izumi3682

izumi3682 OP t1_ircjja9 wrote

Reply to comment by beeen_there in SMART Protocol Extends Silicon Qubit' Coherence by 100x - Still less computing time than an eye blink. by izumi3682

In the USA we don't see him as a mass murderer. He was an unmitigated hero to me. He got the war over fast. He got me home fast. The ground war lasted 100 hours. I was a regular army rad tech at 85th Evacuation Hospital (My unit from Ft Lee VA) located right up against King Abdul Aziz Airbase in Dhahran. I mean the wire fence of the airbase was just behind our tents. When the air war began it was deafening as groups of US, British and French attack aircraft took off seven at at time.

We were the only non-fixed advanced hospital that received casualties from the Scud missile strike attack on the US National Guard barracks about 7 miles away from where our mililtary hospital was sited. The impact of that Scud, about 8 pm our time was LOUD--it shook the ground were we were, 7 miles away. 27 Guardsmen and women were killed. It was about 72 hours of genuine mass cal war casualties for us. I saw bad things, but that's how it is when you are in war.

We also received more than 100 injured from the regular Iraqi army and the Republican Guard. One RG casualty had been severely injured in his upper thigh about 2 weeks before he got to us. His deep wound was swarming with maggots, because his people neglected him. The stench of decay was horrific. He was overjoyed to see us. And he thanked us profusely over and over again. All RG patients were handcuffed to their beds and watched over by MPs.

I was at Operation Desert Shield/Storm from 20 Oct 90 to 10 Aug 91. I'm 62 now.

Are you in the UK? You use the British spelling of "realize". I know that a lot of Brits don't like Trump and the Republican party. 50% of the US population loves Trump. 50% of the US population hates Trump. The US is now in what I would characterize as a "cold" civil war. It could turn "hot" easy.

I, however, loved your Queen. She was a hero too. She was what we in the USA call an honorary member of "The Greatest Generation".

1

izumi3682 OP t1_ircibhg wrote

Reply to comment by caustic_kiwi in White House Releases Blueprint for Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights by izumi3682

>The title is purposefully misleading...

No the title is not misleading at all. That is the official White House name of the set of protections. I thought it was to protect the AI too--until I read the article. I was a kinda disappointed actually, but I figured, well that's interesting a little for society's benefit I suppose. So I decided to post it anyways. See my submission statement. (Not the stickied one, use the link at the bottom of the stickied one.)

https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ai-bill-of-rights/

1

izumi3682 OP t1_ircguda wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in White House Releases Blueprint for Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights by izumi3682

>ya see, how I understand human rights is that you have them regardless of if there is a law about it or not

So... what you are saying is that there is a higher immutable "natural" truth and that we derive our laws from our apprehension of such ultimate truths?

How about the right for a human to live from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death? Will the AI or society protect that?

1

izumi3682 OP t1_irc3wx1 wrote

Reply to comment by Jq4000 in White House Releases Blueprint for Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights by izumi3682

>There's also the possibility that strong AI comes online in tandem with humans developing neural nets, in such a way that humans aren't left behind by an AI going asymptotic.

Yes, I agree with this. I have placed it occurring roughly 5 years after the initial TS, which as you eloquently state may not be "a black haze of singularity".

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/vpoopq/we_asked_gpt3_to_write_an_academic_paper_about/ielpj4d/

2

izumi3682 OP t1_irbpbnh wrote

Reply to White House Releases Blueprint for Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights by izumi3682

Submission statement from OP. Note: This submission statement "locks in" after about 30 minutes, and can no longer be edited. Please refer to my statement they link, which I can continue to edit. I often edit my submission statement, sometimes for the next few days if needs must. There is often required additional grammatical editing and additional added detail.

From the article.

>“Just as our Constitution’s Bill of Rights protects our most basic civil rights and liberties from the government, in the 21st century, we need a ‘bill of rights’ to protect us against the use of faulty and discriminatory artificial intelligence that infringes upon our core rights and freedoms,” ReNika Moore, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Racial Justice Program, says.

>“Unchecked, artificial intelligence exacerbates existing disparities and creates new roadblocks for already-marginalized groups, including communities of color and people with disabilities. When AI is developed or used in ways that don’t adequately take into account existing inequities or is used to make decisions for which it is inappropriate, we see real-life harms such as biased, harmful predictions leading to the wrongful arrest of Black people, jobs unfairly denied to women, and disparate targeting of children of color for removal from their families. The Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights is an important step in addressing the harms of AI.”

I don't know whether this development is too little, too late or not. I see AI is explosively evolving before our eyes. I know that new iterations of already existing extraordinarily powerful and impactful AIs are going to be released in just this next year alone, if not actually this year. I know that, for example GPT-4 which compared to the currently powerful and controversial GPT-3, is going to demonstrate new powers of AI that we might have thought were impossible. All of this is developing with incredible rapidity.

And like I have always maintained, these AIs do not have to be conscious or self aware at all. But I bet this next generation of AI will make a lot of people think it is conscious and self-aware.

