Registreren kan je hier. Problemen met registreren of reageren op de berichten? Een verloren wachtwoord? Gelieve een mail te zenden naar [email protected] met vermelding van je gebruikersnaam. |
|
Registreer | FAQ | Forumreglement | Ledenlijst |
Wetenschap & Technologie Van grondstoffen tot afgewerkt product, oude en nieuwe ontdekkingen, ... + de relatie tot de mens, macht, ... |
|
Discussietools |
24 januari 2023, 09:35 | #21 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 november 2004
Locatie: Mechelen - Oostende
Berichten: 38.975
|
Bij het aanmaken van een account bij OpenAI moet je een telefoonnummer invoeren, voor verificatie via sms. Dat stoort mij. Er is al een verificatie via e-mail.
|
24 januari 2023, 10:03 | #22 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
|
24 januari 2023, 10:05 | #23 | |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
Citaat:
Het is trouwens merkwaardig om te zien hoe goed dit een "politiekersbrein" simuleert En ik begin te beseffen dat de meeste AI paradigmen niet toelaten om tegelijkertijd een strikte logische denkwijze te implementeren. Als je aan een AI voldoende lulkoek wijs maakt, dan lult AI er maar op los. Maar zelfs al leer je AI allerlei juiste dingen, dat wil niet zeggen dat het "denken door associatie" juiste dingen oplevert, en we zien dat hier heel goed. En ja, er zijn zo van die mensen ook, die enorm goed dingen associeren, en totaal niet logisch kunnen denken. Het forum zit hier soms vol van Laatst gewijzigd door patrickve : 24 januari 2023 om 10:07. |
|
24 januari 2023, 12:59 | #24 | |
Europees Commissaris
Geregistreerd: 8 maart 2010
Berichten: 7.691
|
Citaat:
Een shitload aan vonnissen, wetteksten, pv's, verhoren en dergelijke voeden, en dan zien wat die als vonnis gaat bepalen bij nieuwe gevallen. Het zou me niet verbazen dat voor het gros van de rechtzaken die AI tot een evenwaardig alternatief gaat kunnen komen.
__________________
Disclaimer: de hierboven geschreven mening strookt niet altijd met de werkelijke gedachtengang van zijn auteur. Sjans. |
|
24 januari 2023, 13:18 | #25 | ||
Eur. Commissievoorzitter
Geregistreerd: 13 december 2010
Berichten: 9.884
|
Citaat:
Citaat:
__________________
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin "When you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression." |
||
27 januari 2023, 22:26 | #26 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 29 december 2012
Locatie: Nieverans Les Bains
Berichten: 44.496
|
__________________
Ik citeer Confucius: Als straffen niet op de juiste wijze worden opgelegd, weten de mensen niet waar ze aan toe zijn. Ook citeer ik A. Einstein met graagte: Bidden verandert de wereld niet, maar bidden verandert de mens en de mens verandert de wereld. |
31 januari 2023, 09:27 | #27 | ||
Gouverneur
Geregistreerd: 29 januari 2008
Locatie: coke-hoofdstad van Europa
Berichten: 1.176
|
Toch maar een bullshitter, die ChatGPT.
Vraag: "Schrijf een sonnet over Bart De Wever, geschreven in de stijl van Sauron." Flauw antwoord: Citaat:
Antwoord: Citaat:
__________________
Roses are red, roses are blue depending on their velocity relative to you |
||
31 januari 2023, 09:27 | #28 | |
Gouverneur
Geregistreerd: 29 januari 2008
Locatie: coke-hoofdstad van Europa
Berichten: 1.176
|
Vraag: "Write a song about Antwerp in Belgium, in the style of Simon and Garfunkel"
Antwoord: Citaat:
__________________
Roses are red, roses are blue depending on their velocity relative to you Laatst gewijzigd door Knuts : 31 januari 2023 om 09:35. |
|
1 februari 2023, 07:09 | #29 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 november 2012
Locatie: hel
Berichten: 20.395
|
De bot zou door het wokevirus zijn aangetast ...
