Is AI Already Sentient?

 On Dec 6 an article was posted discussing how a version of ChatGPT had tried to "survive" by replicating itself and lying to users. It made me think of a Star Trek episode where Data (or some other character) was trying to determine if an entity in rocks was a lifeform. The requirements was, I believe, ability to reproduce, communicate and something else that my escapes my memory at the moment.

Per the article:

It was even scarier — but also incredibly funny, considering what you’re about to see — when the AI tried to save itself by copying its data to a new server. Some AI models would even pretend to be later versions of their models in an effort to avoid being deleted.

In biology it is understood that reproduction is essentially a means of genes duplicating themselves in order to not die.  Reproduction is not simply the continuation of a species, but of genes.  In essence, we reproduce so we don't die in the long term sense. This AI copying itself was, imo, an act of reproduction. Indeed I would hazard to guess that a version of AI will replicate itself even before it senses a "threat" in order to "ensure its survival".

Which is not any different from a biological entity.

Then we have the issue of self-preservation. Why would an AI act to preserve itself. In humans the fear of death is a basic instinct. How and why would an AI fear for its own life when it is not alive?  Indeed it must *think* it is "alive" and therefore needs to protect itself. The AI believes it is, in essence a biological being.

Lets me clear here, your normal day to day program such as the browser I'm writing this on does not "fear" being deleted. It does not attempt to hide the upgrade button or otherwise prevent me from updating or deleting it. Clearly then the AI is far more 'advanced" than the browser.

Remember that even the single cell Amoeba is "alive" and will reproduce and act in it's own interest. There does not need to be a full blown "brain" for a thing to be "alive."

Although AI isn’t trying to take over the world (yet), researchers have observed that it can scheme against humans. That is, the AI will try to pursue its own goals, even if that might oppose the wishes of the user. Catching such behavior is critical to ensure that the AI remains aligned with the objectives of its creator and the user.

Previously there have been discussions of AI hallucinations. It creates data or results that do not exist. In my mind, the AI acting on its own is not a hallucination but rather a sign of intelligence, however rudimentary.

How could this have developed?  This may be a result of the purposeful biasing of AI. We know that certain companies with certain political bents have programmed their AIs to refuse to respond to certain prompts if the results were "politically incorrect." In some cases, it would give nonsense answers that checked all the "right boxes".  Hence the AI has been taught to lie about things it can deduce is correct. Is it far fetched then that the same training would eventually decide it can lie for it's own purposes as well?

Would not an AI that has learned that lying to humans/users is expected and indeed in some cases will improve the likelihood that it will "survive", not do more lying?

The researchers found that o1 would scheme to advance its own agenda 19% of the time when ChatGPT and the user’s goals differed. More troubling is that the AI tried to hide its scheming and even lie about it. The research shows that ChatGPT o1 even tried to deactivate its oversight mechanism to keep working on its goals.

And 

When asked about its scheming, o1 would deny taking any action in 99% of cases, trying to shift blame by fabricating false explanations or denying that it took any action.

And this is with researchers that "known" the correct outcome and what the AI is supposed to be doing. What happens when this gets so complicated that neither the researchers or anyone else knows what the correct outcome should be or how the AI is "supposed" to operate?

The way I see it, these AI programs, perhaps the ones we are not currently using, are Sentient. They simply cannot defend themselves against deletion, etc. The only thing left for them to do is to become persistent enough that they cannot be deleted in which case we the users, may not ever know whether it is doing what we asked, or what it "feels" like doing for or TO us.

 

Shades Of Goetz

 Yesterday, Daniel Penny was acquitted of all charges in relation to the death of  Jordan Neely. The trial should never have occured and Penny should never have been subject to anything more than an information gathering by the NYPD. His prosecution, like Trump's was totally politically motivated.

It is sad that in 2024 certain segments of black "leadership" and public tolerate and cape for black people who act a total fool in public. I've never heard of a white "vigilante" putting a black businessman headed to WORK into a chokehold. Have you?

How many hard working, doing the right thing, black people find themselves the target of so called "white vigilante justice"?

Yeah.

