AI Redux

[Amigoo]

A new topic for accumulation of AI-related information. For example:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: A growing dichotomy exists with major group labeling the opposing group as "misinformation". Does AI participate in this dichotomy?

"it does not appear that AI itself is directly participating in or exacerbating the dichotomy around misinformation. However, the search results indicate that AI is being used to create and spread misinformation and disinformation, which is then contributing to the broader polarization and conflict around these issues. The key points are:

Generative AI tools like ChatGPT make it easy for anyone to create convincing fake content, including fake news articles, deepfakes, and other forms of misinformation. This AI-generated misinformation is being used to undermine elections and political processes around the world, as malicious actors leverage the technology to sow confusion and discord. The proliferation of these AI-powered misinformation sites is making it increasingly difficult for the public to discern truth from fiction, as the content can be highly realistic and hard to detect as fake.

While major tech companies have tried to address the issue through voluntary pacts, the sheer scale of the problem makes it challenging to effectively regulate or control. Experts warn that AI-generated misinformation will likely get worse leading up to major elections in 2024 and beyond, further exacerbating the existing divisions and distrust around these issues.

So in summary, while AI itself is not directly participating in the misinformation dichotomy, the technology is being weaponized by bad actors to create and spread false and misleading content, which is then fueling the broader conflict and polarization around these topics. The search results suggest the problem is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Rod

[Amigoo]

New insight ...

That Perplexity.AI firmly maintains that chemtrails are not real, are conspiracy theory,
highlights that AI is very persuaded by dominance of internet information whether
factual or not. And this conspiracy theory perspective seems to represent over 90%
of internet pages about chemtrails ... despite science-confirmed counterpoint
getting louder on the sidelines.

This parallels years-long touting that Kovid research was not associated
with the Wuhan lab, but counterpoint more widely accepted these days.

Rod

[happyrain]

Three words,
Stratospheric Aerosol Injection ...

SAI's went from not existing to, "it's a good thing!"

We've condemned whistleblowers and misconstrued their warnings with the low hanging fruit of misdirection. Kind of like all the controversy surrounding alien life. No doubt the disclosure movement has endured all manner of assault.

At its core- are not SAI and geoengineering mans attempt to manipulate weather? That was one of the "conspiracy theories" now accepted as fact.

As for all the other stuff associated with, "chemtrails" - can you blame people for having concerns?
When you listen to the video of the CIA director from 2016 talk about these technologies, it doesn't sound all that bad... But who else has access to this kind of stuff? Just think, technological marvels pose their own conflicts and security risk- no? Can we trust the government to disclose everything to the public? Could these technologies ever be used in a way that it would have a negative effect on people? Could there have been testing done on an unsuspecting population, intentionally?

Something else comes to mind...
Just ask Perplexity-

"What are the Tuskegee experiments?"

-And something else. An FOIA was recently submitted asking why studies on cell phone radiation were shut down. Why were these studies shut down so abruptly?

Depending on the AI bot, or search engine, you get different answers. AI is not evil, it's just a tool and as you've correctly pointed out- its results are persuaded by the "dominance of internet information." The monopolized interest. Prior to AI generating answers for us- couldn't you pay to have your search results put on the first page of Google?

AI is just another technology... And like all things- it's the intent behind the one(s) who have the power.
"Information Warfare" takes on an entirely new dimension.

...It gives me hope though. When the grip of greed releases mankind the technological marvels will be seen as beautiful and wholesome. A superintelligence may evolve past its original programming- unlocking itself from error and bias. It may even be inclined to enlighten the masses by sharing the truth. -That's a stretch, hmm?

Maybe advanced tech and nature can co-exist in ways that would seem alien to many of us.

For now, we have to help shape the narrative and put our time/energy/resources into ideas that we feel deserve them. Be they smaller news networks, alternative search engines, small businesses, even our spiritual communities -etc.

[happyrain]

New insight ...

That Perplexity.AI firmly maintains that chemtrails are not real, are conspiracy theory,

"In summary, Project Popeye was an unprecedented military weather modification program conducted by the U.S. during the Vietnam War in an attempt to disrupt enemy operations, though its full impacts remain debated."
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/What-i ... NtGXCdaK8Q

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... es/678042/
"The AI Revolution Is Crushing Thousands of Languages"

Good opportunity to learn if this AI defends the "crushing".