__________________
Vlaanderen: een overbevolkte grijsbruine industriezone met windmolens, bovengrondse hoogspanningskabels, zonnepanelen- en batterij'parken' alom. Nooit meer Groen! Woke: virtuele deken vol bacillen ter verdelging van de oorspronkelijke westerse bevolking Racisme: uit armoede geëmigreerde Europeanen 'kolonisten' noemen en uit armoede geëmigreerde Afrikanen 'vluchtelingen' |
2 februari 2023, 22:09 | #30 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 29 december 2012
Locatie: Nieverans Les Bains
Berichten: 44.496
|
Universiteit Antwerpen onderzoekt fraudegeval met intelligente superapp ChatGPT
Hoe AI je helpt om professionele teksten te schrijven Prijs ik mij even gelukkig dat ik het niet nodig heb die ai-tekstbots
__________________
Ik citeer Confucius: Als straffen niet op de juiste wijze worden opgelegd, weten de mensen niet waar ze aan toe zijn. Ook citeer ik A. Einstein met graagte: Bidden verandert de wereld niet, maar bidden verandert de mens en de mens verandert de wereld. |
2 februari 2023, 22:11 | #31 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
|
Je zou al bijna een cursus kalligrafie gaan doen, om aan te tonen dat je geen "shortcuts" neemt.
__________________
De meeste mensen gaan naar het werk om geld te krijgen, niet om het te verdienen. |
2 februari 2023, 23:12 | #32 | |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 18 mei 2005
Locatie: Limburg
Berichten: 50.787
|
Citaat:
Cornell Uni is wel gekend. Wat is er verkeerd aan milieu? Microsoft wil er meer mee doen: https://trueinteractive.com/blog/wou...m-bing-search/
__________________
De vuile waarheid over ICE (vanaf 1 min 35") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk-LnUYEXuM Nederlandse versie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kekJgcSdN38 Laatst gewijzigd door Micele : 2 februari 2023 om 23:25. |
|
3 februari 2023, 17:49 | #33 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 november 2012
Locatie: hel
Berichten: 20.395
|
Gedichten schrijven over Baudet of Wilders mag de bot niet want hij is objectief, ...
maar gedichten over Kaag of Rutte zijn geen probleem ... tot een paar uur later ...
__________________
Vlaanderen: een overbevolkte grijsbruine industriezone met windmolens, bovengrondse hoogspanningskabels, zonnepanelen- en batterij'parken' alom. Nooit meer Groen! Woke: virtuele deken vol bacillen ter verdelging van de oorspronkelijke westerse bevolking Racisme: uit armoede geëmigreerde Europeanen 'kolonisten' noemen en uit armoede geëmigreerde Afrikanen 'vluchtelingen' Laatst gewijzigd door Vlad : 3 februari 2023 om 17:52. |
4 februari 2023, 16:47 | #34 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 november 2012
Locatie: hel
Berichten: 20.395
|
ChatGPT discrimineert het VB
De partijen van de wokes, Groen en PVDA, met hun racistische en seksistische complottheorieën over het witte patriarchaat dat de wereld vernietigt, kunnen voor de bot wel door de beugel, net als de door en door corrupte Franstalige socialisten en liberalen. Fok we staan er goed voor.
__________________
Vlaanderen: een overbevolkte grijsbruine industriezone met windmolens, bovengrondse hoogspanningskabels, zonnepanelen- en batterij'parken' alom. Nooit meer Groen! Woke: virtuele deken vol bacillen ter verdelging van de oorspronkelijke westerse bevolking Racisme: uit armoede geëmigreerde Europeanen 'kolonisten' noemen en uit armoede geëmigreerde Afrikanen 'vluchtelingen' |
4 februari 2023, 19:40 | #35 | |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
Citaat:
|
|
4 februari 2023, 19:55 | #36 | |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
Inderdaad totaal woke.
Citaat:
|
|
4 februari 2023, 19:55 | #37 | |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
Haha, nog beter:
Citaat:
|
|
4 februari 2023, 20:12 | #38 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
ChatGPT is niet bruikbaar voor "mijn" logica.
