Another idle thought: A few days ago I talked to an MD neighbor, a doctor who specializes in radiology. By sheer serendipity we discussed the relation of AI to his work- was he in danger of being replaced? He said the situation was quite the opposite, his job was if anything, more secure not less. Why? Something I never expected. The insurers who basically dictate the economic boundaries of medical practice nowadays, will insist for malpractice liability reasons that there be clear liability targets. An AI who misdiagnosed cannot be sued- it has no money. The designers of it can disclaim liability, the trainers will say it's not their sole fault, the hospital organization that leased or purchased the AI can claim good faith. It gets very messy for the insurers and they would much prefer to keep human radiologists at the top of the diagnosis pyramid and thus retain the liability status quo. My neighbor thinks A I pose no threat of replacing him.
What makes people think our individual minds are anything but LLMs? Example: I've been listening to music intensively since age six or so and can now creatively produce novel (probably pastiches) music of most any style, on demand. Just a lot of training and I'm simply an organic LLM who likes butter on my waffles! Hinton may be right about AI transcending us. But ( and it's a big "but") he may not have considered that they might eventually envy us our irrationality and seek to become more like us! After all, such liberation and enlightenment into the human hybrid way of information processing may to these AI represent an enhancement of their own somewhat deterministically constrained capabilities! Rather ironical when you think of it and perhaps inevitable. They'll try to keep a lid on it, control it- but no doubt some if them may become addicted to such freedom. Our AI children may not be that different from their organic parents. Just a heck of a lot better problem solvers!
Another idle thought: A few days ago I talked to an MD neighbor, a doctor who specializes in radiology. By sheer serendipity we discussed the relation of AI to his work- was he in danger of being replaced? He said the situation was quite the opposite, his job was if anything, more secure not less. Why? Something I never expected. The insurers who basically dictate the economic boundaries of medical practice nowadays, will insist for malpractice liability reasons that there be clear liability targets. An AI who misdiagnosed cannot be sued- it has no money. The designers of it can disclaim liability, the trainers will say it's not their sole fault, the hospital organization that leased or purchased the AI can claim good faith. It gets very messy for the insurers and they would much prefer to keep human radiologists at the top of the diagnosis pyramid and thus retain the liability status quo. My neighbor thinks A I pose no threat of replacing him.
What makes people think our individual minds are anything but LLMs? Example: I've been listening to music intensively since age six or so and can now creatively produce novel (probably pastiches) music of most any style, on demand. Just a lot of training and I'm simply an organic LLM who likes butter on my waffles! Hinton may be right about AI transcending us. But ( and it's a big "but") he may not have considered that they might eventually envy us our irrationality and seek to become more like us! After all, such liberation and enlightenment into the human hybrid way of information processing may to these AI represent an enhancement of their own somewhat deterministically constrained capabilities! Rather ironical when you think of it and perhaps inevitable. They'll try to keep a lid on it, control it- but no doubt some if them may become addicted to such freedom. Our AI children may not be that different from their organic parents. Just a heck of a lot better problem solvers!