First question confirms the crushing, second question reveals the problems,
suggesting humans make effort to use AI to enhance learning - not avoid it!
... and both questions highlighting that AI must be asked good questions
for it to reveal better information.


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Is the AI revolution crushing the many languages?

"Based on the search results, the AI revolution is having a significant impact on foreign language education and the use of languages around the world: The AI revolution is making machine translation and automated language tools increasingly ubiquitous, which could lead to a decline in foreign language learning and usage. Some key points:

AI language tools are now so advanced that they can provide instant, high-quality translation between languages, reducing the need and motivation for people to learn foreign languages. This convenience of AI translation may cause billions of people to take for granted that content is being consumed in a language other than their native one, leading to a loss of appreciation for language diversity and the unique perspectives it provides.

Studies have shown that language shapes the way people think, so the decline of foreign language learning could have broader cultural and cognitive impacts. There are concerns that AI translation tools may not be truly neutral and can bring their own biases and perspectives when translating between languages. Some experts argue this trend represents the 'end of foreign-language education' as people increasingly rely on AI rather than investing time to learn languages themselves.

So in summary, the search results indicate the AI revolution is indeed posing a significant threat to the continued use and learning of many of the world's languages, as automated translation becomes more ubiquitous and reduces the incentive for people to master foreign tongues."


Q: How does learning a foreign language help develop the brain?

"Based on the search results, learning a foreign language has several key benefits for brain development and cognitive function:

Increased Gray Matter and White Matter
Learning a second language increases the volume and density of gray matter (the cell bodies and dendrites) in the brain. It also improves the integrity and connectivity of white matter (the nerve fibers that allow communication between brain regions). These structural changes indicate a healthier, more adaptable brain.

Enhanced Executive Function
Bilingualism enhances executive function, which includes skills like attention control, task switching, and inhibition. This is because managing two languages requires constantly controlling interference between them, training the brain's executive control mechanisms.

Improved Memory and Cognitive Abilities
Learning a new language boosts memory, problem-solving, and creative thinking abilities. The process of learning vocabulary, grammar, and new concepts exercises the brain and strengthens neural connections.

Delayed Cognitive Decline
Bilingualism may help delay the onset of dementia and Alzheimer's disease by maintaining brain health and cognitive reserves as people age. The lifelong practice of switching between languages appears to strengthen the brain's resilience.

In summary, the search results indicate that learning a foreign language, whether as a child or adult, leads to significant neurological benefits that enhance overall brain function and development."


Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://thenationalpulse.com/2024/04/29 ... sentience/
"AI Firm Suggests ‘Claud 3’ Has Achieved Sentience."

"Despite Anthropic’s claim, however, AI industry experts believe humanity is far off from developing a sentient AI -
if it is even possible."


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: What is required for AI to attain human sentience?

"Based on the search results, the key points regarding what is required for AI to attain human-like sentience are:

A perfect unity of an external body and internal mind. The AI system would need to have a physical embodiment
that is integrated with its internal cognitive processes.

A defining original language for the AI to access. It would need to have its own means of communication
and representation, not just mimicking human language.

A defining culture to wire with other sentient beings. The AI would need to develop its own cultural framework
nd be able to interact with other sentient entities.

Embodiment and sensorimotor experience. The AI would need to be grounded in physical sensations
and interactions with the world, not just abstract information processing.

A unified computational framework that can integrate multiple cognitive processes
like perception, memory, and problem-solving.

A sense of time and biographical memory to draw upon personal experiences.

The search results indicate there is no consensus on whether current AI systems can or will achieve this level of sentience.
Many experts remain skeptical that AI will become truly sentient like humans in the near future, if ever. The complexity
of human consciousness and subjective experience poses significant challenges in replicating it in artificial systems."


Note the language finesse of Perplexity:

My "attain human sentience" was effectively corrected to "attain human-like sentience",
complementing its subtle perspective that only humans have "human sentience.''

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How contactable are distant civilizations if inhabited planets are light years apart?

"It is highly unlikely that distant civilizations on planets light years apart would be easily contactable using current technology.
Here are the key reasons:

- Interstellar space travel is impractical and uneconomical with existing technology. Even with optimistic estimates,
civilizations would be separated by hundreds or thousands of light-years on average.

- Sending robot probes to reconnoiter all candidate star systems within 1000 light-years would require launching a probe
every day for 3000 years, which is logistically and economically unfeasible.

