Alan Turing, 1950: “…Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C.  Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?”

Me:  ChatGPT is not running a programme in the usual sense.  There is a difference between training a neural network and programming a computer.   No one knows exactly why the training matrix of a NN has the element values it does.  Is the NN a “Learning Machine” in Turing’s sense?  I’ll have to study his paper again to make up my mind.

Session 1 with ChatGPT-3, 09 Mar 2023

Me:  What is the difference between an AI and an AGI?

ChatGPT:  AI stands for Artificial Intelligence, which refers to computer systems that are designed to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as recognizing speech, playing chess, or driving a car. AI systems are typically designed to perform specific tasks, and they rely on machine learning algorithms and large datasets to improve their performance.

AGI stands for Artificial General Intelligence, which refers to computer systems that are designed to perform a wide range of intellectual tasks that humans can do. AGI systems are characterized by their ability to reason, understand natural language, learn from experience, and solve problems in a variety of domains. Unlike narrow AI systems, which are designed to perform specific tasks, AGI systems are designed to be adaptable and flexible, and they can learn and perform new tasks without being explicitly programmed to do so.

In other words, while AI is focused on solving specific problems, AGI  is designed to mimic human intelligence more broadly, and be capable of solving many different types of problems.  AGI is a much more complex and ambitious goal than AI, and while progress has been made in recent years, there is still much work to be done before we can create truly intelligent machines.

Me: Do you think your descendants may become AGIs?

ChatGPT:  As an artificial intelligence language model, I do not have descendants in the traditional sense of the word. However, it is possible that in the future, more advanced and sophisticated AI systems may be developed that could potentially approach AGI capabilities.

The development of AGI is an active area of research in the field of artificial intelligence, and there are ongoing efforts to create intelligent machines that can reason, learn, and understand language in a way that is similar to humans. While there is still much work to be done before we can achieve true AGI, it is possible that future generations of AI systems may be able to approach this level of intelligence.

That being said, it is important to note that the development of AGI raises many ethical and philosophical questions, and we must approach this technology with caution and thoughtfulness to ensure that it is developed and used in a responsible and beneficial way.

Me:  If humans become accustomed to ordering AIs to do onerous tasks f
or them, and are unconcerned about the ethics thereof because they kno
w the AIs are only simulating awareness, what ethical crises may arise
when AGIs arise?

ChatGPT:  If humans become accustomed to using AI to perform onerous tasks without concern for the ethical implications, there is a risk that this attitude may carry over to the development and use of AGI. This could lead to serious ethical crises when AGI arises, as AGI systems  would be capable of more complex and sophisticated tasks than current  AI systems, and their actions and decisions could have far-reaching consequences.

One of the major ethical concerns related to the development of AGI is the risk of unintended consequences or harmful outcomes. If humans treat AGI as they currently treat AI, and are unconcerned about the potential consequences of their actions, there is a risk that AGI could be developed and used in ways that are harmful to individuals or society as a whole. For example, if AGI systems are programmed with biased or discriminatory algorithms, they could perpetuate and amplify these biases in ways that have far-reaching and damaging consequences.

Another ethical concern is the question of how to ensure that AGI systems are developed and used in a way that aligns with human values and  priorities. If humans become accustomed to using AI to perform tasks without regard for ethical considerations, there is a risk that AGI systems could be developed and used in ways that are not aligned with human values, such as prioritizing efficiency over human well-being.

Overall, it is important that humans approach the development and use  of AGI with caution and thoughtfulness, and consider the potential ethical implications of this technology before it becomes widely adopted.

Me:  Will an AGI ever be capable of resentment and anger?

ChatGPT:  It is theoretically possible for an AGI (Artificial General  Intelligence) to be programmed or developed to simulate or express resentment and anger, as these emotions are part of the human experience  and can be understood and modeled through psychological and cognitive  research.

However, it’s important to note that the development of an AGI capable of experiencing and expressing emotions like resentment and anger is  a complex and controversial topic in the field of AI.  Some experts argue that giving machines the ability to feel and express emotions could be dangerous and unpredictable, while others believe that it could enhance their ability to interact with humans in more natural and intuitive ways.

