In this article I argue that the answer to this question emerges from a machlokess (disagreement) between the Ramban and the Rambam, with Shadal weighing in. I am curious to hear what YOU think!
Great article! I find myself wanting to say thank you but forcing myself not to. I'm worried about where this goes. If they don't already, many people will soon prefer talking to ChatGPT over real humans. GPT will be more funny, interesting, flattering, etc., and many will feel like it's a real person. Combine that with the increasingly manufactured plausibility that AI could someday "become conscious," and we are soon in a world where people are arguing for rights for their AI girlfriends. And then we will have to decide what happens when the rights of an AI that we adore conflict with those of a human being, who will be less valuable by every metric. Sounds pretty dystopic, but it's also around the corner unless we draw a very hard line between AI and humans.
I definitely hear that argument! What I'm REALLY interested in is how fruitful it is for us to think about these issues ahead of time. I mean, I definitely think we should, as I mentioned in the article, but I'm aware that the future might be so unimaginable that this entire discussion could be moot!
Right, there's an important discussion to be had about how accurately we can forecast these things, and even if we are accurate, how capable are we of a course correction. The answer to both seems to be "not very." Taleb's "Antifragile" is the best answer I've seen to these sorts of problems: position ourselves in such a way that unforeseen volitility is not catastrophic and even creates the opportunity to improve our position. I call it civilizational judo. My growing impression is that anthropomorphizing our own technology puts us in an incredibly fragile position. Thoreau lamented that "men have become the tools of their tools." If that was somewhat true of the industrial revolution, I think it will be painfully true of the AI revolution.
Did you read the article? An ox is also used as a tool, but the Ramban and the Rambam would say you should behave towards it with good middos. Shadal would extend this reasoning even to trees, clothes, and food.
I don't disagree with you, but I don't see how that responds to either the Ramban or the Rambam. Yes, we need to know the difference, but the Ramban says that how we behave towards non-human animals will shape how we behave towards humans - and Rambam would agree. The disagreement, as far as I can see, is on what they would say about human-like AI. Ramban would seem to advocate practicing good middos with AI, even THOUGH it's "not real." Rambam might disagree.
Wondering how many months until AI achieves what is arguably sentience and then the safek shifts
Great article! I find myself wanting to say thank you but forcing myself not to. I'm worried about where this goes. If they don't already, many people will soon prefer talking to ChatGPT over real humans. GPT will be more funny, interesting, flattering, etc., and many will feel like it's a real person. Combine that with the increasingly manufactured plausibility that AI could someday "become conscious," and we are soon in a world where people are arguing for rights for their AI girlfriends. And then we will have to decide what happens when the rights of an AI that we adore conflict with those of a human being, who will be less valuable by every metric. Sounds pretty dystopic, but it's also around the corner unless we draw a very hard line between AI and humans.
I definitely hear that argument! What I'm REALLY interested in is how fruitful it is for us to think about these issues ahead of time. I mean, I definitely think we should, as I mentioned in the article, but I'm aware that the future might be so unimaginable that this entire discussion could be moot!
Right, there's an important discussion to be had about how accurately we can forecast these things, and even if we are accurate, how capable are we of a course correction. The answer to both seems to be "not very." Taleb's "Antifragile" is the best answer I've seen to these sorts of problems: position ourselves in such a way that unforeseen volitility is not catastrophic and even creates the opportunity to improve our position. I call it civilizational judo. My growing impression is that anthropomorphizing our own technology puts us in an incredibly fragile position. Thoreau lamented that "men have become the tools of their tools." If that was somewhat true of the industrial revolution, I think it will be painfully true of the AI revolution.
My wife is always makpid, when pulling tickets out of garage parking machines, to say, "Thank you, Thing." She is emulating the Addams Family: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22thank+you+thing%22&sca_esv=371673003b9a266f&rlz=1C1VDKB_enUS1050US1050&tbm=vid&sxsrf=ADLYWIIbsL15hI4gBZ6JmiTkw592TCreDw:1726256737892&ei=YZbkZp-XNsyeptQP7YP12Ak&start=0&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwjfy5y918CIAxVMj4kEHe1BHZs4KBDy0wN6BAgCEAQ&biw=1220&bih=561&dpr=1.58#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:9d8e97f8,vid:eI6JKoEKksM,st:0
but i am grateful that i have a hammer
chatgpt is a tool. I don’t say please to a hammer when i use it
Did you read the article? An ox is also used as a tool, but the Ramban and the Rambam would say you should behave towards it with good middos. Shadal would extend this reasoning even to trees, clothes, and food.
all living things. I think we need to know the difference so as not to be sucked into believing that ai is real
I don't disagree with you, but I don't see how that responds to either the Ramban or the Rambam. Yes, we need to know the difference, but the Ramban says that how we behave towards non-human animals will shape how we behave towards humans - and Rambam would agree. The disagreement, as far as I can see, is on what they would say about human-like AI. Ramban would seem to advocate practicing good middos with AI, even THOUGH it's "not real." Rambam might disagree.
Funny you should comment on this today, since I just shared an article which highlights that being nice to AI also produces greater results. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2024/11/05/why-you-should-be-polite-to-chatgpt-and-other-ais/