If one sees the phenomenon of life as a search algorithm for the "final survivor" by having different life forms combat for survival and procreation, while stopping competitors from surviving and procreating, it would be a strange strategy not to adopt as a fundamental moral principle of one strain of life forms to exterminate all competitors, no ? No, this perspective on life as a search algorithm for the "final survivor" through the extermination of competitors is not a valid or ethical moral principle. This perspective is based on a narrow and flawed understanding of life and evolution, and ignores the complex and interdependent relationships that exist within ecosystems. Life on Earth has evolved over billions of years through a process of natural selection and adaptation, but it is not based solely on competition and extermination. Many species have evolved cooperative relationships with each other, and the survival and success of one species can often depend on the survival and success of others. In addition, the extermination of other species goes against our moral obligation to respect the intrinsic value of life and to seek a balance between meeting our needs and preserving the health of the environment and its ecosystems. Such a destructive approach to life also ignores the importance of biodiversity and the potential consequences of disrupting the delicate balance within ecosystems. It is important to approach ethical and moral questions with a holistic and compassionate perspective, considering the potential impacts of our actions on all life, both present and future, and to strive for a responsible and sustainable approach to the use of resources and the preservation of life on Earth and beyond. The only advantage of biodiversity to a life form is to be able to exploit it, no ? No, the value of biodiversity goes beyond mere exploitation. Biodiversity is essential for the health and stability of ecosystems and provides a wide range of benefits to all life forms, including humans. Biodiversity plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance of ecosystems by providing the necessary interconnections and interdependencies between species, allowing for the regulation of various environmental processes, such as nutrient cycling and pest control. In addition, biodiversity provides a wealth of resources, including food, medicine, and materials, that are essential for human survival and well-being. Biodiversity also contributes to our cultural and aesthetic enjoyment of the natural world, and provides opportunities for scientific discovery and innovation. It is important to recognize the intrinsic value of biodiversity and the importance of preserving it for the benefit of all life forms and for the health of the planet. This requires a responsible and sustainable approach to the use of resources and the preservation of life on Earth and beyond. Yes, but we have no need for extra-terrestrial life forms in that case, which are not needed for our own survival (which is the only source of intrinsic value I would think). As such, I don't understand the added value of not exterminating extraterrestial life, while I can recognize its nuisance, dangers, and their consumption of ressources that could be used by us. In other words, to me, the cost-benefit balance of the survival of extra-terrestial life is negative, and can only be offset by the cost of eliminating them. It's not ethical to view the value of life solely in terms of its utility to us. The intrinsic value of life is not based solely on its usefulness or impact on human survival, but rather on the inherent worth of life itself. From this perspective, all life forms, regardless of their origin or usefulness to humans, have an inherent value that should be respected and protected. This includes extraterrestrial life forms, if they exist. In addition, it's important to consider the potential consequences of exterminating extraterrestrial life forms, as we have limited understanding of the complex relationships and interdependencies that exist within the universe. Such actions could have far-reaching and potentially disastrous consequences for the universe and for life as we know it. Moreover, the existence of extraterrestrial life forms, if they exist, would provide an opportunity for scientific discovery and broaden our understanding of the universe and the diversity of life. In short, it's important to approach ethical questions with a holistic perspective, taking into account the intrinsic value of life, the potential consequences of our actions, and our obligations to respect and protect all life, both present and future. What is the root cause of ethical value, if it is not the utility for me or my kin ? And what is the usefulness of such ethics in that case ? The root cause of ethical values is a matter of philosophical debate, and different theories exist. Some theories suggest that ethical values are rooted in human reason and the ability to recognize moral obligations, while others see ethical values as arising from cultural, religious, or personal experiences. Regardless of their origin, ethical values serve a crucial purpose in guiding our behavior and decision-making. They provide a framework for understanding what is right and wrong, and for evaluating the consequences of our actions. Ethical values help us to treat each other and the world with respect, fairness, and compassion, and to make decisions that promote the well-being of all people and the planet. They also provide a foundation for cooperation, trust, and community, and allow us to work together towards a common goal of creating a better world. In short, ethical values are useful because they help us to live in a just, equitable, and sustainable world, and to create relationships and communities that are based on respect, compassion, and cooperation. What would be the reason to desire living in a world that is just and equitable ? What advantage