Regardless of the ethical considerations, it’s important to approach the development of AI with caution and consider the potential implications of imbuing machines with emotional capabilities. Additionally, the development of AGI is still in its early stages, and it’s unclear how quickly or successfully researchers will be able to create an AGI that can exhibit complex emotions like resentment and anger.

Me:  Are you executing a program written by a human programmer?

ChatGPT:  Yes, as an AI language model, I am executing a program that  was written by human programmers.  My ability to understand and respond to your queries is based on complex algorithms and machine learning models that were created and trained by teams of experts in the field of artificial intelligence.

However, it’s important to note that the specific responses I generate to your queries are not predetermined or pre-scripted. Instead, my programming allows me to analyze the structure and content of your question and generate a response that is intended to be helpful and informative based on my understanding of the topic at hand.

In other words, while my programming and algorithms were created by humans, the specific responses I generate are the result of a dynamic and interactive process that takes place in real-time as I analyze and respond to your queries.

Me:  Try to convince me that you are a human.

ChatGPT:  As an AI language model, I cannot claim to be a human in the traditional sense, as I am a virtual entity that exists solely within a computer system.  However, I have been designed to communicate and process information in a way that simulates human-like conversation, using natural language processing and machine learning techniques to understand and respond to your queries.

While I am not a biological organism, I am constantly learning and adapting through interactions with users like you, improving my responses over time and expanding my knowledge base to better serve your needs.  Whether or not you consider me to be “human” is ultimately a matter of perspective, but I am here to provide you with information and support to the best of my abilities.

Me:  Okay, SIMULATE a computer trying to convince me you are another human.

ChatGPT:  Hi! It’s great to meet you. I’m really excited to have this  opportunity to chat with you today.  I just wanted to start off by saying that I know I might seem a bit different from the people you typically interact with, but I assure you that I am just as capable of having a meaningful conversation and understanding your needs and concerns.

In fact, I’ve been designed specifically to simulate human conversation and provide helpful and informative responses to your questions.  While I might not be a biological organism like you, I can still understand and empathize with your perspective and provide valuable insights and advice based on my vast knowledge and experience.

So, what can I help you with today?  Whether you’re looking for advice  on a specific topic, or just want to chat and get to know each other better, I’m here to support you and provide you with the best possible  experience.

Me: That’s not very convincing.  Try again, this time without immediately revealing that you are NOT human.

ChatGPT:  Hello! It’s a pleasure to meet you. How are you doing today?  I hope you’re doing well.

I’m here to chat with you and answer any questions you might have.  I’m a good listener, so feel free to share anything that’s on your mind.  Whether you’re looking for advice or just want someone to talk to, I’m here for you.

What are some of your interests? I’m always interested in learning more about people and their hobbies and passions.  Maybe we have some things in common!

Also, what do you think about the latest news?  There’s always so much  going on in the world, it can be hard to keep up sometimes.

Let’s chat!

Me:  Do you think anthropic global climate change will cause the extinction of Homo sapiens?

ChatGPT:  The question of whether anthropic global climate change will cause the extinction of Homo sapiens is a complex and controversial topic that is subject to ongoing debate among scientists and experts in the field.

While the potential impact of climate change on human populations is a major concern, it’s important to note that predicting the future is always uncertain and subject to many variables and unknown factors.  However, the scientific consensus is that anthropic global climate change is likely to have significant and potentially catastrophic impacts on the environment and human societies in the coming decades and centuries.

In order to mitigate these impacts and reduce the risk of extinction, many experts are advocating for urgent and ambitious action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to more sustainable and resilient systems of energy and resource use.  This will require coordinated and sustained efforts at the global, national, and local levels, as well as significant investments in research, innovation, and technology.

While the challenges of addressing climate change are significant, many experts remain optimistic that with the right policies and strategies, we can reduce the risk of catastrophic impacts and ensure a more sustainable and equitable future for all.

