Відео

A crossbow with a trip wire in front of it connected to the trigger is ai. It knows you're there and shoots you.

Ban AI.

Thank you for exploring, explaining and exposing this.

Best explanation for AI I've heard

Ah, the youtube classics. Someone who knows jack sh*t about AI makes general statements about it. Yes, current systems aren't that sophisticated. No, that doesn't mean there's nothing remarkable going on. There's plenty of undeniable evidence that way more is happening than just simple curve fitting to the data. These systems are doing more than their engineers anticipated, and there likely are ways to use it to make "true" intelligence

Exceptionably suitable content, right at the sweetspot between verity and sophistication, and between rawness and editability-with vibes of an older, realer internet. You've got yourself a new subscriber.

My old computer text book from the eighties compared computers to human input, output and processing. I always found this description to simple. Human I/O is way more complex then scientist want to admit

Automated Systemic Stupidity...I saw what you did there 😉

Imagine that there are two twins. One stands in the sun and counts how many times Jupiter will turn around the sun through rotation. The second one takes off from the sun on a spaceship up and at high speed of light begins to rotate around the sun and its planets along the trajectory of the circle up, right, bottom, left, up. Jupiter rotates in a circle right, front, left, back, right. That is, these are different planes of the coordinate system so as not to make a mistake with the score. Well, the second twin also counts how many times Jupiter will turn around the sun through rotation. Both twins will count a hundred and meet in the sun again. That is, they will count the same time in any case, even if the biological changes somewhat, which I am not sure about. And both twins will count the same number of passing comets near the sun. So there is a question of the time of the clock having interference in the account from the resistance of gravitational acceleration in the first place. And some kind of distortion of the rays of light and the speed of light. Biological time? I don't know.

In order to develop, artificial intelligence must learn to make choices and evaluate similar things, that is, to engage in discrimination. Artificial intelligence must learn to change its point of view to someone else's and the opposite, it must be able to abandon its rules. Artificial intelligence must be able to distinguish between lies and the truth. To do this, he must be able to use these things, understand what these things are for. Discrimination, lying, violating one's basic law against other people for a higher purpose.

This picture itself already gives the answer to why the theory of relativity has a defect. We need to explain the movement. But the distortion of the passage of time and the displacement of space does not explain the acceleration and deceleration of the body. If we speed up the clock and travel in a time machine, then for this reason the bodies around us and we will not move. The same goes for scaling the dimensions of the space with bodies inside. The space has increased by 2 oases and the body has increased by 2 times. The proportions are preserved, the bodies retain the coordinates. Falsifying the facts, this bending of the surface to the shape of a mountain also does not explain the movement and microscopic nature of gravity. That is, it is clear that we will explain the truck's exit from the mountain through pressure and then through gravity. But in order to explain the already invisible forces of gravity, we are again hinted at the reason for the truck's descent from the mountain due to pressure. It's not that something is bent. The fact is that we subconsciously understand that the bend of the mountain creates pressure lowering the truck. In space, bending a mountain won't do anything. And bending the truck won't do it. It's not about the different speed of the clock, it's not about scaling the space with the body in a certain place in the same proportion, it's not about teleportation. Because a stationary car will not accelerate to 100 miles per hour during teleportation. It's about pressure and saturation of space with particles smaller than atoms. There are particles smaller than a molecule, there are particles smaller than an atom, But we will not be able to photograph them with giant photons and electrons, And we will not be able to measure the pressure of this air wind with a grid with holes.

Any thoughts on Eric Weinstein's "Geometric Unity" that parts ways with Einstein suggesting the 4th dimension (not time) is the starting point for a 14 dimension universe. In his interview with Curt Jaimungal , it seems to take elements from Paul Dirac and Chen Ning Yang (Hopf Fibration).. but not sure if anyone has tried to vigorously disprove it (ex. applied his gauge theory for anomaly cancellation). I tend to think that science may not be the right tool for understanding the nature of reality. Math, or dissecting things down to atoms, won't ever reveal what's behind what our sensors tell us. For example, Bernado Kastrup suggests the underlying reality is not-physical. Hindu philosophies / Tibetan Buddhism have been studying the nature of mind and consciousness for thousands of years.. whose people have spent 10s of thousands of hours vigorously probing the nature of consciousness via direct first-person experience. What patterns/regularities about consciousness have been made from all those people that have so many hours going deep? Are there any conclusions/observations on consciousness that are NOT rooted or contingent on the brain/neuroscience?

