zlacker

>>Jimmc4+(OP)
It is easy to point to loopy theories around superalignment, p(doom), etc. But you don't have to be hopped up on sci-fi to oppose something like GPT-4o. Low-latency response time is fine. The faking of emotions and overt references to Her (along with the suspiciously-timed relaxation of pornographic generations) are not fine. I suspect Altman/Brockman/Murati intended for this thing to be dangerous for mentally unwell users, using the exact same logic as tobacco companies.

>>nickle+491
> The faking of emotions

HEH. In previous versions, when it told jokes, were those fake jokes?

>>qarl+dj1
Those are fundamentally different things. You can tell a joke without understanding context, you can't express emotions if you don't have any. It's a computation model, it cannot feel emotion.

>>awkwar+Zl1
Are they fundamentally different? Couldn’t you make the argument that it’s advanced from a probabilistic determination of the most likely next token, to a probabilistic determination of the next token AND a probabilistic determination of the inflection that that token should be transmitted with? How is one any more or less fake than the other?

>>terse-+ns1
I believe the issue is "emotion" and "emotional tone" are not the same thing, in the same way that "humor" and "written joke" aren't the same thing. You can convey emotional tones without having the emotion (that's what I meant by "fake emotion"), just like you can tell a joke without understanding the punchline.

>>nickle+pq3
So if an AI wrote a touching poem, would you call it fake or not? And how is that different than a joke?