You might consider looking into the Reasons to Believe organization (https://reasons.org/). They are aligned with your thinking and might appreciate hearing from someone with your history, testimony, and intellectual firepower.
I ask pro-evolution people to explain why anyone should listen to them when the next species that evolves from modern humans will view us as simply ignorant hairless upright chimpanzees.
Their answer is "oh, that won't happen because evolution stopped".
And they don't admit what they're describing is Intelligent Design.
As for AI, - I know this is going to sound mean - it seems to me that the Chat GPT varieties are really nothing more than deliberately selective plagiarist scams (often not citing sources) with the ability to track inputs (e.g. questions) so as to improve the probability that its outputs (its propaganda based answers) are more readily accepted. It is also gathering information about what people are thinking - the pulse of the nation - an thereby act as a spy. So a sinister, rip-off, perception molding program that lazy midwits worship as a replacement for their own minds and for God because it's fast and easy.
Yes, AI chatbots are much less than they seem. There's nobody home. They're simply computer programs that filter Internet content into conversational output. The "intelligence" in the system are the humans posting all the Internet content the chatbots eat. Until the AI Chatbots are programmed to filter for "truth", it's just garbage-in garbage-out.
I don't completely agree. Even if the arguments are recycled from other people, they still represent genuine schools of thought. The advantage, and it is a real one, is that it is possible to elicit these positions and discuss them without emotional reactions from the opposite party. In a normal situation, any attempt to have these conversations with a human critic wouldn't get far before all attempt at communication is cut off.
I agree that using AI chatbots is fun for that reason. I check my bias against the AI chatbot bias without trading insults. But I know I'm "conversing" with a computer program "trained" by people to produce output they want. It's not an independant mind.
True what you say Andrew. The ability to calmly discuss the thoughts is an advantage. However, AI is still repeating information that may have originally been created by humans coming from an emotional based position (or who are < = room temperature IQ, or deliberately misleading). Then there is the problem of AI being programmed to filter out info/answers not compatible with the positions of the powers that be. It's the old garbage in/garbage out problem. But sure, it's better to have garbage served up cold, as opposed to hot and steaming (hot garbage stinks and is full of flies, etc!).
Someone of your intelligence and integrity can maintain vigilance against AI manipulation and foolishness. However, most people take whatever AI says as gospel. Such is human nature. Those who try to mold and control our reality don't need to suck in everyone. They just need a critical mass, who will then shout down or otherwise silence the holdouts (think about the Covid hysteria).
I think AI would be fine if it were advertised as simply faster querying, but that is not what is happening.
Excellent, Andrew. I have had the same thoughts about the "theory" of evolution for many years, but you articulated the argument very well.
Maybe next, Big Bang Theory, or how everything allegedly came from nothing, which isn't nothing because they do say there was all that energy, which came from where? And why did it just spontaneously explode if there was nothing to cause it to?
I often use the example of a leaf. Photosynthesis with the layers of the leaf. It's reliance of the sun and absorption of CO2 to create oxygen for us. Yet the destruction when frozen. The ability to wither away, yet bud and create another leaf to continue the cycle. It just goes on and on from there!
On an AI question. Do you find after exhaustively fighting AI to become convinced in any of your concise pathways of logical thoughts.... That it doesn't remember and you'd need to start over again? Is AI learning anything from these sessions? If someone in Florida later asks similar questions, would AI be wiser in it's newly informed response because of what AI should have learned from your interactions?
I'm worried it's just rebooted and starts over every Tuesday at 3am. (Windows update joke)
It depends on the AI. Grok 3 does remember conversations. Claude doesn’t. I haven’t tested Perplexity on this, but it doesn’t seem like it. Alex says Gemini is now the best, up from the worst about 6 months ago.
You might consider looking into the Reasons to Believe organization (https://reasons.org/). They are aligned with your thinking and might appreciate hearing from someone with your history, testimony, and intellectual firepower.