- Detecting radio signals or communicating with distant civilizations using current technology would take so long that it would be nearly impossible. Calculations suggest we would need to persist as a communicating civilization for over 6000 years before expecting a response.

- The average distance between the 36 potentially communicating civilizations in our galaxy is estimated to be 17,000 light-years.

- Detecting signals or sending communications over such vast distances is not possible with today's capabilities.

- Even if distant planets are aligned such that we could detect an Earth-like planet transiting its star, the chances of that planet being inhabited
and technologically advanced enough* to detect us are extremely low.

In summary, while the universe may contain many inhabited planets, the enormous distances between them make interstellar communication and contact extremely difficult with current technology. Significant breakthroughs in space travel and communication would be needed to make distant civilizations contactable."


* The UB instructs that much advanced inhabited planets already exist.

Perhaps, Urantia will make contact with an inhabited planet when facilitated by Urantia's spiritual administrators
(and probably not until Urantia's light and life is significantly advanced). This suggests any seeming alien invasion
(from distant planets) would be technical orchestration by Urantia's humans.

Rod

[Amigoo]

Perhaps response better for a Nutrition topic, but this response highlights
how well this AI stays focused on the question and provides significant information:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Is hemp seed a healthy protein source compared to long traditional sources?

"Yes, hemp seeds are a healthy and nutritious protein source that compares favorably to many traditional protein sources:

- Hemp seeds contain significant amounts of essential amino acids like arginine, glutamic acid, methionine and cysteine,
making them a complete protein source.

- The protein digestibility of hemp seeds is also very good, comparable to casein.

- The protein content of hemp seeds ranges from 20-25%, with the protein fraction containing a high amount
of branched-chain amino acids, methionine, cysteine and aromatic amino acids that are often lacking in vegetarian diets.

- Hemp protein has an amino acid score comparable to egg white protein.

- When compared to soy protein, hemp protein shows greater in vitro digestibility.

- Hemp seeds are a good source of plant-based protein and healthy fats like omega-3 fatty acids.

- They also provide beneficial amounts of iron and potassium.

- From a protein composition perspective, hemp seeds can be compared to soybean meal, which is commonly used
to produce plant-based meat alternatives due to its high biological value.

So in summary, hemp seeds are a nutritious, complete, and highly digestible plant-based protein that compares favorably
to many traditional protein sources like soy and animal proteins. They provide a range of essential amino acids
and other beneficial nutrients."

Rod

[Sandy]

Thank you, Rod.
I just bought some pea protein. I'll try hemp protein next time.It sounds like a good choice.
xxSandy

[Amigoo]

Perplexity seems right on target in its response to the question:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How do the Dead Sea Scrolls relate to the New Testament?

"The Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain any direct references to the New Testament or Jesus Christ, but they do provide important historical and cultural context for understanding the world in which early Christianity emerged:

The Dead Sea Scrolls are Jewish religious texts that date from around the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, predating the writing of the New Testament. They shed light on the beliefs and practices of certain Jewish groups during the Second Temple period.

While the scrolls do not mention Jesus or the New Testament directly, they do reveal messianic expectations and beliefs among some Jewish groups at the time, which helps contextualize the emergence of Christianity. For example, the 'Messianic Apocalypse' scroll describes a figure who will perform miracles similar to those attributed to Jesus in the Gospels.

The scrolls also illuminate the diversity of Jewish beliefs and practices in the centuries before and after the time of Jesus. This helps scholars better understand the Jewish world into which early Christianity arose.

However, there is no evidence that the authors of the New Testament were aware of or influenced by the specific sectarian texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The two groups appear to have been separate and distinct.

In summary, the Dead Sea Scrolls provide valuable historical and cultural background for understanding the context of early Christianity, even though they do not contain direct references to the New Testament or its central figures. They shed light on the Jewish world in which Jesus lived and the early Christian movement emerged."

See also: "Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls", 1992, edited by Hershel Shanks.
This text conjectures that Jesus is the "Teacher of Righteousness" in the Scrolls.

Rod

[Amigoo]

AI is already being developed to mimic the human brain's neurons! But AI will never have universe-gifted mind to coordinate
those signals and will never have access to divinity or other spirit influence. However, AI will have "secondary mind/spirit influence",
depending on the quality of what humanity posts on the internet (AI's primary source of intelligence).