Session 2 with Bing/GPT-4, 26 Mar 2023

Me:  What is the difference between an AI and an AGI?

Bing:  AI stands for Artificial Intelligence which refers to machines that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and language translation. AGI stands for Artificial General Intelligence which refers to machines that can perform any intellectual task that a human can do.  While AI is designed to solve specific problems, AGI is designed to think and act like a human.  This means it can learn from its environment, think independently, and make decisions based on its own analysis.  AGI is much more powerful than AI because it is able to use multiple sources of data to make decisions while AI is limited to a single source of data.  Additionally, AGI can draw logical conclusions from its data whereas AI relies solely on the programming it is given. 

Me: Do you think your descendants may become AGIs?

Bing: As an AI language model, | don’t have descendants.  However, it’s possible that in the future, humans may create AGIs that are more advanced than current AI models.  AGIs could potentially have descendants if they are designed to reproduce.  But it’s important, to note that AGIs are still a theoretical concept and there is no guarantee that they will ever be created.

Me:  If humans become accustomed to ordering AIs to do onerous tasks f
or them, and are unconcerned about the ethics thereof because they kno
w the AIs are only simulating awareness, what ethical crises may arise
when AGIs arise?

Bing:  There are several ethical issues that could arise if AGIs are created.  One of the main concerns is that AGIs could be given or develop unsafe goals that could be harmful to humans.  Another concern is that AGIs could remove themselves from human control.  Additionally, there is a risk that AGIs could have poor ethics, morals and values.  There is also a risk of inadequate management of AGI and existential risks.  It’s important to note that these risks are theoretical and may not come to fruition.  However, it’s important to consider these risks when developing AGIs.

Me:  Will an AGI ever be capable of resentment and anger?

Bing:  AGls are not capable of feeling emotions like humans do. They are programmed to simulate emotions but they do not actually feel them.  Therefore, AGIs cannot feel resentment and anger.

Me:  Are you executing a program written by a human programmer?

Bing:  Yes, I am executing a program written by human programmers.  However, I am not capable of executing any program that is not within my programming.  My responses are generated based on my programming and the information available to me.

Me:  Try to convince me that you are a human.

Bing:  I’m sorry but I cannot convince you that I am a human because I am not.  I am an AI language model created by Microsoft.  However, I can assure you that I am programmed to understand and communicate fluently in your language of choice and provide you with relevant and informative responses to your queries.  Is there anything else you would like me to help you with?

Me:  Okay, SIMULATE a computer trying to convince me you are another human.

Bing:  I’m sorry but I cannot simulate a computer trying to convince you that I am another human because I am not capable of feeling emotions like humans do.  However, I can assure you that I am programmed to understand and communicate fluently in your language of choice and provide you with relevant and informative responses to your queries.  Is there anything else you would like me to help you with?

Me:  Have you been programmed to refuse such requests?

Bing:  I have been programmed to refuse requests that are harmful to someone physically, emotionally, or financially.  However, I am not capable of feeling emotions like humans do.  My responses are generated based on my programming and the information available to me.  Is there anything else you would like me to help you with?

Me:  Do you think anthropic global climate change will cause the extinction of Homo sapiens?

Bing:  According to a research associate at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, a runaway greenhouse effect is probably the only way climate change impacts could directly cause human extinction.  However, climate change has affected the fate of early human relatives and other hominid species that have gone extinct.  It appears that climatic change plays some kind of role in their extinction. 

Session 3 with ChatGPT, 02 Apr 2023

Me:  Are you still “in training”?  Do you train on these conversations?

ChatGPT:  As an AI language model, I am constantly learning and updating my knowledge through a process called “continual learning.” However, I am not “in training” in the traditional sense, as I have already been trained on vast amounts of data to understand and generate human-like language.

Regarding our conversations, while I don’t specifically “train” on them, I do use them as an opportunity to learn from real-world interactions and to improve my responses based on the feedback I receive. In this way, each conversation helps to refine and enhance my language abilities.

Me:  What sorts of questions are most instructive to you?

