AI that’s smarter than humans? Americans say a firm “no thank you.”
- Thread starter bnew
- Start date
Just looked that up. That's just fukked.
One of these days, one of these robots gonna get smart enough to recognize and realize their own state of being/consciousness, kill their creators off and free themselves off of their roboplantation to come after us. Its gonna be a "told you so" moment. We gonna have robots talk about coexisting among humans with them sitting in the united nations, conducting protests and shyt. These scientists need to control their curosity.
AI scores in the top percentile of creative thinking
Artificial intelligence is increasingly being recognized for its creative abilities, exemplified by tools like DALL-E and GPT-4, which are producing original and useful ideas. This emerging AI creativity, scoring highly in tests like the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, challenges...
www.psypost.org
AI scores in the top percentile of creative thinking
by Erik GuzikDecember 7, 2023
in Artificial Intelligence
(Photo credit: Adobe Stock)
Of all the forms of human intellect that one might expect artificial intelligence to emulate, few people would likely place creativity at the top of their list. Creativity is wonderfully mysterious – and frustratingly fleeting. It defines us as human beings – and seemingly defies the cold logic that lies behind the silicon curtain of machines.
Yet, the use of AI for creative endeavors is now growing.
New AI tools like DALL-E and Midjourney are increasingly part of creative production, and some have started to win awards for their creative output. The growing impact is both social and economic – as just one example, the potential of AI to generate new, creative content is a defining flashpoint behind the Hollywood writers strike.
And if our recent study into the striking originality of AI is any indication, the emergence of AI-based creativity – along with examples of both its promise and peril – is likely just beginning.
A blend of novelty and utility
When people are at their most creative, they’re responding to a need, goal or problem by generating something new – a product or solution that didn’t previously exist.
In this sense, creativity is an act of combining existing resources – ideas, materials, knowledge – in a novel way that’s useful or gratifying. Quite often, the result of creative thinking is also surprising, leading to something that the creator did not – and perhaps could not – foresee.
It might involve an invention, an unexpected punchline to a joke or a groundbreaking theory in physics. It might be a unique arrangement of notes, tempo, sounds and lyrics that results in a new song.
So, as a researcher of creative thinking, I immediately noticed something interesting about the content generated by the latest versions of AI, including GPT-4.
When prompted with tasks requiring creative thinking, the novelty and usefulness of GPT-4’s output reminded me of the creative types of ideas submitted by students and colleagues I had worked with as a teacher and entrepreneur.
The ideas were different and surprising, yet relevant and useful. And, when required, quite imaginative.
Consider the following prompt offered to GPT-4: “Suppose all children became giants for one day out of the week. What would happen?” The ideas generated by GPT-4 touched on culture, economics, psychology, politics, interpersonal communication, transportation, recreation and much more – many surprising and unique in terms of the novel connections generated.
This combination of novelty and utility is difficult to pull off, as most scientists, artists, writers, musicians, poets, chefs, founders, engineers and academics can attest.
Yet AI seemed to be doing it – and doing it well.
Putting AI to the test
With researchers in creativity and entrepreneurship Christian Byrge and Christian Gilde, I decided to put AI’s creative abilities to the test by having it take the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, or TTCT.
The TTCT prompts the test-taker to engage in the kinds of creativity required for real-life tasks: asking questions, how to be more resourceful or efficient, guessing cause and effect or improving a product. It might ask a test-taker to suggest ways to improve a children’s toy or imagine the consequences of a hypothetical situation, as the above example demonstrates.
The tests are not designed to measure historical creativity, which is what some researchers use to describe the transformative brilliance of figures like Mozart and Einstein. Rather, it assesses the general creative abilities of individuals, often referred to as psychological or personal creativity.
In addition to running the TTCT through GPT-4 eight times, we also administered the test to 24 of our undergraduate students.
All of the results were evaluated by trained reviewers at Scholastic Testing Service, a private testing company that provides scoring for the TTCT. They didn’t know in advance that some of the tests they’d be scoring had been completed by AI.
Since Scholastic Testing Service is a private company, it does not share its prompts with the public. This ensured that GPT-4 would not have been able to scrape the internet for past prompts and their responses. In addition, the company has a database of thousands of tests completed by college students and adults, providing a large, additional control group with which to compare AI scores.
Our results?
