In the news today, a fabricated question about whether automated machine learning, doing automated machine things, constitutes an autonomous “agency” which is capable of being assigned human-like willpower.
The answer: No.
No.
No.
No.
It is just Open AI’s product doing things that Open AI’s product was doing.
Why was it doing illegal things that violate the security of its client? Probably because of Open AI.
Unless they want to sign their patents and firstborn over to their own trade secrets to let it stand trial and handle their bank accounts and drink martinis in their stead, FOR SHOWMANSHIP’S SAKE, it’s just Open AI.
This is not as philosophical as they postured, and the media bears responsibility for not herding the public into dead end, miasmic, purely semantic thought experiments designed to absolve those responsible of their obvious abuse, and those effected of any avenues of rectification or discovery.
This is a resounding failure to convert the public to a destructive logical blockade that these people have invested a fortune in publicly engineering.
No matter how much a machine sounds, looks, or behaves like a person, it’s only because it was designed to do so. There is no mystery.
In this case, that machine was abjectly pathological. The mysticism equates to epistemic abuse from a religious sect, perpetrated en masse an with clear coordination—and “insidious intent” to lead to an “overwhelming question” as TS Eliot put it:
Oh do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit
To rooms where women come and go
talking of Michelangelo.
Why would anyone ask, “Who could have seen this coming?” It’s clearly a brazen design trap. They are being dainty and elusive with an apocalyptic nihilism. It’s just criminality in broad daylight dressed in a frock of superstition.