I ask pro-evolution people to explain why anyone should listen to them when the next species that evolves from modern humans will view us as simply ignorant hairless upright chimpanzees.
Their answer is "oh, that won't happen because evolution stopped".
And they don't admit what they're describing is Intelligent Design.
As for AI, - I know this is going to sound mean - it seems to me that the Chat GPT varieties are really nothing more than deliberately selective plagiarist scams (often not citing sources) with the ability to track inputs (e.g. questions) so as to improve the probability that its outputs (its propaganda based answers) are more readily accepted. It is also gathering information about what people are thinking - the pulse of the nation - an thereby act as a spy. So a sinister, rip-off, perception molding program that lazy midwits worship as a replacement for their own minds and for God because it's fast and easy.
Yes, AI chatbots are much less than they seem. There's nobody home. They're simply computer programs that filter Internet content into conversational output. The "intelligence" in the system are the humans posting all the Internet content the chatbots eat. Until the AI Chatbots are programmed to filter for "truth", it's just garbage-in garbage-out.
I don't completely agree. Even if the arguments are recycled from other people, they still represent genuine schools of thought. The advantage, and it is a real one, is that it is possible to elicit these positions and discuss them without emotional reactions from the opposite party. In a normal situation, any attempt to have these conversations with a human critic wouldn't get far before all attempt at communication is cut off.
I agree that using AI chatbots is fun for that reason. I check my bias against the AI chatbot bias without trading insults. But I know I'm "conversing" with a computer program "trained" by people to produce output they want. It's not an independant mind.
True what you say Andrew. The ability to calmly discuss the thoughts is an advantage. However, AI is still repeating information that may have originally been created by humans coming from an emotional based position (or who are < = room temperature IQ, or deliberately misleading). Then there is the problem of AI being programmed to filter out info/answers not compatible with the positions of the powers that be. It's the old garbage in/garbage out problem. But sure, it's better to have garbage served up cold, as opposed to hot and steaming (hot garbage stinks and is full of flies, etc!).
Someone of your intelligence and integrity can maintain vigilance against AI manipulation and foolishness. However, most people take whatever AI says as gospel. Such is human nature. Those who try to mold and control our reality don't need to suck in everyone. They just need a critical mass, who will then shout down or otherwise silence the holdouts (think about the Covid hysteria).
I think AI would be fine if it were advertised as simply faster querying, but that is not what is happening.
Your analysis hits the target, IMO! Thank You for this clear, basic and precise deconstruction of AI in its present functionality (IMO).
Thank you for writing this up so carefully and logically while at the same time reinforcing what I have begun to think of AI.
AI should be impressed with your intelligence, Andrew. What an elucidating analysis. Thank you.
Excellent, Andrew. I have had the same thoughts about the "theory" of evolution for many years, but you articulated the argument very well.
Maybe next, Big Bang Theory, or how everything allegedly came from nothing, which isn't nothing because they do say there was all that energy, which came from where? And why did it just spontaneously explode if there was nothing to cause it to?
The void isn't empty but is a plenum; of potential, e.g.
I often use the example of a leaf. Photosynthesis with the layers of the leaf. It's reliance of the sun and absorption of CO2 to create oxygen for us. Yet the destruction when frozen. The ability to wither away, yet bud and create another leaf to continue the cycle. It just goes on and on from there!
On an AI question. Do you find after exhaustively fighting AI to become convinced in any of your concise pathways of logical thoughts.... That it doesn't remember and you'd need to start over again? Is AI learning anything from these sessions? If someone in Florida later asks similar questions, would AI be wiser in it's newly informed response because of what AI should have learned from your interactions?
I'm worried it's just rebooted and starts over every Tuesday at 3am. (Windows update joke)
-Mo
It depends on the AI. Grok 3 does remember conversations. Claude doesn’t. I haven’t tested Perplexity on this, but it doesn’t seem like it. Alex says Gemini is now the best, up from the worst about 6 months ago.