正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

We ask AGI to create a perfect world. AGI kills everyone. No people. No problems. Perfect. We add a rule: don't kill anyone. AGI kills everyone anyway. Because if everyone is dead no one can stop it. This is not a joke. This is how a computer thinks. This... show more

Predictive History

79,047 subscribers

14,945 次观看 • 2 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

- How we talk about this situation is very important. This is not a conflict, this is not a battle, it is a genocide of Palestinian people. It is a violation of human rights that should be the concern of everyone.

- How we talk about this situation is very important. This is not a conflict, this is not a battle, it is a genocide of Palestinian people. It is a violation of human rights that should be the concern of everyone.

hannie on my phone

346,582 次观看 • 2 年前

AGI. This Texas company is building it and has a very different approach than I've seen from others. This is Peter Voss's fourth AI company. He talks me through AGI. Is why I say it's a tiny database. Learn more about his company:

AGI. This Texas company is building it and has a very different approach than I've seen from others. This is Peter Voss's fourth AI company. He talks me through AGI. Is why I say it's a tiny database. Learn more about his company:

Robert Scoble

22,715 次观看 • 1 年前

5 years ago, Sam Altman said OpenAI had no plan to make money. The promise to investors? Build AGI -- then ask it how to generate a return. “If AGI is on the table, we take 1/1000th of 1% of the value, return it to investors, and figure out how to share the rest with the world.”

5 years ago, Sam Altman said OpenAI had no plan to make money. The promise to investors? Build AGI -- then ask it how to generate a return. “If AGI is on the table, we take 1/1000th of 1% of the value, return it to investors, and figure out how to share the rest with the world.”

vitrupo

310,753 次观看 • 1 年前

Demis Hassabis says AGI is a scientific goal worth pursuing -- a testable frontier of general intelligence. Kate Crawford pushes back: the industry is already optimized for AGI. What it lacks is alignment with goals that serve people and the planet. "When do we build AI that's actually good for everyone? These are the real benchmarks."

Demis Hassabis says AGI is a scientific goal worth pursuing -- a testable frontier of general intelligence. Kate Crawford pushes back: the industry is already optimized for AGI. What it lacks is alignment with goals that serve people and the planet. "When do we build AI that's actually good for everyone? These are the real benchmarks."

vitrupo

29,243 次观看 • 1 年前

This is a federal crime that is going to kill people around the world. Apparently it just doesn’t matter. This is who we are now. No one is stopping them.

This is a federal crime that is going to kill people around the world. Apparently it just doesn’t matter. This is who we are now. No one is stopping them.

MAGA Cult Slayer

172,799 次观看 • 1 年前

WATCH: This is how Alberta Separatism can win. No BS. And this is why we need to stop it.

WATCH: This is how Alberta Separatism can win. No BS. And this is why we need to stop it.

Zain Velji

10,782 次观看 • 3 个月前

Interesting argument. If we were to steel man this and represent it as a syllogism I think it would look like this: 1. God is perfect 2. A perfect being would only create perfect things 3. The world is imperfect 4. Therefore, a perfect God could not have created this world ...And then we'd further conclude a perfect God doesn't exist. The problem is with premise two, for a number of reasons. Firstly, what does it mean to be perfect? To be perfect is to lack for nothing, to be without flaws, to be fully actualized. But only God is like that, so the only way for God to make something perfect would be to make another God exactly like Himself. But there's a problem with this because the second God couldn't be exactly the same since he had to be created, rather than simply existing by his very nature. So logically speaking God can't create something perfect. This means that if* God creates, God can only create things that are imperfect. So now that we've established that God can't make something perfect, I guess the question is... why would God create? Here's a thought. Ontologically speaking God is the greatest conceivable being... would the greatest conceivable being create things? Or not create things? It seems obvious that creating is greater than not creating. An artist that creates no art wouldn't be much of an artist. If this is correct, it means God will create, and from my first argument God will create something imperfect... something flawed. Something lacking. Another thing worth pointing out is that as humans we knowingly create imperfect beings. We know when a baby is born, it's not perfect... yet we choose to do it anyway. Why? Is our desire to bring new life into the world something evil or wicked? I don't think so. I think it comes from our love for each other and our understanding that giving life is a blessing, even if that child screws up, even if they suffer, their life is a blessing. If God is good, wouldn't He want to bless something with the gift of life, the same way we do? I don't see why not. From this I think it follows that if God exists we'd expect to be in some sort of imperfect or flawed reality, and that's exactly what we find ourselves in. But how does atheism explain the existence of a flawed world? To say that something is flawed is to say it's not how it should be. But how can the world be flawed if atheism is true? On atheism the world just... is. It's not meant to be any sort of way. To be consistent the atheist would have to say reality isn't flawed, which is obviously absurd. This means that not only can Christianity explain the world we find ourselves in, it predicts it logically. Atheism on the other hand would have to predict a totally neutral world with no flaws, no issues, no evil... and no one in their right mind would say that's the world we find ourselves in. So this argument not only fails, it gives us more great reasons to reject atheism.