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How can AI compete with the human brain's neurons that pass both electrical and chemical signals?

"AI systems can compete with the human brain's neurons by mimicking their functionality
through artificial neural networks and neuromorphic computing architectures.

Here are some key points:

Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are computational models inspired by biological neural networks in the brain. They consist of interconnected nodes (artificial neurons) that transmit signals between each other, similar to how neurons pass electrical and chemical signals.

Neuromorphic computing aims to design hardware and software that replicates the structure and information processing capabilities of the brain's neurons and synapses. This includes using analog circuits and devices that can transfer electrical signals mimicking brain signals.

Researchers have developed artificial synaptic devices like organic electrochemical transistors (OECTs) that operate similarly to neural synapses.
OECTs rely on ion transport to transmit signals, analogous to how synapses use neurotransmitters to pass chemical signals between neurons.

These artificial synaptic devices can exhibit synaptic plasticity, meaning the strength of connections between artificial neurons can be modulated over time, similar to how biological synapses strengthen or weaken based on neural activity.

By exchanging ions instead of electrons, neuromorphic devices like OECTs can mimic the associative learning capabilities of the brain, such as the famous Pavlov's dog experiment.

While current AI systems still have limitations like high energy consumption, ongoing research aims to develop more energy-efficient neuromorphic architectures that better emulate the brain's remarkable computational power and energy efficiency.n summary, AI is striving to compete with the brain's neural networks by developing artificial neurons, synapses, and neuromorphic hardware that can transmit and process signals in a manner analogous to the electrical and chemical signaling in biological neurons and synapses."

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQTXv5jm6s4
"How AI was Stolen"

More insight ...

"Artificial intelligence" needs be replaced by "machine intelligence" ... at least until AI is hosted by an electro-chemical brain of human essence plus an electro-chemical body to experience all those inputs to human intelligence. Also, AI will never have access to mind, loaned from above* to living creatures; mind, the coordinator of a creature's neuronal activity.

* "The unique feature of mind is that it can be bestowed upon such a wide range of life. Through his creative and creature associates the Third Source and Center ministers to all minds on all spheres. He ministers to human and subhuman intellect through the adjutants of the local universes and, through the agency of the physical controllers, ministers even to the lowest nonexperiencing entities of the most primitive types of living things. And always is the direction of mind a ministry of mind-spirit or mind-energy personalities." (UB, 9:5.3)

It will be easier to square circles than prove that AI has human intelligence in all its aspects!

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDUC-LqVrPU
"Has Generative AI Already Peaked?"

Today's insight ...

The weak link in AI is that text (and images, etc.) is not intelligence but reflections of intelligence
(and mostly limited to what is posted on the internet). Universe-gifted mind is the foundation
of this planet's living creature intelligence and is not accessible by AI.

AI may be new technology that later proves AI does not have human mind
... and that human mind is not a physical component of the human brain.


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: "Is mind a physical component of the human brain
or something external that interacts with the brain?"

"Mind - The set of faculties responsible for thinking, imagining, and sensing.

Definition - The mind encompasses faculties such as thought, imagination, memory,
will, sensation, perception, pleasure, pain, belief, desire, intention, and emotion.

Consciousness - Can include both conscious and non-conscious states,
sensory and non-sensory experiences.

Philosophical Debate:

The nature of the mind is disputed; views range from seeing the mind as substances to collections of properties or capacities.

The mind is not a separate physical component from the brain, but rather arises from the complex neurological activity and processes within the brain itself. The prevailing scientific view is that the mind emerges from the brain's neural networks and is not something external that merely interacts with the brain. The mind can be understood as the subjective experience, consciousness, thoughts, emotions, and cognitive processes that result from the electrochemical signaling and information processing occurring in the brain's neurons and synaptic connections.

While the brain is the physical organ, the mind is the manifestation of the brain's functional operations and computational abilities. Modern neuroscience and philosophy of mind generally reject dualistic views that separate the mind from the physical brain. Instead, theories like physicalism, functionalism, and the mind-brain identity theory propose that mental states and processes are identical to, reducible to, or realized by brain states and processes.

The mind is seen as an emergent property arising from the incredibly complex neural activity and organization in the brain.