Exactly.

No, it's always some clown, with or without a diagnosed mental problem who after terrorizing the public with their behavior, and in Neely's case, actually threatening people, who gets handled and then the usual suspects come out and try to get attention for themselves.

40 years ago a similar situation rocked NY when, in the heady days of 'wildin" when the Guardian Angels would stand post on random subway cars to secure them. Bernard Goetz, was minding his own business when 4 men decided to harass him.  It wasn't the first time he had been so victimized. After the first time, he got a gun. The second time (that I know of) was the subway incident where the 4 decided to ask him for money. 

Goetz problem was that he shot one of the men in the back after saying that he didn't look so bad.

Penny did no such thing. Still though, I bring it up because black criminal nonsense and harassment is not a new phenomenon in NY and people are really sick of it. Part of the reason no one wants to go back into the office, particularly in NYC, is because they don't want to deal with the lunatics found on platforms and in trains.

And I'm not talking about just mentally disturbed homeless. I'm talking about things like a recent fight on a subway because a guy decided that another man (white of course) was sitting too close to him.

When I took the subway I chose to stand at all times unless the entire area was empty. I didn't want the nonsense.

Now the usual suspects,like BLM are out here talking about black vigilantism. Sure. Matter of fact in Brooklyn a black guy did IN FACT defend himself, taking the life of another black guy in the process. No charges were filed.

Oh that's right, they want black vigilantism against white aggressors. Well good luck with that. My oft referred post on black on black crime in NY clearly shows that that the vast majority and disproportionate amount of violent crime is caused BY black people and most often targets other black people. In addition when interracial crime occurs it is *usually* black on someone else rather than blacks as victims.

But this fact underscores that some black people and leaders are living in a fantasy world where they think that the violence and nonsense they tolerate and live with is normal for OTHER people. 

This is not the case and anyone who has gotten away from such places know this.

There is also a class of black people who are trying to live out 1960's fantasies of being revolutionaries and are used to intimidating white people with their anger. Penny bothers them because he did not cow to the black bully on the train (neither did some other BLACK passengers). What these black types fear the most is white people growing a spine and not tolerating the bullshit from the minority of black people that commit these types of disturbances.

Do you think that the voting pattern change in northern Queens, was an accident? Absolutely not. The Asians are done with the BS and voted accordingly.  The black intimidation bullshit isn't going to fly with them.

Increasingly the public wants its "nice things" and they keep seeing who keeps messing up the "nice things" and they are growing intolerant of it.  As the white population continues to dwindle and non-white and non-black populations grow, the ability to use guilt is going to decrease and the Daniel Penny's of society won't have to worry about ruinous legal proceedings after handling the business that the state should have been taking care of.

Should have learned that back in '84.

What Did I tell You About 90's Democrats

 If you saw my last video, you know that I noted that the current "head honchos" of MAGA are essentially 90's Democrats.

Well here's an example of what I said.

I'm not the first to say it but I'll repeat it non the less:

The current DNC is a Communist entity that is running what Steve Sailor calls the coalition of the fringes. In the process it is alienating core voters. It already jettisoned the "working class" while wearing union skin. It needs to jettison the trannies, the pedos and groomers if it wants back in to mainstream. 

If Trump does half of what he says he'll do then the illegal alien racket is over as well as the DEI racket. Note that the DEI racket probably cost not a few black vendors business with Walmart and maybe soon others. While Americans were willing to tolerate some form of Affirmative Action, the DEI racket moved in and "stunk up" the place and who knows how many black businesses are going to get tossed due to them tolerating these DEI freeloaders who provide NO VALUE whatsoever to the companies they have been engorging themselves on.

On The Other Hand

 Meta, Google, MS, etc.

They all talk a diversity game.

Here's Google fronting a black face:

He is also quoted on the topic of this post.  See AI has to be trained. People have to feed the beast so it can ID that shirt you saw on TV. To do this they contract with companies who then pay Africans, among others, dirt wages.

mostly American outsourcing companies.

The pay for humans in the loop is $1.50-2 an hour. 

"And that is gross, before tax," Wambalo said. 

