Uber vehicle reportedly saw but ignored woman it struck


#1

Life is Most Important in Life is the most important truth in life.
It is impossible to have a system where the logic is correct and founded in reality without, “Life is Most Important in Life” as the reason for executing any command. This is true for computers and people alike. An example would be a person who needlessly eats dead animals. They don’t value the truth (noted above) and as such CHOOSE to lack the actual foundation of logic. They get it when they drive on the correct side of the road, but dismiss it when other life is involved. It’s hypocrisy and contradiction. Failed code and failed lives.

You people don’t listen to the truth or value the truth when it doesn’t appear to affect yourselves. You have currently refused your only chance to get this right. Now watch the mess you are making take lives until you do yield to the truth. Either through a distraction from fixing what is a serious problem in other places or directly taking lives with code flaws, it is going to take far, far more lives than it will save. It’s blatant stupidity and defended by those that have the tendons of my friends stuck in the their teeth with smiles on their faces saying they know better. Get your priorities straight people. Not a one of you has come forward, that I have seen, and proven you have solid and real ethics, values and morals. So, why are you touching this AI stuff anyway, unless the reason is to try and kill us all?


#2

“You people” only distances you from the people whose minds you want to change. Working together and relating is how you get people’s attention. If you do want to make some change, I am working on putting together an artificial general intelligence (AGI) myself. You are welcome to e-mail me at kristoffer.gathering@gmail.com and we can talk about some of your ideas on how an AGI should be guided.


#3

You should of said you agreed, “Life is Most Important in Life”, is true.
You do not have the necessary ethical qualification to be touching this stuff. You lack core logic because you ignore the most important truth, as if your words are more important. Only after you publicly agree…

For this, I wait for you all.

You, I, us, we, each and every single one of us must publicly yield 100% to that truth. Anything less is a lie and an obvious attempt to not publicly genuinely care. Thus, it is an attempt to foolishly destroy life. So, why are you touching this stuff in the first place?
What EXACTLY is it that gives life its importance? “Life is Most important in Life”, begin true.
What is truth? Is it real? Life is the first self-evident TRUTH.
What do we have without life being TRUTHFULLY real? Nothing

Go ahead, show me how life has value and importance without, “Life is Most important in Life”, begin true, without ever using life itself in compete and total hypocrisy and contradiction.

Do you understand? It is complete non-sense to argue with the person that is speaking/writing “The Most Important Truth in Life”. That person has the authority of the truth itself. What they are saying/writing, is already, TRUTHFULLY most important. You agree or you don’t. It’s choice and it is how we are judged by the truth itself. Pick a better side. Me working with you will not change the fact that you must still yield to “The Most Important Truth in Life” or your words and actions will cause needless harm to life.


#4

How much computing power would that take to understand that with each millisecond, a car is adhering to some natural language statement? A lot. I think it would be better for the computer to not speak any language and to just train it to not hit people.


#5

You missed the point.

The point being that a person does not have the logical prerequisites to be touching any of this stuff if they are not FIRST agreeing that, “Life is Most Important in Life”, is always true, for life.

While training a computer to do something is possible, it ignores all the systems where it is left to train itself, which is what this AI concern is all about.

Seriously people, if it is to hard for you to publicly admit whether or not a statement is true, publicly, you must not have much real concern about what may truthfully happen.

Anything we develop is just going to hurt us more, regardless of good intentions, so long as the root problem, people denying and ignoring truth that is straight forward, persists.

The problem is not the Chinese, the Russians, or Google. It’s our choice to publicly ignore the most important truth that is the cause all of these problems with AI. That’s the heart of it. Instead of looking to build a cure, how about just stop behaving and choosing sick? We really shouldn’t be wasting time on this.


#6

I don’t think you’re wrong, but ironically you missed my point. I’m not sure life is the most important thing in life, I know I think alive individuals matter more than rocks so I’m inclined to agree with your line of thought though. My point that you missed is that to best serve your goals, we might be better off building algorithms that don’t waste half their compute on adhering to some natural language statements. Making the best algorithm is usually a case of using your hardware most efficiently, and while in an ideal world we’d have unlimited hardware and unlimited compute and we could check every decision an AI makes with some complex rules written in natural language we can understand, since we’re in the real world we’ll be better off writing algorithms that are optimized for efficiency, and that learn and process as quickly as possible. We want it to do what we want it to do, we don’t need it to believe life is the most important thing in life in order for an algorithm to act that way.

Now, “life is the most important thing in life”. I see what you mean and what you mean is something I agree with. It’s complex what you mean, it’s based on your collected wisdom from your whole lifetime and that I can’t explicitly refute such a stand as this shows that your claim, that life is the most important thing in life, is an interesting and perhaps worthwhile stand to take. But I’m tentative to take that stand and agree wholeheartedly, because while I get what you mean there’s inevitably loss of meaning in words. What you mean is complex - because we’re both human I can get what you mean, but your words, “life is the most important thing in life”, that’s something I don’t know exactly how a machine might interepret, I don’t know what natural language would mean to any machine. The brain doesn’t think in words - it thinks in some way much more complex. AI algorithms certainly don’t think in words, they think in math.

I don’t think we all need to universally agree on some truths before we can act and create something people will all be happy was created. It’s hard to put into words what we want, what will make us happy or what will satisfy us. You have to show, not tell people what you want. What I really want in a good conversation, for example, isn’t something I can tell you I want. I can only show you through many of my words and convey some meaning, and then maybe you’d understand what I consider a good conversation. But telling you won’t do any good, I have to show you in as colorful and informative way as possible. Reducing what I want and what I believe, reducing my truths to a single phrase, that’s a waste of time both for me as a human and for the algorithm that’s gonna drive my car.