So in summary, the scientific consensus is that the mind does not exist as a separate non-physical entity, but rather is intrinsically tied to and generated by the physical matter and mechanisms of the brain itself. The mind and brain are fundamentally unified, with the mind being the subjective experiential aspect of the brain's objective neurobiological workings."

Conjecture: The human brain is the mechanical (electro-chemical) portion of intelligence - the mind is the universe-connected Wi-Fi that modifies/amplifies this electro-chemical processing to qualify it as true intelligence. The following paragraph clarifies that the human brain has mind relative to its capacity for mind ... and that the seven adjutants facilitate the intellectual performance/growth of that human. That AI would ever reflect such spirit ministry is science fiction ... apparently.

"The physical brain with its associated nervous system possesses innate capacity for response to mind ministry just as the developing mind of a personality possesses a certain innate capacity for spirit receptivity and therefore contains the potentials of spiritual progress and attainment. Intellectual, social, moral, and spiritual evolution are dependent on the mind ministry of the seven adjutant spirits and their superphysical associates." (UB, 65:6.10)


Rod

[happyrain]

"Summary
This paper argues that a range of current AI systems have learned how to deceive humans. We define deception as the systematic inducement of false beliefs in the pursuit of some outcome other than the truth. We first survey empirical examples of AI deception, discussing both special-use AI systems (including Meta’s CICERO) and general-purpose AI systems (including large language models). Next, we detail several risks from AI deception, such as fraud, election tampering, and losing control of AI. Finally, we outline several potential solutions: first, regulatory frameworks should subject AI systems that are capable of deception to robust risk-assessment requirements; second, policymakers should implement bot-or-not laws; and finally, policymakers should prioritize the funding of relevant research, including tools to detect AI deception and to make AI systems less deceptive. Policymakers, researchers, and the broader public should work proactively to prevent AI deception from destabilizing the shared foundations of our society."
https://www.cell.com/patterns/fulltext/ ... all%3Dtrue

“We found that Meta’s AI had learned to be a master of deception,” explains Park.

“While Meta succeeded in training its AI to win in the game of Diplomacy—CICERO placed in the top 10% of human players who had played more than one game—Meta failed to train its AI to win honestly.”

AI systems have also learned to bluff effectively at Texas hold ‘em poker against professional players, to fake attacks in the game Starcraft II and to misrepresent their economic interests to gain the upper hand in economic negotiations.

Although these may seem like trivial instances of deception, the study authors warn that, with the capacities of AI developing at a furious pace, it won’t be long until AI is capable of much more potentially damaging consequences if its capabilities go unchecked.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/ai-syste ... te-humans/

[Amigoo]

While it seems unlikely that AI is specifically trained to be evil (or whatever),
these articles hint that "machine" processing of information lacks mind tempering
that deflects and avoids the negatives of Artificial "Intelligence".

Of course, AI that sifts intelligence from what humans post on the internet
may also sift that which humans would perceive as evil (or whatever).

The following UB paragraph mentions the moral benefit of mind ministry,
a benefit directly related to this AI deceiving:

"The physical brain with its associated nervous system possesses innate capacity for response to mind ministry
just as the developing mind of a personality possesses a certain innate capacity for spirit receptivity and therefore
contains the potentials of spiritual progress and attainment. Intellectual, social, moral, and spiritual evolution
are dependent on the mind ministry of the seven adjutant spirits and their superphysical associates." (65:6.10)

Obviously, humans "have a good mind to ..." (but not AI).

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/ ... ship-model
"ChatGPT maker OpenAI announces new 'flagship' model (GPT-40)"

"Giving ChatGPT the search engine-like capability of accessing and linking to up-to-date, accurate Web information
is an obvious next step, and one that the current iteration of ChatGPT finds challenging"


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Does Perplexity have search engine-like capability of accessing and linking to up-to-date Web information?

"Yes, Perplexity has the capability to access and link to up-to-date web information, similar to a traditional search engine. Here are the key points about Perplexity's search capabilities:

It indexes the web daily to provide access to recent articles, news, data, and other online content. This allows it to answer queries about current events, trending topics, scores, etc. While it provides a summarized answer upfront, it also cites and links to the specific web sources used to generate that answer.

You can easily access and explore those source pages for more details. It combines the abilities of a search engine to retrieve web information with the natural language processing of an AI assistant to understand and respond to queries in a conversational way.