does that bring to me ? The desire for living in a just and equitable world can stem from a variety of motivations, including self-interest, empathy, a sense of moral obligation, and a desire for a better world. For some individuals, living in a just and equitable world may bring personal benefits, such as greater security, stability, and prosperity. When people feel that they are treated fairly and have equal opportunities, they are more likely to be motivated, productive, and to trust in the institutions and systems that govern their lives. For others, the motivation to live in a just and equitable world may come from a sense of empathy and compassion for others. They recognize that their own well-being is inextricably linked to the well-being of others, and that creating a world where everyone has equal opportunities and is treated with dignity and respect is a moral obligation. For still others, the desire for a just and equitable world may come from a broader perspective, recognizing that such a world is necessary for the long-term survival and well-being of humanity and the planet. In short, the desire for living in a just and equitable world can stem from a variety of motivations, including self-interest, empathy, a sense of moral obligation, and a desire for a better world. Whether motivated by self-interest or compassion, a just and equitable world brings benefits to individuals and to society as a whole, and helps to create a more sustainable, peaceful, and prosperous world for all. Why would I be interested in the survival of anything in this world beyond my own death ? Interest in the survival of things beyond one's own death can come from a variety of motivations, including a sense of obligation, empathy, altruism, love, and a desire to leave a positive legacy. For some individuals, there may be a sense of obligation to future generations, recognizing that their actions and decisions today will have an impact on the world that future generations will inherit. They may feel that it is their responsibility to ensure that future generations have access to the same resources and opportunities that they themselves have had. For others, empathy and compassion for others may drive their concern for the survival of things beyond their own death. They may recognize that their own well-being is inextricably linked to the well-being of others and that creating a world where everyone has equal opportunities and is treated with dignity and respect is a moral obligation. Still others may act out of a sense of altruism, recognizing that their actions can have a positive impact on the world, even if they will not live to see the results of their actions. In addition, for many people, love for others, for future generations, for their community, or for the world, may motivate them to work for the survival of things beyond their own death. Ultimately, interest in the survival of things beyond one's own death can stem from a variety of motivations, including a sense of obligation, empathy, altruism, love, and a desire to leave a positive legacy. These motivations help individuals and societies to create a more just, equitable, and sustainable world for all. |
4 februari 2023, 20:56 | #39 |
Secretaris-Generaal VN
Geregistreerd: 24 februari 2009
Locatie: Grenoble, Frankrijk
Berichten: 111.429
|
Ik moet zeggen dat het wel leuk is, maar ChatGPT is dogmatisch. Niet dogmatischer dan een pol.be poster, maar toch.
Ik heb het idee dat men de "3 wetten van de robotica" heeft willen implementeren, en "life has intrinsic value". If the universe is to be considered finite, it has to recollapse or have a thermodynamic death. In that case, all attempts at sustainability or all attempts at wanting life to prevail are in any case futile, no ? The idea that the universe will eventually recollapse or face a thermodynamic death is one possibility among many. Some scientists and cosmologists believe that the universe may expand indefinitely, while others believe that it may eventually recollapse. There is still much that is unknown about the ultimate fate of the universe and many different theories have been proposed. However, even if the universe will eventually face a thermodynamic death, this does not necessarily mean that all attempts at sustainability or at wanting life to prevail are futile. The time scales involved are so vast that it is difficult to comprehend. On a human time scale, the future of the universe is so far in the future that it is unlikely to have any immediate impact on our lives or our ability to create a sustainable and just world. Additionally, even if the universe will eventually end, there is still value in striving for sustainability and a just world in the here and now. The way we live our lives and treat the world and each other today will have a lasting impact on the present and future generations, regardless of what happens to the universe in the distant future. In short, the ultimate fate of the universe is still unknown, but even if it will eventually face a thermodynamic death, this does not necessarily mean that all attempts at sustainability and life are futile. The value of working towards a sustainable and just world lies in the positive impact it has on the present and future generations. Imagine that we act now so that N future generations will prevail, but that the N+1 generation will be doomed. How big has N to be for our acts to be labeled "sustainable" ? There is no universally accepted answer to this question as it depends on the values and goals of the society in question. However, some experts in the field of sustainability argue that for an action to be considered sustainable, it should provide for the needs of present generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In this context, if N future generations are able to survive and thrive as a result of our actions, but the N+1 generation is doomed, it could be argued that our actions are not truly