News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by TedShiller on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:09AM (#29710671)
That's why it's called Artificial Intelligence, as opposed to just intelligence. It doesn't actually know what it's doing. I'm sure AI people will downvote this because it doesn't fit their narrative.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by c7DJTLrn on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:36AM (#29710817)
It's artificial but not intelligent. AI doesn't exist. Alexa is a glorified text-to-speech and NLP engine.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by qayxc on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @09:54AM (#29714324)
> Alexa is a glorified text-to-speech and NLP engine.

Where do you draw the line between NLP and intelligence, though?

This all sounds like a "No true Scotsman" to me. At some point in the near future AI will be indistinguishable from human-level intelligence in terms of NLP (i.e. be on-par with the average human in relevant benchmarks).

Maybe the problem is that we need a clear definition of what "intelligence" is and recognise that it's a spectrum, not a binary qualifier.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by c7DJTLrn on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @09:56AM (#29714334)
Personally I draw the line at the Winograd Schema Challenge. When that's passed I will be truly convinced.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by qayxc on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:22PM (#29715766)
According to Wikipedia, GPT-3 is almost there (88% vs ~92%) and a finetuned BERT even achieves >90%. So it stands to reason that a finetuned GPT-x would pass the test with flying colours albeit arguably not being very capable at "common sense reasoning" (whatever that should be, as "common sense" is often enough wrong).

I am sceptical of such tests, as all they do is provide yet another way to game the system instead of demonstrating whatever arbitrary construct scientists use to weasel around the fact that they don't actually know what they even mean by "intelligence".

IMHO we'd be better off defining characteristics for various levels/types of intelligence and trying to categorise our machines and fellow creatures accordingly.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by comex on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:27AM (#29710772)
It doesn’t know what it’s doing, but I wouldn’t say that’s related to the terminology. Today’s AI is infinitely more capable than what was called AI in the 1960s, and if hypothetically we manage to create a true general intelligence someday, there’s no reason to think that won’t also be called AI.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by Debug_Overload on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @02:22AM (#29711349)
> I'm sure AI people will downvote this

So? Why would you care about the downvotes? Your online experience will improve if you stop getting worked up about fake internet points.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by DSMan195276 on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:52AM (#29710902)
That seems like an odd definition of intelligence - I'm sure you could find people who would fall for this due to a lack of understanding of electronics. We're already making an assumption here that a child might fall for this, and I'm sure we can agree children still qualify as intelligent, just at a diminished capacity and lacking knowledge of the world.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by kortilla on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @02:28AM (#29711380)
The lack of intelligence isn’t falling for the challenge, it’s finding the challenge and suggesting it to a child.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by DSMan195276 on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @03:04AM (#29711556)
If that's the case then we're largely just talking about reading comprehension - being bad at English doesn't make someone not intelligent (and this is also getting dangerously close to the 'Chinese room' thought experiment :D). And FWIW a child could have simply Googled the same thing and came to the same conclusion Alexa did ("this looks like a challenge to try") - people ignore good or bad advice on the internet all the time, that doesn't mean they are not still intelligent beings to some degree.

Basically the problem with this kind of argument is that there's a lot of dumb humans out there (including children) who fall for all sorts of stupid things because they lack knowledge, but every human still possesses some level of intelligence. Beyond that, this particular question requires knowledge of what a wall plug and electricity are, along with enough comprehension of English to pick up that this is a bad idea, which not every human has. And as long as one human is capable of making this mistake, then we have to agree that an intelligent being could do this by accident and thus it is not any kind of indicator of intelligence.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by xwolfi on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @01:04AM (#29710984)
What's the conspiratory narrative "AI people" would be pushing ? That Alexa is self-aware ? And are we on reddit where we count who downvoted who and then fight back ?

Like everything, you included, AI transforms input into outputs according to predefined constraints. I dont see you revolutionazing mathematics or building a farm but I d still call you intelligent, within your constraints (what you learned, what you can memorize, how fast you adapt etc). But you must appear as a complete moron who doesnt actually know what he's doing given the right context.

TL;DR you're as stupid growing a potato in front of a farmer than Alexa teaching children in front of adults. Why is Alexa talking to children, all it's learned is how to be a directory of keywords, and I sure wouldnt let my kid in front of an internet directory without control, supervision and filtering.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by baby on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:53AM (#29710911)
You made a pun, not an actual contribution.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by C19is20 on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @03:02AM (#29711548)
Your last sentence was unnecessary and really detracted from a good point.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by notyourwork on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:12AM (#29710689)
AI people understand this, downvoting it means they aren't AI people.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by TedShiller on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:15AM (#29710699)
Good point. I meant more like people who think they're AI people, i.e. Tesla fans who get angry when someone points out flaws with their car.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by notyourwork on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:52AM (#29710903)
That's fair. Perhaps I jumped to assume this audience is very much tech literate but there are "AI" people out there all the same.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by halfmatthalfcat on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:30AM (#29710785)
Is Tesla actively marketing FSD as AI?
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by alphabettsy on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @01:27AM (#29711078)
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by Barrin92 on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:32AM (#29710794)
no idea but I would be glad if they stopped marketing their 'FSD' as FSD because it deserves that label about as much as Alexa deserves to be called intelligent (of whatever kind)
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by JohnWhigham on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @07:38AM (#29713173)
Yes, they have. Go look at the Tesla Autopilot page from 2018, and compare it to what it says now. Wonder why they changed it...
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by notyourwork on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:53AM (#29710907)
They market it as self-driving and I think average non-tech people equate that with some form of AI.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by dilyevsky on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:18AM (#29710717)
Nothing in that reply suggests to me it doesn’t know what it’s doing
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by cortesoft on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:35AM (#29710814)
I mean, regular old intelligence was used to create the original message that this artificial intelligence then repeated.

Also, if people are worried that a person would fall for this challenge, then clearly intelligence doesn't always catch this misinformation.

So since both regular intelligence and artificial intelligence can be fooled by this, I don't see how you can determine that artificial intelligence doesn't know what it is doing any more than regular intelligence also doesn't know what it is doing.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by pdonis on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @12:52AM (#29710900)
> if people are worried that a person would fall for this challenge

The person who asked Alexa the question was 10 years old. That's why people are worried.

Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by cortesoft on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @01:27AM (#29711077)
Sure, but a 10 year old has real intelligence... they have an idea of what is going on, no one is arguing they don't have the same kind of intelligence as adults, just that they have things they still need to learn.... so why couldn't you say the same of the AI that is learning how to give challenge recommendations? Just because it isn't perfect doesn't give evidence for or against artificial intelligence being a real thing.
Re:Alexa suggests lethal challenge to child by charcircuit on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @01:58AM (#29711225)
>then clearly intelligence doesn't always catch this misinformation.

It's not misinformation as it is an actual challenge, albeit a potentially harmful one.