipulate the humans it may not get unplugged.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com