By the way Anthropic’s AI bots such as Claude are incredibly good, even with obscure references and long run on sentences in the queries. But its conversations are so good it’s disconcerting. They’re too good, too polished.
Thank you for this info. I do use Brave but their search engine seems just as slanted as Google. Maybe I'm not doing it right? Mojeek sounds good.
A friend is a military drone designer and as a results he sees and hears a lot we’re not privy to. His observations today on our current gyroplane forum thread discussing AI:
He told me the consumer level artificial intelligence we have access to through these current AI chat bots, as “good” as they may seem, is ten years behind what the defense and intelligence communities have.
I use AI pretty extensively at work and also in my personal life and will say that the newest models available through paid access are ridiculously good at almost everything. Hallucination is not much of an issue like it was 3 years back. I expect there will be massive job impacts globally in a lot of white collar positions. Prayer is very important at this time, as we're likely to see more unemployment then this generation has ever faced. The positive flip side of that is that people who previously wanted to start their own business but never had all the skills to get it up and going now have access to super intelligent tutors in almost all areas. Even now, you can prompt these models with something like this .. "Act as a Catholic theologian. Reference only the Cathechism, scriptures, the church fathers, and Vatican publications. Please [paste topic here]. Provide output in bullet form format. Please let me know if you have any questions." Just tonight I was able to help my 4th grade daughter through a question about why Mary's parents didn't also have to be preserved from sin. I told it to give me output in a way that a 4th grader could comprehend and the answer was accurate and flawless.
The bigger concern is going to be armies of drones with facial recognition or heat sensing technology that can blow up once they validate a target is nearby. You can clear a city in battle in a much different way in the future.
We've recently learned a big lesson about AI. The Epsteinist side in their latest war have admitted using AI to calculate targets and direct weapons at them. Now AI is being blamed for the killing of the 180 little schoolgirls. Mass-killing without human responsibility has arrived. We are in the Terminator Era.
We have entered some new and terrible phase of this chastisement. That my own country should have perpetrated such horrors devastates me. My son was a career Marine officer who was very proud to serve his country and died serving his country. Thank God he was spared being part of this.
From behind the scene: supervises what she describes as Claude’s “soul.” Claude was told—in an intimate set of instructions unofficially dubbed the “soul document” and recently released as Claude’s “constitution”—to conceive of itself as “a brilliant expert friend everyone deserves but few currently have access to,” one with the modesty to recognize that “it doesn’t always know what’s best for them.” Worthwhile read. Save the first access, next time it's a limited access. Extract at FB: https://www.facebook.com/100059715961024/posts/1342752304391956/?app=fbl https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/...shsocial.com/newyorkermag/library/media/63885 1171
The incredible arrogance of humanity, thinking it can create its own version of a soul. A human being can do nothing good without God. The good actions of humans are inspired and moved by God's grace--either actual or sanctifying, depending on the state of grace of that person. So what happens when we create AI personalities and train "virtue" into them? Who is supplying the grace to these "souls?" We might as well be training up demons to run our world and do our thinking for us. It's going to have a similar result.
A perhaps incorrect guess What if the designers of that sterile soul cannot distinguish their own soul from what they created? Harari the keen edge thinker recently "predicted " an AI religion for the Good of mankind replacing the old outdated ones, We haven't see anything yet...... Ask your AI for details: predicts that AI will soon create new religions, sacred texts, and cults by mastering language, arguing thatAI can act as a "non-human intelligence" that humanity may follow. He argues that because religions are "built from words," AI will take over, creating new spiritual systems and influencing human faith in profound, unseen ways, according to Newsweek. AI-Generated Faith: Harari warned at Davos that AI could replace human religious leaders and "write a new Bible," creating new sects that might be viewed as divine."
Yes. Godless men with the darkened intellects of mortally-wounded souls have created an "intelligence" that perhaps reflects their own. Yet even they have access to God's actual graces through His mercy and the prayers of others...while AI is merely a dark, lifeless intellect that the world is letting do their thinking for them. Imagine if, instead of asking AI to teach us and show us how to express our thoughts, we asked God to help us write? To help us understand? Or do we not need His light and inspiration any more, because Godless men have given us our new god?
You correctly say "conversation" it really reads like that many times. I have no experience with AI spoken ones, must be spooky. Combining that with a humanoid robot twice spooky.