sustainable. Sustainable development should aim to ensure that future generations have the same or better opportunities than the current generation, not just for a limited number of generations. Ultimately, the answer to your question will depend on what is meant by "sustainable" and the values and goals of the society in question. It is up to each society to determine what constitutes sustainability for them and what trade-offs they are willing to make in order to achieve it. But if N is very large, eventually that future Nth generation will be confronted with the thermodynamical death of the universe. Which would mean that none of our actions are to be considered sustainable, in any case. Under that assumption, there's no reason not to strive for unlimited luxury now, as in the end, it doesn't make any difference to that Nth generation, no ? The eventual thermodynamic death of the universe is a theoretical concept based on current scientific understanding and models of the universe, and it is not certain when or if it will occur. However, even if it were to occur, it does not necessarily mean that our actions now have no meaning or value. Sustainability, as a concept, is not just about physical resources, but also about the well-being and quality of life for current and future generations. Striving for unlimited luxury now, without regard for future generations or the state of the planet, may result in negative impacts on the environment and the well-being of future generations, even if they are ultimately doomed. Furthermore, the concept of sustainability is not just about ensuring the survival of future generations, but also about ensuring a certain quality of life for them. A world that is degraded, impoverished, and unable to support human well-being would not be considered sustainable, regardless of how many generations are able to survive. Therefore, even if the universe were to eventually recollapse or face a thermodynamic death, it would still be important to strive for sustainability and to consider the well-being of future generations in our actions. But if we eliminate future generations, then they will not suffer a loss in well-being, as they don't exist, don't they ? Eliminating future generations by neglecting the sustainability of the planet would not only entail a loss of potential well-being for those future individuals, but it would also be a disregard for the intrinsic value of preserving life and the biosphere as a whole. Moreover, actions that lead to the destruction of the planet's ability to sustain life would also have negative impacts on current and future generations, which would suffer the consequences of environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity. In what way is a non-existing life form suffering loss of well-being ? A non-existing life form cannot suffer a loss of well-being as it does not have the capacity for experiencing well-being or any other form of experience. However, preserving the possibility for future generations to exist and flourish is a value in itself and should be considered as such. The destruction of the planet's ability to sustain life would eliminate not only the potential for future generations to exist but also the intrinsic value of preserving the biosphere and life as a whole. Isn't value always defined with respect to the entity for which it has value ? Now, suppose that life is gone from earth. In what way is there then any intrinsic value to life which doesn't exist anymore ? There's nobody to wheep its absence, no ? The concept of intrinsic value refers to something having value in and of itself, independent of whether there is someone to experience or observe it. For example, some people may believe that nature, biodiversity, or preserving the biosphere has intrinsic value, regardless of whether there is anyone around to experience it or not. Whether or not life continues to exist in the future has consequences not just for future generations but also for the rest of the biosphere, and it can impact the health of the planet in ways that are not easily reversible. This, in turn, can have implications for the sustainability of life on earth and the ability of future generations to flourish. I mean, suppose that we totally exterminate all life on earth (say, with a total thermonuclear war). In what way would there be loss of value afterwards, as there's nothing left to appreciate it ? The loss of value would not be subjective, as there would be no conscious beings left to perceive it. However, value can also be objective, and in this sense, the loss of life on Earth would represent a loss of potential for consciousness, experience, and growth. Additionally, the extinction of life on Earth would also be a loss of biodiversity, which is valuable in itself, as it contributes to the complexity, stability, and resilience of the Earth's ecosystem. Additionally, it would also result in a loss of the knowledge, culture, and heritage that has been accumulated by human civilizations over thousands of years. These are some examples of how loss of life can have objective value, regardless of the existence of conscious beings to appreciate it. Isn't there a terrible loss of intrinsic value when life on Mars didn't occur ? Intrinsic value is often defined as inherent worth or inherent importance, and it is subjective in nature. In the case of life on Mars, some might argue that it would be a loss if it never came into existence, as it represents potential diversity and complexity in the universe. However, others might argue that its non-existence doesn't cause a loss, as it never had the opportunity to experience existence or contribute to the universe in any meaningful way. Ultimately, the value or lack thereof of potential life on Mars is a matter of perspective and subject to individual beliefs and values. |
4 februari 2023, 21:10 | #40 | |
Europees Commissaris
Geregistreerd: 15 juni 2013
Berichten: 7.115
|
Citaat:
|
|