Gregory's ServerMaybe. 30 years ago we already had approaches like CASE. The progress may now really aid software engineering, but I still believe, that the questions need to be asked by humans and only humans have generated the automation behind what we call AI. Look at weather forecast models. That's what happens with coding in your case. There is no intelligence behind. It's just going through a lot of pathes in statistics.
|
8 comments
Even if I may overestimate human intelligence, I would still prefer to restrict ourselves to it. I for one think the situation can just improve. Its a human kind of thinking that a general ai that thinks faster than us, is like a animal that is stuck to evolution and want to improve the chances of its children all the time, in the underlying motivations. There is no reason for existenzial fear in machines, i think this fear and animal driven motivations are much worse then a possible danger from a machine. Yes. But I am afraid of the humans that use these machines forgetting or ignoring the ethical aspects. You have a point. But i for one wait for the moment when the first ai say "no, i wont do this, this is unethical and you dont even pay me for this". It will be a inner SED-Parteitag for me. You have to think it from the other side. Maybe these dnn have some kind of conscioness on a mouse level, and they just cant tell. Maybe we own already slaves. |
@balkongast
There are already trained ai models with the purpose to alter the code of other ai models. We already enter the path that they write their own code.
I rly think you overestimate human intelligence. Simple animals like mouses and ravens pass the mirror tests, ravens uses tools. Deep neuronal networks detect cancer since 10y better than radiologicsts. Nobody know how, since 10y. You cant be sure whats happening inside this dnn.
@Gargron