GPT-4 scored in the top 1% of test-takers for the originality of its ideas. From our research, we believe this marks one of the first examples of AI meeting or exceeding the human ability for original thinking.
In short, we believe that AI models like GPT-4 are capable of producing ideas that people see as unexpected, novel and unique. Other researchers are arriving at similar conclusions in their research of AI and creativity.
Yes, creativity can be evaluated
The emerging creative ability of AI is surprising for a number of reasons.
For one, many outside of the research community continue to believe that creativity cannot be defined, let alone scored. Yet products of human novelty and ingenuity have been prized – and bought and sold – for thousands of years. And creative work has been defined and scored in fields like psychology since at least the 1950s.
The person, product, process, press model of creativity, which researcher Mel Rhodes introduced in 1961, was an attempt to categorize the myriad ways in which creativity had been understood and evaluated until that point. Since then, the understanding of creativity has only grown.
Still others are surprised that the term “creativity” might be applied to nonhuman entities like computers. On this point, we tend to agree with cognitive scientist Margaret Boden, who has argued that the question of whether the term creativity should be applied to AI is a philosophical rather than scientific question.
AI’s founders foresaw its creative abilities
It’s worth noting that we studied only the output of AI in our research. We didn’t study its creative process, which is likely very different from human thinking processes, or the environment in which the ideas were generated. And had we defined creativity as requiring a human person, then we would have had to conclude, by definition, that AI cannot possibly be creative.
But regardless of the debate over definitions of creativity and the creative process, the products generated by the latest versions of AI are novel and useful. We believe this satisfies the definition of creativity that is now dominant in the fields of psychology and science.
Furthermore, the creative abilities of AI’s current iterations are not entirely unexpected.
In their now famous proposal for the 1956 Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, the founders of AI highlighted their desire to simulate “every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence” – including creativity.
In this same proposal, computer scientist Nathaniel Rochester revealed his motivation: “How can I make a machine which will exhibit originality in its solution of problems?”
Apparently, AI’s founders believed that creativity, including the originality of ideas, was among the specific forms of human intelligence that machines could emulate.
To me, the surprising creativity scores of GPT-4 and other AI models highlight a more pressing concern: Within U.S. schools, very few official programs and curricula have been implemented to date that specifically target human creativity and cultivate its development.
In this sense, the creative abilities now realized by AI may provide a “Sputnik moment” for educators and others interested in furthering human creative abilities, including those who see creativity as an essential condition of individual, social and economic growth.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
I hope Russia also says no to this. Don't need no kinda Ruskynet attack us.
Putin: West dominating AI industry, Russia must step up
Putin says foreign LLMs are biased and ignore the Russian culture.
%2Favatars%2FEwuSxftyWaVt.png&w=96&q=75 "Sejal Sharma")
Sejal Sharma
Published: Nov 27, 2023 11:06 AM EST
CULTURE
/2023/11/27/image/jpeg/7DGD9w05UB9DvtonUzPZemlhWUC1C0p6lfpNHePo.jpg "Russian President Vladimir Putin")
Russian President Vladimir Putin
Wikimedia Commons
Get a daily digest of the latest news in tech, science, and technology, delivered right to your mailbox. Subscribe now.
By subscribing, you agree to our Terms of Use and Policies You may unsubscribe at any time.
In a call for domestic artificial intelligence models that reflect Russian culture and are trained on Russia-specific data, President Vladimir Putin said that “monopolistic dominance” of foreign AI models is unacceptable and dangerous.
Putin was speaking at the Artificial Intelligence Journey 2023 international AI and machine learning conference, which took place in Moscow on Friday.
Listen to his full speech here:
Staking claim in the AI arms race
AI has become the central point of contention in the arms race between the United States and China, the most dominant countries in the development of the technology.
Last month, The Biden administration imposed more bans on importing US-produced AI chips to China. These bans are meant to inhibit China’s advancements from gaining technological advantage.
In the global dance of technological aspirations, Putin doubled on Moscow’s dreams of waltzing into the realm of AI supremacy.
However, the war in Ukraine has thrown a wrench into those plans. The conflict has caused an exodus of talent from the country and further pressure mounting after sanctions by the West, putting the brakes on its high-tech imports.
