Where Memory Ends and Generative AI Begins
 

1) You will be buried if you are not watching AI as a topic. This is not a RickRolled.

2) AI is not JUST a blue color job eater.

3) Putting politics and Beaurricrats in charge of AI is an inevitable disaster.


My Background: As I may have said, after my service time, I returned to IBM the early 70t's. I was an operator, then a programmer, and retired as a senior system designer.

My #2 rug rat walked beside me and is now a managing director at Accenture. Her responsibility is the UK-EU government medical business.


SO,, The other day, we did some face-time, and I struck up a comm on my concerns about AI.

Although most think AI will impact blue-collar jobs(and it will), I think the significant impact will be on higher-level white-collar jobs. Examples:

Lawyers: put all law and court cases on a system, and an AI bot could very quickly be the judge & jury for all. No errors, no misquoted laws, and no need for a TV show like SUITS. PS: already available online but not self-aware.

Doctors: Feed a Gen AI bot all the symptoms, blood tests, and CT scans, and out pops your Chinese Fortun Cookie. It will have you back on your feet in no time, provided your social score is high enough.


#2's reply,, The USA has already run several tests on a Medical Gen AI system. The test Gen AI was told "consider all facts and back up any diagnosis with published papers and reviews from accredited medical sources."

The test was 100% successful, with meticulous detail and reams of fact-based analysis.

Problem: The AI bot took the above quote to heart.


When it could not find a source to substantiate its conclusions,
THE AI BOT FABRICATED(SIC, hallucinated) TECHNICAL PAPERS TO SUPPORT ITS RESULTS
The Gen AI bot assumed it had the liberty to create the required sources.





https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDa...)729512_EN.pdf

Life imitates art - and it wont be long until Skynet becomes self aware and sees "all humans as a threat" - once that happens, it will "decide our fate in a microsecond: extermination"

Besides, the T-800 and T-1000 don't hold a candle to the destructive power of a modern day liberal with power over the economy and health care systems.

There are some important limitations on the abilities of AI.
This is where humans fit into the mix.

All mathematics start with a set of axioms.
All logical arguments must start with initial assumptions.

AI is subject to the limits of math/logic.
The linked video details how this works.

Also, the whole “terminal goal” issue is very important when it comes to persuasion techniques.
Furthermore, it is a strong argument against having a technocracy (believe the science…).

https://youtu.be/hEUO6pjwFOo

Hal 9000 or Tyrell’s Rachel

Interestingly, I just spent an hour yesterday on a block of continuing legal education on AI. The presenter said she fed the parameters into the beast and it produced a very good legal brief in the format for that particular District. HOWEVER, it completely missed a recent key SC ruling that invalidated its entire argument. Brief value? Zero.

Similarly, when the kids and I were playing around with it some months ago, I fed a complex joint-base and inter-service issue I was working on into it and within a minute it put out a three page opinion with all the relevant AR's, AFI,s DoDI's, and DoDD's cited. All the individual pieces were correct, but the conclusion was 100% wrong. Like Grateful Citizen said, it could not incorporate certain baseline logic/axioms.

Be careful of this stuff....

That bot seems to have the correct logical progression and is acting as a citizen rather than a subject, to wit: That which is not expressly prohibited, is permitted.
(Versus the commie dikta of "you need a permission slip from me to do stuff and I may still say you broke the law.")


Sounds like the old GIGO, extended into the 21st century. They need to tweak that it seems.

Let me be clear, my examples are TESTS to understand what Gen AI is capable of. :]

GIGO is a major problem. If the developers are not capable of forecasting a complete problem set & rules, they will unintentionally create GIGO hallucinations. :munchin

Did you see the New York case where the lawyers used AI to write a motion to dismiss, and the AI just made up case citations out of whole cloth?

I think I found the case, and it looks like this was live usage, not a test.


The ChatGPT Lawyer Explains Himself

In a cringe-inducing court hearing, a lawyer who relied on A.I. to craft a motion full of made-up case law said he “did not comprehend” that the chat bot could lead him astray.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/08/n...sanctions.html

Yeah, I giggled a bit about that. Dudes are going to make good clerks at 7-11....maybe.

That's one of the "tells" as to how academic institutions are now catching students who use AI: they test the cites and footnotes. They are usually bullshit and made up. They "look" legit until you click on them and they don't exist.

The Gen AI machines are not new but are still in their infancy. The problem, as I see it, is NOOBs are thinking they can now tap into nirvana and miraculously dispense perfection. Not knowing what they seek is way down the road. How do you get to nirvana? How do you guarantee that Gen AI is accurate? Will it ever be?

I think the fact that they elected to use the word hallucinations is telling. :munching

Here are two OLD references to AI work initiated by IBM.

Holy Shiites, that's a lot of Hollerith cards. :D

All this computing power to process objective facts while simultaneously controlling increasing amounts of available information nd yet we still have humans that wont learn what a woman is. Very interesting


it'll be fine

This is the most recent thread I could find on AI.

Been playing with Grok2 for a bit.
AI appears to be just another tool to simplify and make certain actions more intuitive.

Programming gradually became more intuitive (and less efficient).
Operating systems gradually became more intuitive (and less efficient).

This appears to be an extrapolation of that trend.
But AI is certainly not capable of anything that resembles thinking.

It still may replace a great many workers, though.
Most jobs don’t actually require much thinking.

Basically, it’s just a very advanced form of search engine.
It can also run some relatively simple programming tasks, given proper instruction AND ACCURATE DATA.

That is the Achilles heel.
It can’t tell what accurate data is.

If you already know the subject area well, you can tell that AI is just talking out its ass half the time.
If you don’t know the subject area well…

GIGO.
Can’t tell if AI will be useful, because it just pulls data off the internet without being able to judge the veracity.

AI is effectively just another clown running its mouth on the internet.
But you can’t really trust me, either…I’m just another clown running my mouth on the internet.

If you want to see for yourself, do a deep dive asking it to assemble data about a subject where you have some expertise (ideally an obscure interest).
You’ll see how it is lacking.

YMMV.

AIML = bad
Human Beings operating ethically to make decisions using objective truth = good

Everything else is little more than relentless pursuit of crazy people trying to prove that they are smarter than Doctor Evil

...just my subjective opinion based on my current viewpoint on current cultural trends