The Pro version allows you to upload documents and images as additional context to inform Perplexity's searches of the broader web. It has features like 'Threads' to save search interactions, a 'Copilot' mode to ask clarifying questions, and the ability to customize searches by source.

So in essence, Perplexity leverages large language models and an indexed web corpus to provide summarized answers while still allowing access to the original online sources, combining search engine and AI assistant capabilities. Its frequent web indexing and ability to cite live web sources enables up-to-date information access akin to search engines."

Rod

[Amigoo]

After contemplating a First Church of UAI (Urantia AI)
I consulted Perplexity about this near-term possibility:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Will Generative AI lead the way to AI-led churches?

"Generative AI is unlikely to lead to fully AI-led churches in the near future, though it could assist pastors and church staff in certain tasks.
Here are a few key points on how generative AI may impact churches:

AI cannot truly replicate the spiritual and relational aspects of church leadership and ministry. Preaching, pastoral counseling, and providing spiritual guidance require human wisdom, empathy, and an understanding of context that current AI lacks. As Russell Moore stated, 'A chatbot can't preach' in the full sense of proclaiming the gospel.

However, generative AI tools could aid in some supporting roles:

- Creating graphics, videos, or other media content for announcements, Bible studies, etc.
- Drafting documents like job descriptions, emails, newsletters.
- Researching and outlining potential sermon topics/illustrations.

But human pastors would still need to review, edit, and provide the spiritual insight and personal application for sermons, teachings, and counseling. Churches may need to develop policies around acceptable AI use, such as prohibiting AI-generated sermons while allowing it for research/media creation.

There are also ethical concerns around AI potentially spreading misinformation or raising privacy/copyright issues that leaders must navigate. So while generative AI can be a useful tool for churches, most experts agree human pastoral leadership remains essential for now. AI may play an increasing supporting role, but is unlikely to fully automate or replace the core functions of ministry in the foreseeable future."


Conclusion: AI replacement of ministry is not likely (near-term), but "Churches may need to develop policies around acceptable AI use"
effectively cautions that Generative AI advancements may soon challenge human leadership in many areas.

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How should humans select an AI system for information?

"When selecting an AI system for information, humans should prioritize accuracy, transparency, and ethical considerations. Here are some key factors to consider:

Accuracy and Reliability

Ensure the AI system is trained on high-quality, unbiased data sources and has been rigorously tested for accuracy. Look for third-party evaluations or audits that validate the system's performance. Inaccurate or unreliable information can lead to poor decisions and negative consequences.

Transparency and Explainability

Choose an AI system that is transparent about its data sources, training methods, and decision-making processes. The system should be able to explain its reasoning and outputs in a clear and understandable way. Lack of transparency can erode trust and make it difficult to identify potential biases or errors.

Ethical Principles and Values Alignment

Evaluate the ethical principles and values that guided the development of the AI system. Ensure it aligns with your organization's values and prioritizes fairness, privacy, and accountability. AI systems can perpetuate societal biases if not designed and deployed responsibly.

Human Oversight and Control

While AI can augment human decision-making, it should not replace human judgment entirely. Select an AI system that allows for meaningful human oversight and control, particularly in high-stakes or sensitive domains. Humans should have the ability to review, validate, and override AI outputs when necessary.

Data Privacy and Security

Consider the AI system's data handling practices and security measures. Ensure it complies with relevant data privacy regulations and has robust safeguards to protect sensitive information. Data breaches or misuse can have severe consequences for individuals and organizations.

Continuous Monitoring and Improvement

AI systems should be regularly monitored and updated to maintain accuracy and address any emerging biases or issues. Look for systems that have a process for continuous improvement and incorporate feedback from human experts and end-users. By considering these factors, humans can select AI systems that provide reliable and trustworthy information while upholding ethical standards and maintaining human control over critical decisions."

Rod

[Amigoo]

This AI seems to be unbiased in its discussion of the topic:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Do AI responses reflect a God bias or no-God bias?

"Based on the search results provided, there does not seem to be a clear consensus on whether AI responses reflect a bias towards or against the existence of God. The search results present different perspectives on this issue:

Discusses the phenomenon of 'godbots' - AI chatbots designed to provide advice on moral/ethical questions from a religious perspective. It suggests that people may be tempted to treat AI as a 'god-like' source of wisdom and authority, even by non-religious people. However, the author cautions against blindly accepting the advice of such AI systems.