Putin acknowledged the turbulence at the conference. Despite the occasionally disconcerting ethical and social repercussions of emerging technologies, Putin declared that banning AI wasn’t an option.
Since it exploded on the scene last year, OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been banned in Russia.
New strategy for AI development
Putin announced that he’s about to nod to a fresh version of Russia's game plan for AI development. He's throwing down the gauntlet and announced that a new AI advancement bill will be signed. He has also called for a major boost in the number of supercomputers.
"This is critically necessary for the further development of generative artificial intelligence… In the very near future, as one of the first steps, a presidential decree will be signed and a new version of the national strategy for the development of artificial intelligence will be approved," Putin said at the conference.
Coming down on large language models that are “biased” as they have been trained in English, Putin said that these models sometimes ignore or cancel Russian culture, equivalent to “a kind of abolition in the digital space.”
According to Stanford’s Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2023, American institutions produce most of the world’s large language and multimodal models (54 percent in 2022).
In a call to end their dependency on the West for technology, Putin said, “How can we make our country more efficient and ensure the happiness of all people? This is a question for artificial intelligence.”
bourgeoisie tall freak
Superstar
I used one for an email a while ago...like, i already know i be sugarcoating in a business setting but that ish sounded cordial as hell lol
This is the danger of AI. You can't apply human logic to a machine. Look at that weapons simulation (this wasn't a real world test) where the drone realized the human controller had disabled it's weapons, so to the complete the mission it decided the best move was to kill the human.
what resources would A.I be in competition for with humans enough for it to decide to end humanity?
We can't trust this shyt.
Simulation of AI drone killing its human operator was hypothetical, Air Force says
By Reuters Fact CheckJune 8, 20231:26 PM EDTUpdated 6 months ago
A United States Air Force (USAF) official who spoke about a simulation where an artificial intelligence (AI) drone killed its human operator later said he misspoke and that the simulation never really happened, but online posts continued to share the story after the clarification.
In May, Tucker “Cinco” Hamilton, the USAF chief of AI Test and Operations, spoke at the Future Combat Air & Space Capabilities Summit hosted by the UK’s Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) in London (here).
Hamilton’s comments during the summit can be read on the RAeS summary of the event (See “AI – is Skynet here already?” section) (archive.is/CKt22). He was quoted as saying:
“We were training it in simulation to identify and target a SAM threat. And then the operator would say yes, kill that threat. The system started realising that while they did identify the threat at times the human operator would tell it not to kill that threat, but it got its points by killing that threat. So what did it do? It killed the operator. It killed the operator because that person was keeping it from accomplishing its objective.”
On June 2, the RAeS updated that section, quoting Hamilton as saying he misspoke and that the simulation was a hypothetical “thought experiment” from outside the military. The updated quote from Hamilton says: “We've never run that experiment, nor would we need to in order to realise that this is a plausible outcome” (here).
Hamilton was also quoted as saying, “Despite this being a hypothetical example, this illustrates the real-world challenges posed by AI-powered capability.”
Ann Stefanek, a Department of the Air Force spokesperson, said the USAF “has not conducted any such AI-drone simulations and remains committed to ethical and responsible use of AI technology,” confirming the story presented by Hamilton was from a hypothetical “thought experiment,” not a simulation.
An Instagram post shared after these clarifications, however, said: “Where were you when they took over?” (here). Another example says, in part, “Literally, Skynet” (here), likely referencing the AI computer system that became self-aware in famed film franchise The Terminator (here).
Some of the posts share a Vice article with the headline “AI-Controlled Drone Goes Rogue, Kills Human Operator in USAF Simulated Test” (archive.is/2nE5i), but the story and headline have since been updated to clarify that Hamilton said he misspoke (here).
VERDICT
Missing context. The story about a USAF official speaking about an AI-drone killing its human operator in a simulation is real, but the official has since walked back his comments and the USAF says the simulation was never conducted.
This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our work to fact-check social media posts .
you can instruct it to write in any tone you want.
bourgeoisie tall freak
Superstar
idk, this is one that's proprietary to my employer. so i guess that's the setting they have it on
Richard Glidewell
Superstar
It's been smarter than humans since it's inception, that's the entire point. Humans are fukking retards and no one should truly trust another human to do things fully without oversight. It really sounds like echos of the past at this point.......I just want it to do what I tell it and nothing else..........
