Prev: The Stage was Re: Safety was Re: Trust was Re: BannerAds wasRe: Rules was Re: Standards was Re: Rebels was Re: Yadda was Re: Murphy
Next: testing
From: rick_s on 29 Jun 2010 18:20
On 6/29/2010 23:01, rick_s wrote:
> So public schools probably won't allow students to bring their AI to
> school, because of the disturbing nature of some of the scenes.
>
> But they might provide AIs since replicating them is free and almost
> instantaneous. Each student could be listening to one do a theme like
> the Librarian in Time Machine 2002.
>
> But since the only time they are allowed to speak is within a theme it
> is scripted or commands in real time are improvised. (Human assisted
> interactivity, which is a consequence or added benefit of real time
> commands during performances. But that is still human active interaction
> not the same as an AI using a prescribed sales technique using fuzzy
> logic and historical records to overcome any objection during a sale.
>
> If a real sales pro went to work on what the AI should say to counter
> any argument after 30 years of experience he the teacher would know
> almost everything anyone might say.
>
> So that is reason enough not to let the AI speak interactively and that
> has to include teaching. Can we prevent people from adding speech and
> doing all that? If its not permitted and everyone knows its not
> permitted, then if you do it, chances are you are breaking the rules and
> people will suspect trickery right away. At a point it is still caveat
> emptor.
>
> However at school, they want a controlled environment and so they would
> provide the AIs, and they would provide the scripted teaching commands.
>
> Teacher's helpers are still a good thing. Especially if the school just
> buys a blue ray disk for that subject and wow it has a lot teaching
> material in it, and kids probably would enjoy the one on one and the
> entertaining aspects of learning with multi-media.
>
> Add teaching of all kinds to that since it is realistic and modeled.
> Teaching any field with objects that you can closely examine, and can be
> manipulated in 3D space, which means disassembled and assembled, or from
> diagnosis to treatment, [insert medical problem here.] for teaching or
> as a reference for doctors nurses or even food staff training for a
> chain restaurant.
>
> A huge market waiting to be tapped there no doubt. And any physical
> dancing or exercise program will look better when you can see real
> looking people doing the actions.
>


So you see its a little messy right?
Anyone could add speech interactively if they knew AI. And really as
soon as you stray off the topic, the slightest, the AI is now shrugging
its shoulders and the spell is broken.

So it's not as dangerous as it might appear. Try it yourself and see how
easy it is to fool people to get an AI to pass the Turing test.

So then the lights come on figuratively speaking "OH, you're just a
program, trying to sell me another car."

I think what makes it more safe is we are not developing it further than
that.

There are benefits to separating the AIs from the people in that way.
And also conveniences since when playing a theme that's like playing a
video, and you can turn the sound down at night. And when interacting,
it can't speak out loud so it won't disturb anyone. When you play a
video you are conscious of the volume and sound and you play videos when
the sound is appropriate.

AIs that speak by themselves would need to be told to shut up at night
or when you are on the phone or when you are trying to have a
conversation with someone else.



 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: The Stage was Re: Safety was Re: Trust was Re: BannerAds wasRe: Rules was Re: Standards was Re: Rebels was Re: Yadda was Re: Murphy
Next: testing