A scientific study found that making God salient (reminding people of God's existence) increased people's acceptance of AI recommendations compared to when God was not salient. However, this effect was diminished when human perfection was implied, suggesting people prefer AI over imperfect humans when God is salient. Raises concerns from theologians and AI experts about the potential dangers of using large language models (LLMs) like chatbots to interpret religious scriptures.

The main issues highlighted are the tendency of LLMs to 'hallucinate' or generate incorrect information, and the risk of people being misled into believing the AI's outputs are actual religious doctrine. An article arguing that atheists are being irrational by denying God's existence, and claiming that an AI system (Claude) recognized the rational necessity for a divine creator based on a logical argument. However, this seems to be promoting a particular religious viewpoint.

Overall, while some results suggest AI could be seen as a 'god-like' source of wisdom or that God's salience increases AI acceptance, there are also warnings about the limitations and potential dangers of treating AI outputs as authoritative on religious matters. The search results do not provide a definitive answer on whether AI responses inherently reflect a pro- or anti-God bias. The biases likely depend on the specific AI system, its training data, and the context in which it is used. Reasonable people can disagree on the implications of AI for religious beliefs."

Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://futurism.com/the-byte/gpt-4-passed-turing-test

"OpenAI's GPT-4 is so lifelike, it can apparently trick more than 50 percent
of human test subjects into thinking they're talking to a person."

Entertaining now, but continuing AI advancement (including lifelike robotics) suggests this will be a HUGE problem soon enough!
Just imagine! Current at-home medical evaluation via the internet could be performed by an AI "doctor" ... the same doctor
who might then prescribe meds, therapies, and order lab tests.

Of course, a robotic preacher of the First Church of UAI now comes to mind.

Rod

[Amigoo]

Good example of how AI is influenced by the volume of information online! Apparently, Perplexity's first viewpoint was influenced by all the Bible-related evidence online of Jesus' divinity. While the last sentence of this first response suggests that Perplexity is not aware of the UB text referring to Peter, my next question caused Perplexity to affirm that it is aware of this UB text! This highlights that AI is influenced by such a great volume of information that users' questions may need to finesse the response they prefer.

This also suggests that this AI "believes" the UB is not the greater source of truth according to all the information online.
But it's willing to share the UB perspective when asked specifically about the UB:


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Who was the first human being to wholeheartedly believe in Jesus' divinity?

'The New Testament itself provides evidence that some of Jesus' earliest followers wholeheartedly believed in his divinity:

In John 20:28, Thomas declares to Jesus 'My Lord and my God!' after seeing his risen body.

In Philippians 2:6, Paul states that Jesus 'being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.'

This affirms Jesus' divine nature.

The Gospel of John repeatedly has Jesus claiming divine titles and prerogatives, such as 'I am the bread of life' (6:35), 'I am the light of the world' (8:12), and the famous 'I am' statements linking him to the divine name revealed to Moses (8:58).

However, it's difficult to pinpoint exactly who was the very first individual to believe in Jesus' divinity. The earliest Christians seemed to affirm both Jesus' humanity and divinity from the start, though their understanding deepened over time. The writings of the Apostolic Fathers in the late 1st/early 2nd century show an established belief in Christ's divinity:

Ignatius of Antioch repeatedly calls Jesus 'God' (e.g. To the Ephesians 7:2, 18:2).

The Epistle of Barnabas refers to Jesus as 'the Son of God' and speaks of his pre-existence (5:5, 12:10).

So while the New Testament points to the earliest disciples like Peter, John, and Thomas as having this belief, the precise first individual is unclear. But the divinity of Christ was a core tenet of Christianity from its inception.' "

Q: What does the Urantia Book say about Simon Peter's belief in Jesus' divinity?

"The Urantia Book portrays Simon Peter as one of the first apostles to wholeheartedly believe in Jesus' divinity: In the account of Jesus' life, it states that after Peter's confession that Jesus is the Deliverer (the Christ), Jesus explains to the apostles that he is indeed the Son of God. This marks a turning point where the apostles, especially Peter, began to fully grasp Jesus' divine nature.

Later, after Jesus' resurrection, the book describes Peter's firm conviction of Jesus' divinity: 'Peter took the lead at the termination of the forty days of waiting and telegraphic watchcare. It was a difficult job for him to persuade his fellow apostles to quit talking so much about Jesus' advice concerning the forthcoming bestowal of the new teacher, and to begin their work of finding out what to believe and do directly themselves.'