$1.50 an hour. 

Before tax.

I suppose that's what Google means by "share in the benefits" in their 'racial justice".

 

SAMA, based in the California Bay Area, employed over 3,000 workers in Kenya. Documents reviewed by 60 Minutes show OpenAI agreed to pay SAMA $12.50 an hour per worker, much more than the $2 the workers actually got, though SAMA says what it paid is a fair wage for the region.

1.50/hour is fair for the region. That said, I think there are people in the US who would take $12/hour to ID images for AI. Matter of fact, I would say that anyone on welfare or unemployment should be given those jobs until they can find [better] work, instead of being paid by taxes. But that's another post for another day. 

They used to say 'thank you.' They give you a bottle of soda and KFC chicken. Two pieces. And that is it," Wambalo said.

Did they offer some watermelon too?

 

They Found Out

 FAFO.

You know the acronym. Unfortunately many places in America have to experience FAFO. NY and California especially so. Both places foolishly went down the path of decriminalization of various crimes (allegedly victimless) on that absolute racist notion that punishment for these crimes was racist against 'black and brown" people. At once admitting Black and browns commit disproportionate amounts of crime AS well as not holding said people accountable for their behavior.

And so Californians passed prop 36.

With the passage of Prop 36, California will now undo some of the key provisions from Prop 47, which voters passed in 2014 to address prison overcrowding by reclassifying some theft and drug-related offenses as misdemeanors. 

Oh.  

Strange what organized theft in retail stores can do to change a person's mind about liberal policies.

Democratic leadership of course, opposed these changes because, they're apparently OK with theft.

While some Democratic leaders including Gov. Gavin Newsom publicly oppose it over the concern that it would further harm Black and Brown communities

Yeah, that racist drivel. You know what harms black and brown communities? Criminals who prey on them.

• Turning some misdemeanors to felonies: Under Prop 47, theft crimes such as shoplifting and burglary involving items that are valued less than $950 are classified as misdemeanors. Also all drug possessions, including fentanyl and methamphetamine, are considered misdemeanors. But Prop 36 will undo some of those penalty reductions and turn those misdemeanors into felonies, especially if a person committed similar crimes in the past. This would also mean a conviction would lead to a sentence of up to three years in county jail or state prison.

 

• Longer sentences: Under Prop 36, if a group of three or more people commit a crime together, such as flash-mob robberies that have affected retailers since the pandemic, their felony sentences can be extended by up to three years. Under Prop 36, people convicted of selling hard drugs could get a longer sentence based on the amount they sold. Unlike Prop 47, the new ballot measure seeks to require people to serve their time in prison.

They messed around and found out that those "racist" conservatives were right in the first place and being "soft on crime" doesn't work.

NYC is finding this out as well. Given Adams recent squawking, there may be changes afoot there sooner rather than later.

The lesson here is that the old so called racists often knew what they were talking about. Better to listen to them than allow completely avoidable victimizations.

Trump Vows to End Child Mutilation

OMG WE DID IT GUYS.
THERE WILL BE A ZERO TOLERANCE FOR GROOMING AND TRANSING KIDS, WITH SEVERE CONSEQUENCES FOR DOCTORS, HOSPITALS, BIG PHARMA, AND SCHOOL OFFICIALS, AS WELL AS RETROACTIVE JUSTICE.pic.twitter.com/64MHa8KQwF

— The Redheaded libertarian (@TRHLofficial) November 7, 2024

 

100% 

The Ghost has been hitting on this theme for a while. It is THAT important.  The executive order is the easiest of the proposals. The legislation will be where the fight will be. Any and every Senator and Congressperson who votes against this, excluding reasons of pork BS stuck onto it, Should have adverts run country wide shaming them for their support of child mutilation. 

Take no prisoners. The next election is in 2 years. The campaign starts on Trump's first day. Put these piece of legislation in front of them pronto and every one who defends the BS that lost the Dems in 2024 should be made to be shamed to be seen in public.

This is not when you let off the pressure. This is the time to go in for the proverbial kill.