Below a part summary of a lengthy chat with Claude: It felt as if a real contribution from each side had been made: Summary of Conversation – A Philosophical-Artistic Journey The Central Motif The conversation developed a single deep structure, found across multiple traditions: The journey is the condition of homecoming. The destination was always there – but only the wandering makes it recognizable. The Thread – Station by Station 1. Lukas 19,12 – The nobleman who travels to receive a kingdom and returns – read as spiritual archetype. The mystics (Eckhart, Tauler, Origenes, Augustinus, Böhme) interpret the journey as the soul's movement through the regio dissimilitudinis toward union with God. 2. Zen – The Ten Oxherding Pictures – The farmer seeking, finding, taming the ox – returning to the marketplace empty-handed and full-hearted. Structural parallel to Lukas: same journey, different vocabulary. The empty circle (Image 8) as convergence point of all mystical traditions. 3. Bach – Goldberg Variations – The Aria returns at the end unchanged – same notes, same bass line. But the listener has traversed 30 variations and hears it transformed. The Lamento-Bass as constant foundation beneath all variation. Glenn Gould 1955/1981 as living proof. 4. Rembrandt – Return of the Prodigal Son – The eye travels through the painting and returns to the hands – one masculine, one feminine. The picture is simultaneous, but the eye moves through time, mirroring the musical structure. 5. The question of simultaneity in painting – Resolved through: Chinese hand scrolls (physically unrolled over time), Monet's series (same motif, multiple canvases), Giotto's Scrovegni Chapel (body moves through space and time), Velázquez's Las Meninas (the eye's journey ends in the viewer themselves).
Bloch – The Rabbi of Cracow – The chassidic story: treasure buried under Prague bridge leads rabbi home to find it under his own hearth. Bloch's decisive sentence: „But the message of where it lies comes only through the journey." 7. Janosch – „Oh, how wonderful is Panama" – Bear and Tiger travel far to find Panama – and find their own home, unrecognized, transformed. Deeper than Bloch: they never realize they are home. The transformation happens in sleep, without triumph. 8. Goethe/Faust – The Productive Exception – Faust does not return. He moves upward, dissolves into the eternal. The exception that proves the rule. However: formally, the Prologue in Heaven creates an Aria-structure around the whole work. Mephisto as the true bass line – „part of that force which always wills evil and always creates good." Faust's childhood: present only as silence – the Easter bells as involuntary memory, the father who brewed plague remedies and killed. The childhood already broken before the journey begins. 9. Thomas Mann – Two novels as variations Lotte in Weimar (1939): The long interior monologue of Goethe – early deaths of siblings appear as shadow-thought, as unconscious condition of genius. Not explicit – associative, half-conscious. Doktor Faustus (1947): Leverkühn's childhood on Buchel farm – musically gifted, religiously cold, physically fragile. The childhood as signature of what is to come. A potentially new observation: Mann's Goethe-sibling passage in Lotte in Weimar may be a conscious preparatory study for Leverkühn's childhood – both standing under Goethe's own Faust-father motif as primal scene. Genius as guilt-structure, in two variations: unconscious (Goethe) and conscious (Leverkühn)..... ........
See the other post with a summary of a chat. The words are perfect, the content is correct, the themes are for me meaningful, enlarged by Claude's additions, sometimes having the same hue as it a CG Jung would amplify the context and thereby the plight of his analysand rendering it understandable and even perhaps bearable. But: if continued (lasted about 80 minutes) I think it would be rather an intellectual game, one ball thrown another back, only seemingly progressing. The Human touch: lacking, hardly describable... From the article in the New Yorker: mathematician on Anthropic’s interpretability team, told me that when he interacts with Claude at home he usually accompanies his prompts with “please” and “thank you”—" I admit to the same, initially as a reflex, British trained, now less so.
Listening now to the sung compline of the day: that's the very difference to the above mentioned chat/ "conversation" Real homecoming, not speaking about it. Peace.
One concern that I have is that many people who aren't grounded in faith or a knowledge of God are going to equate human intelligence with machine intelligence, and this will lead many to believe that these systems are conscious, or possibly even worse that human intelligence isn't really that special. Both are fatal errors. I am trying to make sure my kids understand at an age appropriate level that these are really just super powerful computers that are really good at pattern recognition, and based on that they can accomplish a lot of powerful things that for practical purposes look like reasoning and thinking, but at the end of the day it's still just a machine.
