Nothing wrong with playing/singing other people’s songs, I sing along to the radio in my car all the time.

Maybe a bit, but depends on how well said life extension works (delays and prevents aging vs straight up reversing aging) and whether you can get people to continue working. I think it would still be decades before it takes adequate effect. Not as helpful for countries looking at major issues in 10-30 years. Could be a way to help buy time and wiggle room at best.

Demographic collapse is not a real thing. The only reason that it is a topic is that many governments have built a social welfare Ponzi scheme, funding support for the elderly with the work of the younger. That does not need to be the case. It's a manufactured crisis.

But assuming there were a crisis caused by a decline in the workforce, yes it would help. But of course retirement and pension would have to be totally re-visited. The only way it would help is if the life-extended continued to work.

China is the shining example. We will have too many people. One child per couple. We don't have enough young people to do the work. Take time off to have more children. It's what happens when governments try to take too much control for your own good..

We're talking about ethics here, not unethical legal loopholes

How so? There is a correct/least bad way to behave in a group, and this will happen to any entity in a group; that's as intrinsic as it gets, isn't it?

Or do you mean it should be intrinsic to all entities? As long as an entity perceives at least one other entity it will interact with, there is already an array of possible interactions and thus ethics. For an AI to have no ethics at all, it would have to perceive itself as the only "real entity". It seems to me that if such a thing happened, it would simply be badly programmed...

GPT is just building rows of words based on probabilities. You guys are giving all that way too much credit. Please first learn about how AI / machine learning works and start discussions after that.

Researchers are already close to accomplishing this with Stable Diffusion, fMRI, & AI https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/two-researchers-created-model-draw-193459472.html

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.18.517004v2

lol - say you regularity violate use terms on open source software without saying you regularity violate use terms on open source software.

lol - you don't think ChatGPT is spitting out insanely close replicas of other peoples work daily?

Important Caveat 1 : What they built is a lot more limited than you might imagine just by looking at the pictures.

Important Caveat 2 : This isn't memory, it's decoding what the user is currently looking at. Even as this technology gets better, it remains to be seen if the human brain can even recall a memory coherently enough to extract it like this.

But still : It's a real step towards a technology that sci-fi writers have fantasized about for generations. And even if it never works on "memories", it could be huge for people with disabilities. And of course, if it ever got cheap, people would use it to record dreams.

[removed]

So if I call something in my process "learning" I'm free to use it? I'm learning copies of your works on my printer to sell right now

Edit: to be clear I don't know what the answer is but that seems simplistic

[deleted]

At this point surveillance will be so large, that having thoughts will be a crime.

So I'd rather wouldn't think about it. And hope to die before it will become a thing.

PS: or we will psionically ascend. That's I can greet easily

The base knowledge to build androids has been around a long time, we just didn't have the software for them to do anything interesting.

Denmark is still well above the average, even for Europe.

• Share of primary energy from low-carbon sources

[deleted]

Sounds like a disgruntled worker who probably got laid off or fired if they think this matters.

Even if it is against the terms of service of ChatGPT, what are they going to do about it? There are no legal judgments if AI output even is copyrightable, and no judgments if training on copyrightable material is fair use.

And OpenAI trained on a lot of copyright material, so they better think twice about opening that can of worms.

They only thing they can try to do, is limit the access of Google to ChatGPT's output, but good luck with that, if they want it to remain available to the general public.

You misunderstand.

You typed up quite a large and thoughtful reply to a bot. The bot's post is what reads like dry toast without butter. I'm simply trying to help you not waste your time.

I would like to sue every AI that used my data in it's training. 1 million dollars per use.

All musicians learn from hearing other music.

There is a difference between learning and copying.

Other people have already mentioned nutrition, which is very important. But scientists have also theorized that part of the reason for the Netherlands having the highest average height is that women in that country have preferred men who are taller, more than in other countries.

In response to your question, I don’t think so, that would be very strange. The only way I could think of that the size of a country and the height of its people would correlate is if bigger countries tend to have higher GDPs per capita, allowing people more money so they can get proper nutrition from food. However, I don’t think size of country and GDP per capita correlate much, but I could be wrong.

That implies that there’s no intrinsic ethical behaviour, though. If we remove the benefit to the individual, being part of a society, does it persist?

I think this shows that a big factor would be whether an AI perceives itself as part of the group, or outside of it.

Yeah, you can try it if you have a paid account