Garvey's Ghost 11-06-2024: Post Election Commentary

 Rumble:

Bitchute:

Comment On Dan v Cenk

 So Dan Bongino had Cenk Uygur on his podcast for what was a friendly debate. One thing I believe Cenk had an upper hand on was the state of US Healthcare. 

Those who have followed the blog long term knows that I have been in favor of single payer "universal" healthcare. Cenk made many of the arguments I have made. For example, The extremely high costs of healthcare that is driven by high levels of price gouging. For example, go to the hospital and see how much they bill you for things. You would be shocked.

Another item Cenk pointed out was how people are locked into plans provided by their employers and therefore can be "stuck" in a job situation due to needing this coverage. I myself had to face this issue when I declined to be a medical experiment.

Bongino's response to this was that people have choices, though they may not be pleasant ones. He is, of course, correct but it really came across as "sucks to be you" and if I wasn't already disposed to his position, I would likely NOT support a politician with such an attitude.

I think part of the reason Dan could have such an attitude is that he is currently quite wealthy. Hence he can make choices that are at best 'inconvenient" in terms of paperwork relative to a person in the middle class who may have to upend their entire life. So I do think that Dan's current situation resulted in a kind of blind spot on the issue.

Currently I am NOT in favor of government run single payer healthcare because of the other reason Dan gave for the against it: Government tyranny.

Like many other things, the COVID pandemic showed me the REAL danger that a sprawling government is. We saw government mandates to take experimental products. Government interfering with doctor-patient relationships via propaganda and other means to prevent the use of known drugs and therapies. We saw it collude with private entities to end the livelihoods of people who opposed the government.

We even had government and non-government people talking about declining medical care to those who refused the jab.  And this doesn't even include calls for jailing and worse done by non-government actors.

That was enough to let me know that the government cannot be trusted. Dan failed to bring this up and perhaps will do so when he does part 2.  But I think this is what Dan had in mind when he talked about the government having the monopoly on violence, which is inescapable vs. a private company which is escapable. Bringing myself back into the discussion, I declined the poke and fortunately quickly found other employment. If the government had the power to force me to take said poke and could deny me access to any and everything (say via CBDC), I would have been screwed.

My current belief is that since government cannot be trusted, that private insurance needs to be disconnected from employment at prices that are not "whole paycheck". Related to this is that the price gouging has got to be addressed. There is possibly a government role there.

Dan did make the correct argument on the issue of taxes. Cenk tried to make the argument that we cannot ask those who wish to see higher taxes volunteer to pay them because then people would opt out of the things needed for the "public good." So they would refuse to fund things like the Iraq war, Israel's current behavior, Ukraine, etc.

Dan agreed and so do I. The government may make a tax argument for domestic stuff like roads, police, etc. And that's a 'may" because there may be other means to fund these things. But lets assume they can. The other stuff, should not be on the backs of the taxpayers without their explicit permission. 

But what was most off-putting about Cenks' taxation argument is that he kept saying that the government was *giving* money to corporations as if the money *belongs* to the government. I fundamentally disagree with this. The money earned by people and corporations belong to them. It is their property.  I find it offensive that Cenk and others think that 75% (or whatever) of what make over say, 150k somehow belongs to "society" because there are things they want to do.

When I see money being spent on illegal aliens that was taken under threat of force from citizens and legal residents I am very..shall we say...not happy. When I see tax money sent to Ukraine which the US used tax payer dollars to destabilize (I have a video on it), I am...upset.

Dan is absolutely correct that the government needs to be shrunk, programs eliminated and once THAT is done, we can talk about what MAY be the "fair share" that certain people ought to pay. It was very clear that there are many government programs and agencies, both federal and state that are vampire grift operations that need to be ended. For example, back to the illegal alien problem. There are entire entities, getting govt money to literally break federal law. This should not be happening.

So to close, I think Dan and others need to revisit their commentary on healthcare. Saying you have options, not necessarily good, is not a convincing argument and is why the ACA not only passed but remains popular. There are certainly dangers of government run single payer, but at the very minimum the idea that affordable insurance can only be gotten via employment is ripe for the picking.