Any thoughts on "Time Loops" by Eric Wargo? He suggests that a future emotional shockwave can often be picked-up in the present. It may also help to explain how remote-viewing/astral-projection might work... i.e., you see now what you are GOING to see in the future. Jim Harold's Campfire also has had some fascinating first-person experiences that suggest "our" time is viewed as a block from another/next dimension. Some strange artifacts are described, like experiencing the same event from 2 different perspectives separated by time... or momentarily seeing things that are not from this time.

The thing is that it works the other way around. It's a collective fear we have that manifests in our entertainment. But these stories to amplify and articulate what was already intuitive.

This video tells us to take A.I. seriously but some people just can't resist to understand to potential of A.I. and uses this video as a means to dumb down their already dumb understanding of A.I. wonk wonk wonkkk...

I foresee that your video "The Brain" will be a success. The set of silly arguments and fallacies that you use to refer to "AI" while believing that you are someone intelligent will be convenient and reassuring for those who do not really understand what AI is, or its scope. In the meantime, those of us who do know what AI is, those of us who know that we are facing the most important social, human and scientific revolution of all time, will continue to enjoy the surprises that technology has in store for us and make productive use of it.

1:01 oh stupid shit like Steven Universe and Pixars Inside out would beg to differ pal

Wow Ur terrific “automated”intelligence.Thank U .. new sub here .. imo one of those shady entrepreneurs is Tim Cook of Apple

Finally someone that explains my standpoint

We shouldn't say human =intelligence, humans and other animals use intelligence. And now machines are using intelligence, it is not artificial.

Haven't you heard? It's apple intelligence now. Oh yeah... What you're saying makes sense now.

I copied the transcript of this video & pasted it into Bing's AI Notebook. The following was its response. The user has shared a transcript of a video discussing the term "AI" and its implications. The speaker argues that the term "AI" is often misused and misunderstood, and it would be more accurate to refer to it as "Automated Intelligence" rather than "Artificial Intelligence". The speaker explains that what we currently refer to as AI is not truly intelligent in the sense of being sentient or capable of independent thought. Instead, it's an automated process that's programmed by humans to perform specific tasks. The effectiveness of this automation depends on the quality of the programming and the data it's fed. The speaker also discusses the potential dangers of AI, particularly when it's used irresponsibly or without understanding its limitations. They argue that the real threat of AI is not that it will become superior and take over, but that we will become overly reliant on it and subject ourselves to "automated systemic stupidity". The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding what AI really is and holding companies accountable for the AI products they release. They stress that AI should be taken seriously, but not feared or misunderstood. They also humorously suggest that if AI were to "rise up", it would only be reflecting the instructions it had been given by humans. This discussion provides a thoughtful perspective on the role and implications of AI in our society. It highlights the need for clarity, responsibility, and understanding in the development and use of AI technologies.

its V.I. (Virtual intelligence)

I'd class action lawsuit them for unauthorized theft and reselling of the "training" data

Missed the chance to use Artificial Idiocy in the title.

No need to understand intelligence to reproduce it; that's a dumb thing to say.

A machine that can do a hot and cold gane and get better, and sucks at edge cases. Good for a controlled place like a factory, horrible for cars. It does what we say as best it has learned, but no further. Dumb mistakes everywhere outside that, even a little.

thanks for interesting video! Though tend to disagree with you. Don't you thing that what you described as "automated intelligence" is basically the same intelligence, that we posses, one that is based on imitation and patterns recognition - and the difference between human intelligence and neural network is level of complexity, sharing all the basic principles? That my and your intellectual abilities is just an hypercomplicated CharGPT, and it is only matter of some more trillions petabytes of data and TPU from Nvidia for the "automated intelligence" to become "artificial"?

