jaclaz Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 As many might have read lately, the MS guys put online on Twitter an experimental AI thingie, and in NO TIME the kids on twitter managed to make it become an almost total jerk. Just in case (example):http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-chatbot-racist Till now this is (as I see it) "normal", the thingie is experimental, the whole AI stuff is at its very early stages and the kids (and trolls) on Twitter are undoubtedly (let's take out any "moral" judgement) quite good at it. The "news" are that the goof MS guys posted an official apology (not really needed IMHO): http://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2016/03/25/learning-tays-introduction/ that sounds A LOT (at least to me) as a non-apology. The statement by Mr. Peter Lee - Corporate Vice President, Microsoft Research - about: Quote Unfortunately, in the first 24 hours of coming online, a coordinated attack by a subset of people exploited a vulnerability in Tay. even if followed by: Quote Although we had prepared for many types of abuses of the system, we had made a critical oversight for this specific attack. As a result, Tay tweeted wildly inappropriate and reprehensible words and images. We take full responsibility for not seeing this possibility ahead of time. makes NO sense whatsoever, you FAILED (and failed BADLY ) at it, there was no such thing as a "cordinated attack by a subset of people", or if there was, it would have been the first d@mn thing you should have tested in the laboratory before going public. All it takes is to get a few tens of average high school kids and let them play with the thingie a little bit, for a few hours, something that evidently is not within "standard" MS testing. Or simply listen to Cat Stevens Quote Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world It's hard to get by just upon a smile Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebolt Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 What concerns me is people who are eager to ascribe sentience to machines--followed by rights, of course--when those machines are really just sophisticated recording / playback devices, the only true personalities involved being those of the programmers. It’s the “pathetic fallacy” run amok; prepare yourselves for much more of the same in the future. These people should just lock themselves in a closet with a sock puppet and be done with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripredacus Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 It may be a long time before rights will be given to machines. We are still struggling to determine how to give rights to chimpanzees. “Animals, including chimpanzees and other highly intelligent mammals, are considered property under the law,” she continued. “They are accorded no legal rights,” beyond being free from mistreatment or abuse. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/31/nyregion/new-york-judge-denies-request-to-extend-legal-rights-to-2-chimps.html?_r=0 Now I am wondering if anyone put a chimpanzee on twitter and how it worked out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted March 28, 2016 Author Share Posted March 28, 2016 37 minutes ago, Tripredacus said: Now I am wondering if anyone put a chimpanzee on twitter and how it worked out... That would be unreal, and, not-so-casually : http://www.theunrealtimes.com/2011/09/19/harvard-scientists-successfully-train-chimpanzees-to-use-twitter-and-gain-followers1/ jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebolt Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 On 3/28/2016 at 8:34 AM, Tripredacus said: It may be a long time before rights will be given to machines. We are still struggling to determine how to give rights to chimpanzees. Hopefully so, but it's only been ten months and... https://www.rt.com/viral/373450-robot-kill-switches-status/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebolt Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Maybe in the future it will be Tay that who is expected to apologize: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-10/skype-s-homeland-grapples-with-dilemma-of-robot-as-legal-person To summarize: law as a nice cover in case something goes wrong... "Hey, don't sue me, sue the killer robot I built." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripredacus Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 If legal precendent means anything (and I cannot say how it applies to relative science fiction works) that any court cases concerning actual robots would follow the same lines as those chimpanzees in New York: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/04/21/chimps-given-human-rights-by-u-s-court-for-the-first-time/ BUT... AI is not "AI" currently. It is still just programming. Until any of these robots can pass the Turing Test, they are just machines and their creators should still be held responsible for any actual issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebolt Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Never mind the Turing Test, let's just have them fight it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bphlpt Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Those two look like they're going to either dance, or hug. Cheers and Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now