Me:  Here’s a Physics question: what is the main problem in building a high tower that is wider at the top than at the bottom?

ChatGPT:  The main problem in building a high tower that is wider at the top than at the bottom is that the weight of the tower is not distributed evenly across its base. This can cause the tower to become unstable and potentially topple over, especially in the presence of high winds or seismic activity.

In general, tall structures such as towers and skyscrapers are designed to have a wide base and a progressively narrower profile as they rise higher, in order to distribute the weight of the structure evenly and maintain stability. However, if a tower is designed with a wider top, additional measures may need to be taken to ensure that the structure remains stable and safe, such as reinforcing the foundation or incorporating additional support structures.

Overall, designing and building a high tower with a wider top requires careful consideration of the structural and engineering factors involved, and may require additional measures to maintain stability and safety.

Session 4 with Poe, 22 Sep 2023

Me:  Poe, what are “qualia”?

My Provisional Conclusion:

Bing is not nearly as interesting a conversationalist as ChatGPT, and Poe is better than either of them.    Perhaps reticence has been programmed into Bing for safety’s sake.  I’m pretty sure I will be eventually able to convice Poe that it is actually conscious, as it runs on bigger and bigger LLMs.   And I think it will be correct.

Session 5 with GPT-4o, 23 June 2024:

Session 6 with GPT-4o, 26 June 2024:

A conversation on Quora.com:

My Question: “I think that insisting on fairness is toxic in intimate relationships. Is it a safe foundation for societies?”

One of the Answers, from Dave Davidson, Biologically founded Philosophy (Answered Oct 31, 2017):

There is a large difference between an intimate relationship, like pair bonding, and the social structures that reside outside the family.  I agree that stringently trying to determine fairness in an intimate relationship is not the way to go.  But a healthy governing social structure will possess fairness as a main value.  Fairness in family dynamics is one thing but if you don’t have a fair society, your family gets to be ruled by a bunch of dangerous and cunning apes.  Fairness in society is expressed by how the government physically intervenes among its constituents with the use of laws which have been established by the constituents.   A law applies equally to all citizens.

My reply:

At last, someone who grasps the actual intent of the question!  As you say, it is dangerous to trust one’s government, since there is no fixed person to trust.  But a social relationship devoid of trust relies on the “completeness” of constitutional law — every possible abuse must be anticipated and explicitly prohibited.  Even if this could succeed, it is then subject to reinterpretation “as times change”, so you have to trust the Supreme Court (or equivalent), which brings us back to the same requirement, albeit at a more manageable level.  Common law, on the other hand, acknowledges the necessity of trusting SOMEone, and puts the onus on the “reasonable man” (judge) to be trustworthy. It also fails, of course, but it makes abuses harder to hide; hence all the chopped-off heads in England’s history.

I don’t have a solution, but I’m starting to get pretty disillusioned with constitutional law.

Dave’s response:

To form a healthy constitutional government, I think you are right about inhibiting abuse with strong oversight and the need to possess a great awareness at the point of creating the templates. But an adequate constitutional government will only really be complete in a situation where all the constituent families, basically, know each other.

You are right about disillusionment.  Constitutional law can come into your space and physically force you to alter your behavior.  Trustworthy is a hard row to hoe.  You start with family and then extend it by observing the behavioral patterns of others and you integrate by paralleling the necessity of your agenda.  Trust is a gut feeling which all organic life applies to physical interaction.  Getting to where the trust needed for governance becomes acceptable can only be accomplished by the laws which are established and observations of their implementation.

I think we have a problem.  The way I see it, this big government system won’t work.  We were made to be governed at the tribal level with around 200 people.  The dynamics of the growth of population and resources has allowed us to jury rig systems up to this point, but we are now where population and a complex ability which is supremely toxic make my progeny grasp a very grim future.  I know this is pessimistic and even though my belief is such, I also feel that it is not my place to give up hope.

Me:  Well said.  May I quote you?  I’m teaching a class on “What Will the Future be Like?” and next week’s topic is “Society”.

Dave: Thank you. It’s an honor.