Interesting argument. If we were to steel man this and represent it as a syllogism I think it would look like this: 1. God is perfect 2. A perfect being would only create perfect things 3. The world is imperfect 4. Therefore, a perfect God could not have created this world ...And then we'd further conclude a perfect God doesn't exist. The problem is with premise two, for a number of reasons. Firstly, what does it mean to be perfect? To be perfect is to lack for nothing, to be without flaws, to be fully actualized. But only God is like that, so the only way for God to make something perfect would be to make another God exactly like Himself. But there's a problem with this because the second God couldn't be exactly the same since he had to be created, rather than simply existing by his very nature. So logically speaking God can't create something perfect. This means that if* God creates, God can only create things that are imperfect. So now that we've established that God can't make something perfect, I guess the question is... why would God create? Here's a thought. Ontologically speaking God is the greatest conceivable being... would the greatest conceivable being create things? Or not create things? It seems obvious that creating is greater than not creating. An artist that creates no art wouldn't be much of an artist. If this is correct, it means God will create, and from my first argument God will create something imperfect... something flawed. Something lacking. Another thing worth pointing out is that as humans we knowingly create imperfect beings. We know when a baby is born, it's not perfect... yet we choose to do it anyway. Why? Is our desire to bring new life into the world something evil or wicked? I don't think so. I think it comes from our love for each other and our understanding that giving life is a blessing, even if that child screws up, even if they suffer, their life is a blessing. If God is good, wouldn't He want to bless something with the gift of life, the same way we do? I don't see why not. From this I think it follows that if God exists we'd expect to be in some sort of imperfect or flawed reality, and that's exactly what we find ourselves in. But how does atheism explain the existence of a flawed world? To say that something is flawed is to say it's not how it should be. But how can the world be flawed if atheism is true? On atheism the world just... is. It's not meant to be any sort of way. To be consistent the atheist would have to say reality isn't flawed, which is obviously absurd. This means that not only can Christianity explain the world we find ourselves in, it predicts it logically. Atheism on the other hand would have to predict a totally neutral world with no flaws, no issues, no evil... and no one in their right mind would say that's the world we find ourselves in. So this argument not only fails, it gives us more great reasons to reject atheism.

Darwin to Jesus

57,618 次观看 • 3 个月前

Zionists still don't get it, the people have woken up. This is the perfect example of why everyone is turning against them.

Zionists still don't get it, the people have woken up. This is the perfect example of why everyone is turning against them.

Financelot

40,867 次观看 • 8 个月前

Physicist Brian Cox says consciousness is the most complex emergent phenomenon we know, but it still comes from underlying laws In principle, a powerful enough computer could model the brain AI and AGI raise this question: "we still don't know how consciousness emerges from the brain"

Physicist Brian Cox says consciousness is the most complex emergent phenomenon we know, but it still comes from underlying laws In principle, a powerful enough computer could model the brain AI and AGI raise this question: "we still don't know how consciousness emerges from the brain"

Haider.

103,565 次观看 • 6 个月前

this song is perfect and a total ear worm i just don't understand why everyone hates on it

this song is perfect and a total ear worm i just don't understand why everyone hates on it

Dr TT

24,590 次观看 • 2 年前

Night King kills a dragon, kills thousands of people, kills giants and destroys the wall. Only to die from a quick stab. Now this is where people had problems with the show, I still don't understand how they created such a great and outstanding villain and ruin it with a crazy ending

Night King kills a dragon, kills thousands of people, kills giants and destroys the wall. Only to die from a quick stab. Now this is where people had problems with the show, I still don't understand how they created such a great and outstanding villain and ruin it with a crazy ending

Unique Movie Moments 🐬

47,455 次观看 • 1 个月前

Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI co-founder, on why the company that builds AGI shouldn't be chasing infinite profits: Speaking on the No Priors podcast, Ilya Sutskever turns a question on the very technology he's working to build. "If you believe that the technology that we are building, AGI, could potentially be so capable as to do every single task that people do... does it mean that it might unemploy everyone? Well, I don't know, but it's not impossible." From that possibility, Ilya Sutskever draws a conclusion about how such a company should be structured: "And if that's the case, it makes sense. It will make a lot of sense if the company that builds such a technology would not be incentivized to make infinite profits." But he doesn't present this as a settled view. He immediately points to the force that complicates it — competition: "I don't know if it will literally play out this way because of competition in AI. So there will be multiple companies and I think that will have some unforeseen implications on the argument which I'm making. But that was the thinking." His point is simple: if AGI can do everything a person can, it might put people out of work on a massive scale, and that changes things.

Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI co-founder, on why the company that builds AGI shouldn't be chasing infinite profits: Speaking on the No Priors podcast, Ilya Sutskever turns a question on the very technology he's working to build. "If you believe that the technology that we are building, AGI, could potentially be so capable as to do every single task that people do... does it mean that it might unemploy everyone? Well, I don't know, but it's not impossible." From that possibility, Ilya Sutskever draws a conclusion about how such a company should be structured: "And if that's the case, it makes sense. It will make a lot of sense if the company that builds such a technology would not be incentivized to make infinite profits." But he doesn't present this as a settled view. He immediately points to the force that complicates it — competition: "I don't know if it will literally play out this way because of competition in AI. So there will be multiple companies and I think that will have some unforeseen implications on the argument which I'm making. But that was the thinking." His point is simple: if AGI can do everything a person can, it might put people out of work on a massive scale, and that changes things.

Big Brain AI

13,398 次观看 • 1 个月前

See? They're a literal cult. This is the fandom that thinks they're above everyone else. This is the fandom always h4rassing everyone else's idols. This is the fandom that ruined kpop's reputation.

See? They're a literal cult. This is the fandom that thinks they're above everyone else. This is the fandom always h4rassing everyone else's idols. This is the fandom that ruined kpop's reputation.

sonomari

10,649 次观看 • 5 个月前

Lavrov: "We all want to know what kind of world we live in. Therefore, the US must explain its plans and how this relates to the norms that existed before." Well, it's not just Lavrov; the entire world is at a loss. The old world has collapsed before our eyes. The new world isn't here yet. But I don't think the US thinks it owes anyone anything. The US is building its own unipolar world where it will dictate how everyone lives. Then everyone will know what kind of world they live in. To achieve this, the US only needs to subjugate Iran, Russia, and China. Isn't that clear? Turning a blind eye to this and pretending everything is fine won't work. Iran is now taking the US's first blow because Iran is the gateway to the conquest of Russia and China. That's what I think.

Lavrov: "We all want to know what kind of world we live in. Therefore, the US must explain its plans and how this relates to the norms that existed before." Well, it's not just Lavrov; the entire world is at a loss. The old world has collapsed before our eyes. The new world isn't here yet. But I don't think the US thinks it owes anyone anything. The US is building its own unipolar world where it will dictate how everyone lives. Then everyone will know what kind of world they live in. To achieve this, the US only needs to subjugate Iran, Russia, and China. Isn't that clear? Turning a blind eye to this and pretending everything is fine won't work. Iran is now taking the US's first blow because Iran is the gateway to the conquest of Russia and China. That's what I think.

Victor vicktop55 commentary

97,979 次观看 • 4 个月前

He is the one who sacrifices innocent civilians(Alhijri-and his terrorist militia). why doesn’t he leave the residential areas? Everyone is safe outside the areas. We don’t want war, we don’t want destruction, and we don’t want any of this to happen. We want it to be peaceful and with an agreement. He is a terrorist, he kills people and terrorizes them. This is forbidden by God. Fear God with regard to women and children.!

He is the one who sacrifices innocent civilians(Alhijri-and his terrorist militia). why doesn’t he leave the residential areas? Everyone is safe outside the areas. We don’t want war, we don’t want destruction, and we don’t want any of this to happen. We want it to be peaceful and with an agreement. He is a terrorist, he kills people and terrorizes them. This is forbidden by God. Fear God with regard to women and children.!

عمر مدنيه

40,099 次观看 • 1 年前

"Why is everyone crying? Didn't we all know they'd go back to their old agency someday?" This is what Yuehua wants to tear apart anyway. No one can recreate a perfectly balanced group like EVNNE

"Why is everyone crying? Didn't we all know they'd go back to their old agency someday?" This is what Yuehua wants to tear apart anyway. No one can recreate a perfectly balanced group like EVNNE

dhi✮⋆˙ EVNNE BACKTALK

19,310 次观看 • 6 个月前

“Benjamin Netanyahu, if you can hear me, please drop a bomb on this building.“ That is a JOKE. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to read the Constitution.

“Benjamin Netanyahu, if you can hear me, please drop a bomb on this building.“ That is a JOKE. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to read the Constitution.

James Fishback

79,661 次观看 • 3 个月前

SAM ALTMAN: “WE CAN LAUNCH THE FIRST AGI AND NO ONE WOULD CARE THAT MUCH” Sam believes humanity will probably meet Artificial General Intelligence with a collective “meh.” World-changing tech? Sure. But first, let people finish scrolling cat videos and fighting in the comments. He thinks AGI won’t shake the world immediately - but it will eventually run it. Source: vitrupo

SAM ALTMAN: “WE CAN LAUNCH THE FIRST AGI AND NO ONE WOULD CARE THAT MUCH” Sam believes humanity will probably meet Artificial General Intelligence with a collective “meh.” World-changing tech? Sure. But first, let people finish scrolling cat videos and fighting in the comments. He thinks AGI won’t shake the world immediately - but it will eventually run it. Source: vitrupo

Mario Nawfal

176,964 次观看 • 1 年前

Why is everyone asking us how to get more Rocks? we don't know! but Marouen knows anyway, here is a guide 👇

Why is everyone asking us how to get more Rocks? we don't know! but Marouen knows anyway, here is a guide 👇

Crestal

100,831 次观看 • 1 年前