So I watched this video where the researchers are testing various GPT-3 NLP AIs with varying conditions intrinsic to the AIs being tested. One is where an AI has hostile regards to humans. I know it is just a test and can't go anywhere (I hope). The idea being that we want to find where a given AI can have dangerous to humans, sentiments and settle down those sentiments quickly. If such a thing is possible if an AI actually gets "mad" at us for reasons.

Here is a video that shows a testing AI get angry and threatening towards humans. I don't think this is staged, but I could be wrong. It's hard to tell for sure with AI these days. Even a highly trained AI expert was apparently completely fooled by an AI that had no idea what it was communicating. He was not alone. Some other highly trained AI experts also were feeling substantial unease as to how fast these NLP programs were progressing. If these AIs can fool the experts, what chance do us hoi polloi laymen have? Anyway, here is a video concerning that. Just ignore the Elon Musk parts. I want you to see these conversations with these GPT-3 AIs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbc1Xeif0pY&t=112s (6 Oct 22)

16

izumi3682 OP t1_ir6wva4 wrote

Reply to comment by beeen_there in SMART Protocol Extends Silicon Qubit' Coherence by 100x - Still less computing time than an eye blink. by izumi3682

Well, we are attempting to come at quantum computing from several different angles. The one I have a special delight in, is that of photonic quantum computing. The idea of using photons as qubits and having the capability of operating a quantum computer at room temperature really captures my imagination. I don't even know if photonic quantum computing exists outside of the theoretical, but most of our work in apprehending and exploiting these laws of physics to develop ever more powerful computing, be it binary or quantum and especially the development of computing derived AI whether binary or derived from quantum computing is attacking the problems from many different directions, "thinking outside of the box".

I don't know if quantum annealing computing is being currently used to help develop AI. Narrow optimization problems could a part of what successful AI/ML requires. I do know that a great many high level customers, purchased the D-Wave quantum annealing computer. People like Google, and JPL and Oak Ridge and Goldman-Sachs to name but a few. Oh and NASA Ames.

I think the Schwarzkopf quote is actually a very good metaphor for all of our efforts to develop our technologies. We are coming at these things from every angle possible.

1

izumi3682 OP t1_ir4i0aa wrote

Reply to SMART Protocol Extends Silicon Qubit' Coherence by 100x - Still less computing time than an eye blink. by izumi3682

Submission statement from OP. Note: This submission statement "locks in" after about 30 minutes, and can no longer be edited. Please refer to my statement they link, which I can continue to edit. I often edit my submission statement, sometimes for the next few days if needs must. There is often required additional grammatical editing and additional added detail.

This appears to be a fairly significant breakthrough for silicon based logic gate quantum computing.

From the article.

>A team of researchers with the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney has achieved a breakthrough in spin qubit coherence times(opens in new tab). The research took advantage of the team’s previous work on so-called “dressed” qubits - qubits constantly under the effect of an electromagnetic field shielding them from interference. In addition, the researchers leveraged a newly-designed protocol, SMART,(opens in new tab) which leverages the increased coherence times to allow individual qubits to be safely coaxed to perform the required computations.

Important takeaway.

>The UNSW researchers’ efforts have shown that groups of qubits can be controlled through a single, microwave-based magnetic source. In contrast, applying an electronically-controlled magnetic field can better control individual qubits. According to the researchers, the SMART protocol leverages a potential path for full-scale quantum computers.

>“We have shown a simple and elegant way to control all qubits at once that also comes with a better performance,” says Dr. Henry Yang(opens in new tab), one of the senior researchers on the team.

My take is this. Humans don't give up on anything. I see so much pessimism here that this or that is not going to be possible for decades, maybe centuries, maybe ever. The reality doesn't work like that. Humans will, in the words of the late great Norman Schwarzkopf, in answer to the question from a reporter during Operation Desert Storm about how he was going to proceed when he asked Schwarzkopf; "Are you going to make a main thrust through their lines?" And Schwarzkopf answered him, and I may be misremembering the quote precisely, but he said something like this.

"We are going to going to go through, over, under, around, any which way we can to achieve our military objective."

Well, that is how humans are in our efforts to develop our technology, especially our computing and AI technology as fast as we possibly can. And make no mistake. This is not an "AI winter" issue any longer. Now it is a matter of national security and probably economic supremacy for the USA, China (PRC) and yes, Russia.

I see that the most profound and impactful developments in quantum computing seem to mostly come from UNSW. And I am truly grateful for their efforts. I wonder why the US quantum computing efforts aren't as fruitful.

But in any case, it is not just computing/AI alone. It is the exploitation of said computing/AI to make level 5 autonomy vehicles. It is the exploitation of said computing/AI that will make bipedal humanoid robots that will be difficult to tell from living humans, until you are up "pretty close", within the next ten years. It is the exploitation of said computing that could produce an AI that might be able to solve the politico-economic and yes technological puzzles and problems that bedevil mankind to this day. In less than ten years.

I have great faith in our scientists, engineers and technologists that they can solve all of our problems, in maybe the next 20 years, but mostly within the next ten years. I put it like this in a comment from 2017. A technological lifetime ago.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/5dn9rt/how_to_avoid_stephen_hawkings_dark_prediction_for/da5tem8/

1