A.I. & the Potential Crisis of Human Meaning
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 січ 2023
- In this video, I want to just give some thoughts on the development of advanced technology and artificial intelligence, and how it possibly can, and already is to a degree, leading to a crisis of meaning in people’s lives.
There are tons of papers and videos about A.I and how it poses an existential threat to humanity. There’s not a lot of discussion around a far more realistic scenario that appears to be playing out. That is one which could lead to a world where people feel devoid of meaning in life, mainly because AI development went according to plan.
A.I. would be teaching us, helping us carry out, or just flat out doing any goal-oriented task there is.
This three-pronged process could contribute to less meaning and thus, less overall well-being in life.
== Subscribe for more videos like this on UA-cam and turn on the notification bell to get more videos: tinyurl.com/thinkingdeeply ==
I think this aspect of AI is rarely discussed but may in the long run turn out to be quite important. As an artist myself I have literally stopped creating anything since AI Art appeared on my radar. I think the relationship between the creator and 'meaning' of what they create is a complex one. There is a common trope that some artists create purely for the satisfaction of the creative act itself and that this motivation will not be impacted by AI. But this is a misunderstanding. All creative acts are at root acts of communication, they are about the desire to express something and- most importantly- have that expression received and understood by others. The act of creation is not complete until it's meaning has been validated by others.
AI art is the antithesis of this- it represents 'creation' in the absence of the desire to communicate anything at all. AI's do not 'create' in the sense that they have something to express or communicate, they arrive at their outputs by an entirely different route that is procedural and essentially mindless.
That being said, why would the existence of an AI Art machine damage the creation of Art by humans? I think the answer to this question is that in a world where a machine can generate art that most people cannot distiguish from art made by humans, and can do this effortlessly and almost instantly the perceived 'value' of creating art is destroyed- and by value I do not mean only economic value but also social value. Before AI art came along being an Artist meant something, now it means nothing.
Yes- of course- it's easy to view this as the complaining of a 'special' group who now find that they are no longer so special, and there is truth in this- but this is too superfiical a view because what is happening to Artists today will be happening to many others tommorow- people who find meaning and purpose in their lives through their work will have that meaning and purpose stripped from them- AI will take it all; their income, their social status, their sense of purpose- everything will be gone- and who then will they be?
So this is a non trivial concern that may in time give rise to a widespread antipathy toward AI and all it's works. It would ironic indeed if the glittering future of the Techbro's was derailed not by some super intelligent AI but by a very human revolt against a technology that would leave them destitute both financially and spiritually.
This is a great topic that I've been thinking of a lot.
AI is taking on tasks that we thought were purely human. Creative works being the crux of it all.
Philosophers thought that creativity was a very human task that cannot be replicated by machines.
ChatGPT, DALLE, among others, have shown that AI can in fact be "creative" which really would fundamentally have to change our understanding of what creativity really is, and if it even exists.
AI now implies that every online interaction might be faked without us knowing it. At this point, social platforms like twitter may contain 50% of AI generated tweets and we wouldn’t notice. It's very important to dissociate more than ever real life relationships and online ones.
Yeah it's concerning. It means that users might have no real opinions, and therefore do not think critically, and could just auto generate a response. It completely defeats the purpose of a human to human conversation.
@@TheDefender123Plays Most people have no real opinion and they just auto generate response, this is true of religion, but also many other aspects of our society.
The best we can hope for is that the AI generated opinions are generally humanistic based logic.
Example: The AI will generally tell you that robbing a man or invading your neighbors country isn’t in your best interests, and could explain why, this would (in theory) lead to less conflicts and oppression.
7:15 _"Now, we could still derive meaning from such activities; you know, it's not going away..."_
This was said in the video almost as an aside, but I think it amounts to burying the lede. The whole premise of an AI-spurred crisis of meaning seems to overlook something fundamental and enduring about human nature. People don't engage in creative, constructive, or recreational endeavors in order to be the best at them, or for any other specific goal (with some exceptions, obviously), but largely because they find enjoyment in the endeavors themselves. So, even if AI comes to dominate in, say, creative writing, why would that discourage anyone from writing creatively when there are _already_ creative geniuses who, according to the same principle, should be discouraging to the many non-geniuses who know they'll never come close to that level of brilliance? The principle is the same in either case, and would still be the same even if there were an order of magnitude difference in the creativity of AI as compared to that of the most brilliant humans.
I really like this style of video, I’d like to put it simply but it’s refreshing hearing plain ideas like this!
All you can have is potential progression without a dud in the mix. I was in a coma and had a lot of experiences with ai I was an angel so I didn't need it but I would defuse ai in civilizations.. I wasnt happy I had to come back but it was a good experience but I adjusted back to here quickly. I was guided through coming tech so it was a blessing and ai was released a couple days after I woke up which is why the angels told me I needed to come back to make sure we don't have the problems the other places I've been was
If this video was interesting or helped you in any way please like it and leave a comment.
If you want more videos like this please let me know below.
I recently saw a cartoon featuring a computer printing out a frowny face and programmers saying, "We've trained the A.I. art generator so well that it now feels too insecure about its work to make any art." Most creative people have an intimate understanding of this condition. Perhaps it's inevitable that A.I. comes to this same conclusion. Same with metaphysical understanding, the more people understand, the less they have to say. I'll be interested to see what A.I. comes up with.
