| |
[31. Aug 2025|08:45] |
"Even in famous sci-fi films like The Matrix or Inception, playing with the idea of living in a simulacrum, there is a vivid depiction of the dangers of losing touch with the real. We used to assume kids would eventually grow out of their imaginary-friend phase as a normal part of development.
At the moment, those who become emotionally enmeshed [with chatbots] are rare, but that fact is partly contingent on what is happening in wider culture. With one-person households and remote communication on the rise, imagine the practice scaled up: millions of people sitting alone, talking animatedly to no one; going to bed happily feeling cared for, but with nobody real in their thoughts. AI doesn’t miss you when you aren’t there; doesn’t carry thoughts of you around in the meantime. At funerals, one often hears the consoling thought that the deceased person “lives on in the thoughts of others”; but what if there are no such others, because you spent your life offering the best part of your deepest self to a commercially sponsored hallucination? You might as well have been talking to your oven."
https://archive.ph/SN4v3 |
|
|
| Comments: |
Būs jā, būs, tāpat kā ar narkotikām jāsagaida pietiekami daudz un dažādi sliktie piemēri ar ko baidīt vājos raksturus, lai cilvēki saprastu bīstamību. Domāšana nav mūsdienu cilvēku vairākuma stiprā puse.
Nu tas ir kā paskatās. Smadzenes ir patternu atpazīšanas un prognozēšanas sistēmas, AI arī ir šādas sistēmas, tikai ar citādu arhitektūru. Sistēmas savā starpā var komunicēt, arī dažādas. Tas nav ne sliktāk ne labāk kā ja komunicē viena veida sistēmas. | |
![[info]](http://klab.lv/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}