Futurism, transhumanism, bioethics, ethics, science, philosophy, artificial intelligence, personhood.
There are contexts where human cognitive and emotional intelligence takes precedence over AI, which serves a supporting role in decision-making without overriding human judgment. Here, AI “protects” human cognitive processes from things like bias, heuristic thinking, or decision-making that activates the brain’s reward system and leads to incoherent or skewed results. In the human-first mode, artificial integrity can assist judicial processes by analyzing previous law cases and outcomes, for instance, without substituting a judge’s moral and ethical reasoning. For this to work well, the AI system would also have to show how it arrives at different conclusions and recommendations, considering any cultural context or values that apply differently across different regions or legal systems.
4 – Fusion Mode:
Artificial integrity in this mode is a synergy between human intelligence and AI capabilities combining the best of both worlds. Autonomous vehicles operating in Fusion Mode would have AI managing the vehicle’s operations, such as speed, navigation, and obstacle avoidance, while human oversight, potentially through emerging technologies like Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs), would offer real-time input on complex ethical dilemmas. For instance, in unavoidable crash situations, a BCI could enable direct communication between the human brain and AI, allowing ethical decision-making to occur in real-time, and blending AI’s precision with human moral reasoning. These kinds of advanced integrations between humans and machines will require artificial integrity at the highest level of maturity: artificial integrity would ensure not only technical excellence but ethical robustness, to guard against any exploitation or manipulation of neural data as it prioritizes human safety and autonomy.
The question as to whether morality is innate has been hotly debated in developmental psychology for decades.
An international study with LMU participation provides evidence that our moral sense is not innate.
“An Unscientific American” discusses the resignation of Laura Helmuth from her position as editor-in-chief at Scientific American. The author, Michael Shermer, argues that her departure exemplifies the risks of blending facts with ideology in scientific communication.
Helmuth faced backlash after posting controversial remarks on social media regarding political views, which led to public criticism and her eventual resignation. Shermer reflects on how the magazine’s editorial direction has shifted towards progressive ideology, suggesting this has compromised its scientific integrity. He notes that had Helmuth made disparaging comments about liberal viewpoints, her outcome would likely have been more severe.
While LLMs are trained on massive, diverse datasets, SLMs concentrate on domain-specific data. In such cases, the data is often from within the enterprise. This makes SLMs tailored to industries or use cases, thereby ensuring both relevance and privacy.
As AI technologies expand, so do concerns about cybersecurity and ethics. The rise of unsanctioned and unmanaged AI applications within organisations, also referred to as ‘Shadow AI’, poses challenges for security leaders in safeguarding against potential vulnerabilities.
Predictions for 2025 suggest that AI will become mainstream, speeding up the adoption of cloud-based solutions across industries. This shift is expected to bring significant operational benefits, including improved risk assessment and enhanced decision-making capabilities.
One of the leading AI companies is funding academic research into algorithms that can predict humans’ moral judgements.
Scientists raise the alarm following updated research ethics guidelines on heritable human genome editing.
—————–Support the channel———–
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter.
PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter.
——————Follow me on——————–
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT
The 3 Body Problem Explored: Cosmic Sociology, Longtermism & Existential Risk — round table discussion with three great minds: Robin Hanson, Anders Sandberg and Joscha Bach — moderated by Adam Ford (SciFuture) and James Hughes (IEET).
Some of the items discussed:
- How can narratives that keep people engaged avoid falling short of being realistic?
- In what ways is AI superintelligence kept of stage to allow a narrative that is familiar and easier to make sense of?
- Differences in moral perspectives — moral realism, existentialism and anti-realism.
- Will values of advanced civilisations converge to a small number of possibilities, or will they vary greatly?
- How much will competition be the dominant dynamic in the future, compared to co-ordination?
- In a competitive dynamic, will defense or offense be the most dominant strategy?
Continue reading “The 3 Body Problem Explored — Robin Hanson, Anders Sandberg & Joscha Bach” »
Michael Levin is a Distinguished Professor in the Biology department at Tufts University and associate faculty at the Wyss Institute for Bioinspired Engineering at Harvard University. @drmichaellevin holds the Vannevar Bush endowed Chair and serves as director of the Allen Discovery Center at Tufts and the Tufts Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology. Prior to college, Michael Levin worked as a software engineer and independent contractor in the field of scientific computing. He attended Tufts University, interested in artificial intelligence and unconventional computation. To explore the algorithms by which the biological world implemented complex adaptive behavior, he got dual B.S. degrees, in CS and in Biology and then received a PhD from Harvard University. He did post-doctoral training at Harvard Medical School, where he began to uncover a new bioelectric language by which cells coordinate their activity during embryogenesis. His independent laboratory develops new molecular-genetic and conceptual tools to probe large-scale information processing in regeneration, embryogenesis, and cancer suppression.
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 — Introduction.
1:41 — Creating High-level General Intelligences.
7:00 — Ethical implications of Diverse Intelligence beyond AI & LLMs.
10:30 — Solving the Fundamental Paradox that faces all Species.
15:00 — Evolution creates Problem Solving Agents & the Self is a Dynamical Construct.
23:00 — Mike on Stephen Grossberg.
26:20 — A Formal Definition of Diverse Intelligence (DI)
30:50 — Intimate relationships with AI? Importance of Cognitive Light Cones.
38:00 — Cyborgs, hybrids, chimeras, & a new concept called “Synthbiosis“
45:51 — Importance of the symbiotic relationship between Science & Philosophy.
53:00 — The Space of Possible Minds.
58:30 — Is Mike Playing God?
1:02:45 — A path forward: through the ethics filter for civilization.
1:09:00 — Mike on Daniel Dennett (RIP)
1:14:02 — An Ethical Synthbiosis that goes beyond “are you real or faking it“
1:25:47 — Conclusion.
