On 4/2/23 8:23 AM, Tristan Miller wrote:
Greetings.
On 2023-04-02 14:07, 22T.R732 wrote:
On 2023-03-31 06:31, 22T.R732 wrote:
Seems like someone in comp.ai deleted the earlier version
of this
Your earlier post was automatically rejected by the moderation
software for excessive cross-posting.
I am allowed 5 x-posts
Says who? Every moderated group (and indeed, every news client and
every news server) can set its own limit on the number of cross-posts.
You need to comply with *all* of these limits in order for your posts to
make it through.
What I *objected* to was that your deletion HERE
managed to propagate to all the OTHER groups included.
I didn't delete anything, and so there was nothing to "propagate". Any
time you submit an article to a moderated group, even if it is
cross-posted to other unmoderated groups, then it needs to pass
moderation *before* it appears anywhere on Usenet. Your article was not deleted from the other groups because it never appeared in them in the
first place.
Your article was clearly on-topic here and you're welcome to continue
the discussion here so long as you don't cross-post. I've started
another thread on the question of whether to allow cross-posting to
comp.ai.
On the whole I agree with your concerns. I started with Usenet
way on back, when it was still "civil". It is no longer "civil".
Allowing cross-posts, or many cross-posts, is likely to result
in chaos, flame-wars and worse. I have seen many groups go that
way and a more 'academic' group like comp.ai does require some
sort of shield ... yet one that cannot over-tax any moderators.
However 'AI' has finally reached a state and form where it is
no longer just "sci-fi musings" but a tangible, sometimes
threatening, influence on global civilization. Musk and a fair
number of other prominent tekkie figures are now seeing that,
and SAYING something about it. This has attracted considerable
attention, even at the highest levels - regulatory/policy/funding.
As such, 'comp.ai' is no longer as obscure as it ought to be,
it's suddenly part of a big 'something'.
I am not sure what is required these days to create a new
Usenet group. I would suggest something like "comp.ai.policy"
to absorb the large-scale, oft crap, postings while still
being sort of "on target" to those most involved in 'AI'
research.
The near-term future of 'Chat', 'Bard' and related approaches
to, hmm, 'human emulation', is not entirely clear. There DOES
seem to be a potential for rapid SELF-improvement with these
sorts of systems. The human mind is in many ways a "hall of
mirrors" and that effect CAN be emulated ... the system
observing itself, the world, the effects of the world on
itself and so forth - making continual improvements.
People, politicians, money interests and such DO need to worry
about a Chat-5.0. There are likely many paths to de-facto
"consciousness" and Chat and/or friends may indeed be one of
those. "Emulate", "fake", something WELL enough and it is not
really "fake" anymore ... just "consciousness", "being", by
alternate means. That has broad *implications* that have,
until now, been pure sci-fi.
I saw in the news yesterday that Wal-Mart corp is going to
fire most of its human warehouse/shipping humans and
replace them all with 'AI'/"Expert Systems". It tried to
spin that as the fewer humans getting easier, better-paying,
jobs. However that leaves the 99% unemployed. Not the ONLY
corp moving in that direction. This is serious, this is of
economic significance, this is *political*.
Remember about a year ago when a Google 'AI' expert came
to the conclusion that his system WAS effectively
'conscious' ? They FIRED him for saying so.
Hmmm ... how many 'AI' profs/experts can Chat-5.0 replace ?
Beginning to 'get it' ??? :-)
Mary Shelly was prescient.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)