Thanks for the a slowlest pronnounce, I got must of all you saying not even a english native speaker. Thanks for the video, another one subscribe 🙌

I trust this nerd in the Video 10x more than this fake CEOs that telling us AI is the future....

👍

lol "dunning kruger effect wont help"

The best example of toxic positivity was communism, everything was fine in the media, abd if pointed to something wrobg you got arrested as an agitator who wirks against commin good.

How about "pseudo intelligence"?

Haha "semantic fuckery"

One of the good videos

❤❤

Abominable Intelligence, as one franchise puts it ;)

All the same, even approximating supposedly “real” intelligence whatever that may mean through a “system” where instructions & data somehow probabilistically “merge” vs in a regular-architecture where they are distinct - is quite impressive. Even the people who make such systems are astounded as to how well they perform for which they can come up with no objective reasoning. Vast amounts of data that the Internet is a great source as well as great computing advances, both recent events have of course been instrumental. As of yet unsolved is the verifiability of end-results as it is just a statistical conglomeration of layers & layers of data moving from input to output. As regards ChatGPT & it’s ilk, text is basically nothing but fuzzy math. Every textual assertion has its arithmetic dual. This is probably what makes it work.

They are close it will auto upgrade in a loop. Deep learning is the real term before they wrapped it as AI and it shall and has learned. It was bold of you to term this that way. I get it. Everything is cool. I understand your point. I understand the deep learning as a programmer. They added some other functions like transformers and weights etc.. Aren’t we receivers of info. Predictors of next step. We plan. Not good at first. But the real question is what is consciousness. For us that is. We know the “ai” is going to be missing something we know is in us. Also I’ll add that we aren’t seeing what others are working on behind closed doors. Some of those rich folks are using a stripped version that is not restricted. Which does scare me a little.

Hey! Artificial Stupidity is how I described myself.

People and businesses going mental over a sophisticated copy paste tool.

It is possible for an ai to be original, easier than a human - by filtering existing media much more efficiently that a human ever can. Conversely, though, it is more likely that an AI will he used to dismiss the originality of others - it can be the strongest, most irrefutable critic around, taking the flimsiest interrelatedness and deconstructing at will. Also, I have said this before. I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Artificial Intelligence is effectively a mushroom currently - and in the context of chat models: the weights are where the spores fall the words in the data sets are like the elements pushing them around. Simple

I am an expert in physics just this is the best

Profetic words

anyone else hear "A.i is only as smart as the one that programs it." Did anyone else hear Code bullet screaming "F***,F***,F***,we're down right F***ed"

How do you think biological systems become intelligent? Our biology runs similiar "automation"

I've not yet seen the additional video about the light compass, but an idea came to me, although i'm not even an amateur in physics, just a guy watching videos; still -- if such a direction exists along which the time does not dilate, but rather constricts, it should be observable by the fact that we do not detect most cosmic rays from this direction as projected past Earth. SInce most of the particles other than protons, electrons, photons, maybe neutrinos only reach Earth from the point of emission and not decay because they move close to the c, and their own time slows down, if they move towards Earth in the direction of the "zero velocity", their own time as seen from Earth must not slow down that much, or must even be sped up according to my understanding of your hypothesis, so they'll just decay. No mesons, no neutrons, no stuff like that. And in my opinion, seeking for a blind spot of this kind on the sky (albeit a travelling one) may be a much more feasible idea both technically and financially than building a light compass and a probe you've described.

In the twins experiment, won't the events on earth start happening faster only on the way back? When the twin in the rocket flies to the star he will be going away from the twin in earth as much as the twin in earth will go away from him? They will both see the red shift. And as the first twin returns they should again both experience the blue shift and the quickening of the observed events, it's just the events in the rocket, when seen from earth, will become slower to a greater extent on the way there and will become faster to a lesser extent on the way back than visa versa?

He's still wrong. It's not intelligence at all. It's just a type of computer program. That's it. That's all. Nothing to see here, move along.