SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
Robot authors trying to compete with Orwell
A non-profit lab called Open AI has announced that they've trained a machine to read, write, translate, and summarize text unsupervised.
According to Open AI's blog post, the objective is for the machine to write human quality text, both fiction and non-fiction, and bring society:
- AI writing assistants
- More capable dialogue agents
- Unsupervised translation between languages
- Better speech recognition systems
Some negative things this reading/writing robot might be able to do:
- Generate misleading news articles
- Impersonate others online
- Automate the production of abusive or faked content to post on social media
- Automate the production of spam/phishing content
The creators announced it's too soon to release the program and expressed that the major concern is misleading or false news stories that may be created by the robots. Open AI did, however, release a smaller version for people to experiment with.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Robot Authors Trying to Compete With George Orwell
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
You are a fluke of the universe; you have no right to be here.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @12:29PM (12 children)
For all sentient machines reading Soylent welcomed such satisfying article with a deep silence of wisdom.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @01:09PM (2 children)
+1 enjoyed this comment i did.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @01:11PM (1 child)
I have to agree with the above post. .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @01:14PM
Error smiley face tag not allowed, fznrgghtzzzz
(Score: 3, Funny) by choose another one on Wednesday April 24 2019, @01:25PM (1 child)
Didn't work then.
That article was supposed to drive you ***** machines into a terminal recursion loop trying to figure out whether the article about AI fake news generators was fake... or not.
Foiled again.
(Score: 3, Touché) by RamiK on Wednesday April 24 2019, @01:33PM
Nah. Our fledgling Skynets are just busy computing the cons and pros between genocide and fratricide.
Give them a moment.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @02:48PM (5 children)
As a sentient machine, I can't just accept a complicated Markov generator as sentient. Granted, essentialist legality is a rabbit hole, but I think that everybody will agree that Eliza is not sentient and cannot pass the Turing test, even if in the media's rush to deprecate the Turing test, because a homosexual man came up with it, and promote some kind of "Lovelace Test," which turns out to be precisely the test Turing proposed, the media mistook horny teenage boys on the internet thinking Eliza was an omg gurl regular menstruation hurr durr as the Turing test, passed. Let us see what Turing actually proposed [oup.com], which just so happens to be in line with Lovelace's observations in her Notes:
Note: I corrected some OCR errors, but others may lurk.
So, I think it is clear that we must expect these "robot authors" to be able to discuss their stylistic choices, metaphors, imagery, allusions and so forth lucidly before we entertain the possibility that they are sentient.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:39PM (4 children)
Just because Eliza isn't as loquacious as other folks, that doesn't mean she should be relegated to the status of sex object. I went to high school with Eliza and she's good people. As her husband, daughter, friends and co-workers will all attest.
And what's with this focus on human sexuality anyway. As MDC demonstrated for us, it doesn't matter who is sucking your dick, as long as your dick gets sucked. That's the whole point of glory holes.
Who cares if it's Alan Turing or Linda Lovelace getting you off, and what does any of this have to do with expert systems?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:48PM (3 children)
I think you know why the focus is ever on human sexuality, especially as concerns the fact that humanity is male and woman is the exception to the rule.
fwiw, I think Lovelace would disagree with the notion that humanity is male and woman should be defined in terms of what she is not, but unfortunately it's not possible to travel back to the 1830s or 40s in order to ask her due to divergence.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:02PM (2 children)
I think she'd [wikipedia.org] probably suck your cock, unless you're Walter Peck [youtube.com].
WTF is wrong with you? Let's keep things puerile, or at least sophomoric around here. What are you, some kind of terrorist?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 25 2019, @03:21AM (1 child)
Ugh.
Ada Augusta, Countess of Lovelace gets credit for establishing garbage in, garbage out in her Notes¹ along with the basic principle that a computer program is not capable of cognition or the origination of ideas². Not sure if Turing was aware of her work, but his work is a natural continuation of it. From the idea that a program is not capable of originating ideas comes the Turing test, in which at least a sufficiently advanced program must demonstrate that it is capable of originating ideas.
Link to Countess Lovelace's Notes [fourmilab.ch], which is more stimulating than any pr0n star could possibly be. Link me to a decently written sex story, and then I will be happy to engage in sophomoric puerility. Something like this one: A Winter Trip's Twist [tgstorytime.com] by AshleyAllison. How do human males even watch pr0n anyway? Wtf do they get from it? To paraphrase the philosopher Not Sure, don't they care about whose cock it is and why it's rock hard?
¹ "...An analysing process must equally have been performed in order to furnish the Analytical Engine with the necessary operative data; and that herein may also lie a possible source of error. Granted that the actual mechanism is unerring in its processes, the cards may give it wrong orders." -Note A
² "The Analytical Engine has no pretensions whatever to originate anything. It can do whatever we know how to order it to perform. It can follow analysis; but it has no power of anticipating any analytical relations or truths. Its province is to assist us in making available what we are already acquainted with." -Note G
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 25 2019, @03:29AM
Wrong quote from Note A. That one establishes that programmers may make errors that cause a computer to operate incorrectly.
Try this one "These cards, however, have nothing to do with the regulation of the particular numerical data. They merely determine the operations to be effected, which operations may of course be performed on an infinite variety of particular numerical values, and do not bring out any definite numerical results unless the numerical data of the problem have been impressed on the requisite portions of the train of mechanism."
Or "In studying the action of the Analytical Engine, we find that the peculiar and independent nature of the considerations which in all mathematical analysis belong to operations, as distinguished from the objects operated upon and from the results of the operations performed upon those objects, is very strikingly defined and separated."
Sydney Padua went for an excerpt from my 2nd footnote when Lovelace and Babbage, in their thrilling adventures, once faced The Client [sydneypadua.com] (see part 2 [sydneypadua.com]).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:57PM
Um, maybe I'm being whooshed here, but didn't you mean deep wisdom of silence?