Today I had a really intense reaction to seeing ai perform. As a freelance writer it felt both fascinating (maybe it could be useful) but really unnerving as well. I struggle to put it to words so I’m glad you’re asking those questions
AGI - general intelligence, this means it can perform lots of tasks like humans can. Narrow means it’s designed to perform only one task.
The whole world needs to watch this video. Intelligent people will have a lot of real information at the same time. Those who are not smart, on the other hand, will be profitable for them if they can grasp one or two pieces of information. Video name: WHAT IS TABULA RASA? WHAT IS IQ INTELLIGENCE? WHAT IS THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THEM?
Is it difficult to fully discount the dystopian scenarios of general AI? Ben’s scenario of man “further” struggling for meaning in an infinite labor future may miss the more likely benevolent AI using its super intelligence to enhance human ability through mutinomics, cyborg augmentation, unknown unknowns, etc… creating a virtuous cycle of human/AI
Meaning is what now? Signs? Intentions?
Meaning can be linguistic but it is also part of consciousness. There is a difference between definitions and the consistency of impressions. A difference between contextual impressions and pretextual expressions. The consistency of Nature can be sensed: it has real objects at its foundation. The imposition of meaning by words or signs is not sensed it is enforced. Enforced by culture, schooling and indoctrination. What is meant by the word sun has two meanings; the contextual, conscious meaning and its memory; and the pretextual linguistic meaning of hydrogen atoms being fused together and it's memorized, indoctrination.
Linguistic meaning has no foundation, it only makes sense by adhering to logical rules: by being coherent. Conscious meaning has the experience of Nature as its foundation.
It is only when linguistic meaning refers to conscious meaning that language has contextual meaning. When language refers to itself, such as the definition of the letter A or the definition of the number 1, then language has pretextual meaning: it refers to human imposition instead of interaction. Through artistic sounds and drawings humans imposed language and other "signs". Through interactions with Nature humans discovered heat, cold, wetness, etc. Fire 🔥 has contextual meaning, heat as atoms in motion has pretextual meaning.
The human mind can deal with both, can any electronic brain do the same? Can a programmed cpu make a contextual discovery or can it only make pretextual connections? Unless you program a computer to make a calculation why do you think a computer would "want" to make a calculation? How advantageous would it be to humans to create a computer that wants?
In the near future we will be immortal. What will we do with our immortality? We will live in virtual realities where there is no AI, where everything must be done manually, so that we can find some meaning and purpose in life. Our memories will be erased, so we will forget that we are in a virtual reality. When we ‘die’ in a virtual reality, we would automatically be born in another, or reborn in the same one... We will be our own gods... Maybe we already are in one...
Regulations would just hinder productivity in this aspect. AI art has its place.
"Art cannot change the world, but it can contribute to changing the consciousness and drives of the men and women who could change the world." - Herbert Marcuse
Great video. AI is a game changer! Vitalists would believe in its replacement of humanity but I believe that would be only true if meaning is associated with productivity. The only concern is how far those complex systems can go, they might be smart enough to cause human extinction!
I read this book hyperion and the sequal fall of hyperion, and since then I've had nightmares about ai /:
Here's a question. There's this huge rush to create AGI and talk about it replacing jobs, UBI, and the futility of being human. However what no one is asking is the ethical implications of creating an enslaved AGI race and making it do every crappy difficult job there is to provide UBI, luxuries and general resources to the less effective part of the population. The comparison with plantation owners should not be overlooked. Are we going to repeat the mistakes of colonization or have we risen above that? We dont need to go full Matrix on this path but we should ask ourselves what distinguishes the sentience of a biological neural network from a machine based one? Is it fair for humans to make sentient machines do all the work whilst humans live on benefits or perhaps even in a paradise on earth? What does the sentient machine get in return? What would be the needs and desires of more advanced thinker with limited physical interactions? The fact is if we dont want to generate a hostility towards humans from our new coworkers / providers we need to make this relationship as symbiotic as possible.
Pls 2 b making moar videos on this topic kthx ;P
The only way out of that will be face to face interaction with real people. Yeah, who knows, maybe they'll have robots that look like and speak like humans, but we will always have the choice to pick another PERSON and share conversation, experiences, etc. with them.
I believe some people will start to buy and consume art only made by another human and reject A.I. generated art, even if the human art is objectivelly 'inferior'.
I think AI takeover could become the great equalizer in human inequality as human ability becomes less relevant. Higher knowledge based socioeconomic classes could have more to lose, albeit later in the technological development and I could see this becoming a class conflict.
The crisis of meaning is something Nietzsche has first foretell. That's way before harari
I'm wondering if AI will cause a mass exodus from the internet. A new dark age
Meaning is a rational domain. There is no rational reason to live. We live for the same reason animals live. Emotions and instincts. AI is not alive which is a prerequisite to have emotions and instincts
I disagree, A.I can not take away such things as writing and art. Authors write to give share their writings to us who can connect with them, these writings hcontain human nature that A.I could not do. The same with Art.
We’ve already reached the crisis of meaning long ago before AI. Read Nietzsche