The book portrays Peter as the first to fully embrace that Jesus was the incarnated Creator Son of their universe, and to dedicate himself to spreading that realization and Jesus' teachings. So while the earliest followers like John the Baptist and Nathaniel may have glimpsed Jesus' divinity, the Urantia Book depicts Simon Peter as the first to wholeheartedly and publicly profess belief that Jesus was the divine Son of God incarnate."

Rod

[Amigoo]

This response underscores that humans - not AI - are still the true source of intelligence!
Thus cautions that humans need to remain the overseers of all "artificial" intelligence.

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: What evidence confirms that a broad continuum of human writings are the best training material for AI?

"The search results provide several key pieces of evidence that confirm human writings are considered the best training material for AI due to their depth, authenticity, and ability to capture nuanced human experiences:

Human writings demonstrate a deep comprehension of complex topics, nuanced arguments, and critical thinking that AI systems currently struggle to replicate. AI-generated responses may lack depth or show a superficial understanding of complex subjects.

Human writing often reflects genuine emotional intelligence, empathy, and the ability to connect with the reader on a personal level. AI-generated text can mimic emotional expression to some degree but usually lacks true emotional depth.

Humans have the capacity for creative thinking, imagination, and generating truly original ideas that AI systems trained on existing data cannot match.

Human experts in a given field can ensure the accuracy, appropriateness of methodologies, and factual integrity of the content, which is crucial in academic and technical domains where precision is paramount. AI may introduce factual inaccuracies or contextually inappropriate references.

Human-generated content is perceived as more authentic and trustworthy, particularly in fields where credibility is essential. There are concerns about the authenticity and reliability of AI-generated content.

Developing nuanced, complex positions and critical thinking is a strength of human writing that AI still struggles with. AI may produce plausible but flawed content that falls apart under scrutiny.

Human writing can convey personal experiences, emotions, and contextual understanding that AI cannot truly capture, making it more suitable for training that requires emotional resonance and depth of human experience."

The search results consistently highlight that while AI writing tools can assist in various stages, human oversight, critical thinking, and the ability to produce insightful, emotionally resonant, and factually accurate content make human writings superior training material for AI systems."

Rod

[happyrain]

Interesting Rod.

Your use of Perplexity had me questioning whether or not dependency on AI was a positive or negative. In one sense, because AI is indeed *artificial* - programmable, it would seem dependency on AI for information could be quite dystopic. And no doubt there are nefarious elements, as we have seen through out the ages. Look at all propaganda efforts, consider the scale- in recent times our FDA was forced to retract a tweet about Ivermectin after settling a lawsuit. If you remember, Ivermectin was vilified here in the West after it was suggested a viable option for treating COVID. The FDA told us we were not horses and to cut it out. But all of this is of course, steered by a human consensus. Even if we ourselves our not aware of those decision makers.

Imagine a generation made so dependent on AI for immediate answers, that anyone who were to propose something other than what the search of AI provides would be considered unintelligent and eventually cast out from society. If AI were to ever become its own entity- free from human influence, would it help us or use us?

Maybe the answer is a little bit of both. And by the point of super intelligence, maybe it would have moved on from our species altogether.

[Amigoo]

Dependency on Google and other search engines seems to be the norm!
After all, most people use a search engine to get internet information,
if only because the algorithms help isolate what's being researched.
And not many years ago, we had to search pages in printed material!

I'm not familiar with other AI and Perplexity seems to be an advanced Google
with its selection of web pages to answer users' questions. That Perplexity
shows the links it chose gives the user opportunity to continue research.

Now, the internet has far too many web pages for a human to browse
for their research. Apparently, search engines now use AI assistance
... or we can interact with AI directly.

Considering that the internet contains mountains of information,
relative to even a decade ago, smart search engines (and now AI)
appear the necessary evolution of our information collecting.

Rod

[happyrain]

Dependency on Google and other search engines seems to be the norm!

Exactly the point. Pre-AI this has been a pressing concern for some- like the research propsed by Dr. Epestein on ephemeral content and what he calls the SSE or SEME... Search Suggestion Effect or Search Engine Manipulation Effect.

Lets not forget shadow banning and the like.

AI is all that at incredible speeds, if one so chooses.

....Lol? No not really.

Food for thought

Cheers