Maximally curious seems like a good idea. But can we get it without bias? I think I would rather have maximally unbiased AI. Even unintentional bias is a problem, but I am much more concerned about the massive damage that intentional bias will create in AI, and how we will even recognize it.
Conceptually, I like the focus on curiosity. I’ve not checked out ChatGPT yet and I know I need to explore this. I’m getting ready to teach a graduate course in August and believe in embracing tools. I’ve been fascinated by Musk’s concern about how AI will be used. On another note, when looking at xAI, I hope to see women involved. All the people listed appeared to be male. I can’t help myself. I notice gender and race. I enjoyed the articles shared this week.
I’m fascinated by the intersection of Climate Change and Generative AI.
Will AI come up with some solutions to the problem?
Will it not even see it as a problem at all?
The thing we’ve learned over the last few years is that Black Swan events don’t happen in a vacuum and can actually cause other Black Swan events. (Think Putin isolating himself and becoming delusional about Ukraine).
What if AI could interact with some of the big problems affecting the world and actually start to provide solutions?
The concept and benefits of being curious is powerful and the lack of it is often a great limiter of our growth and ability to change. However, I don’t know enough about what programming for maximal curiosity looks like, how it differs form how other forms of AI learning. I also am not sure how a deeper understanding of human nature would ensure ‘good actors’ outcomes and not just increase the ability to exploit and leverage the selfish or bad actor abilities that reside within in all of us more effectively.
I appreciate this newsletter and the community responses it helps me grow, see different perspectives and challenge my thought processes and beliefs. Thank you
Re Max Curiosity... it is an insightful proposed focus that reaches into one of the essential characteristic of human achievement. Without curiosity, there is no motivation for what might be next. However, curiosity is also the root of chaos and unrestrained change. Curiosity and consistency struggle in every way and everyday, whether as seen in our D and R politics or raising a child. That said, instead of single vector priority for safer AI, or Asimov’s three rules, I wonder if the design of the guiding intent might be constructed around the paradox of curiosity and consistency, or a similar balanced and circular goal that is then better aligned with the ancient and forever of the creation the AI may be born into. I think we’ve seen enough of single vector maximizing of benefit in this world.
I’m not sure if downloads is as important as engagement. The Twitter platform usage is up 3.5% globally week over week while the Threads platform usage is down 50% week over week.
Of course there’s going to be a drop after that insane 1st week at Threads. The question is will that first week give them enough momentum for the platform to be sticky?
Do we mean active curiosity like, "What happens if I stick my tongue on the end of the plug for my father's electric shaver?" or "What happens if I set light to this cart full of hay bales that's parked in an underpass below a main road?" Will this AI be an adult or child?
Maximally curious seems like a good idea. But can we get it without bias? I think I would rather have maximally unbiased AI. Even unintentional bias is a problem, but I am much more concerned about the massive damage that intentional bias will create in AI, and how we will even recognize it.
I agree, and I'm biased in thinking that it will be hard for an unbiased AI to come from Elon, who has shown to be very biased.
Conceptually, I like the focus on curiosity. I’ve not checked out ChatGPT yet and I know I need to explore this. I’m getting ready to teach a graduate course in August and believe in embracing tools. I’ve been fascinated by Musk’s concern about how AI will be used. On another note, when looking at xAI, I hope to see women involved. All the people listed appeared to be male. I can’t help myself. I notice gender and race. I enjoyed the articles shared this week.
I’m fascinated by the intersection of Climate Change and Generative AI.
Will AI come up with some solutions to the problem?
Will it not even see it as a problem at all?
The thing we’ve learned over the last few years is that Black Swan events don’t happen in a vacuum and can actually cause other Black Swan events. (Think Putin isolating himself and becoming delusional about Ukraine).
What if AI could interact with some of the big problems affecting the world and actually start to provide solutions?
Its not Elon's bias that I am particularly worried about. Its the bad actors. And Elon would be an angel compared to them ;-)
The concept and benefits of being curious is powerful and the lack of it is often a great limiter of our growth and ability to change. However, I don’t know enough about what programming for maximal curiosity looks like, how it differs form how other forms of AI learning. I also am not sure how a deeper understanding of human nature would ensure ‘good actors’ outcomes and not just increase the ability to exploit and leverage the selfish or bad actor abilities that reside within in all of us more effectively.
I appreciate this newsletter and the community responses it helps me grow, see different perspectives and challenge my thought processes and beliefs. Thank you
Re Max Curiosity... it is an insightful proposed focus that reaches into one of the essential characteristic of human achievement. Without curiosity, there is no motivation for what might be next. However, curiosity is also the root of chaos and unrestrained change. Curiosity and consistency struggle in every way and everyday, whether as seen in our D and R politics or raising a child. That said, instead of single vector priority for safer AI, or Asimov’s three rules, I wonder if the design of the guiding intent might be constructed around the paradox of curiosity and consistency, or a similar balanced and circular goal that is then better aligned with the ancient and forever of the creation the AI may be born into. I think we’ve seen enough of single vector maximizing of benefit in this world.
Interesting. Do you have a framework that you think is interesting?
Oh... I continued to read the articles. Your summary and link about “wu-wei” helps make my point. Send it to Elon, he needs to read it!
I’m not sure if downloads is as important as engagement. The Twitter platform usage is up 3.5% globally week over week while the Threads platform usage is down 50% week over week.
Of course there’s going to be a drop after that insane 1st week at Threads. The question is will that first week give them enough momentum for the platform to be sticky?
Some really good articles this week. Thanks for sharing!
Thanks Linda!
I would not trust Musk to do anything good for humanity!!!!!!!!!!
Nothing? Really? Can you think of anything that Musk has done that you’re proud of or excited about?
Do we mean active curiosity like, "What happens if I stick my tongue on the end of the plug for my father's electric shaver?" or "What happens if I set light to this cart full of hay bales that's parked in an underpass below a main road?" Will this AI be an adult or child?
Good point. Curiosity, can, and does lead in every direction.
Curiosity killed the cat🙀
meow!