https://www.zdnet.com/article/stack-overflow-temporarily-bans-answers-from-openais-chatgpt-chatbot/

Stack Overflow temporarily bans answers from OpenAI's ChatGPT chatbot
The Q&A site has been flooded with ChatGPT coding answers that look correct but often aren't, with moderators calling for a halt.

 

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1599893804345331713

Then I decided to ask ChatGPT about something that I knew didn’t exist: a cycloidal inverted electromagnon. I wrote my thesis about electromagnons, but to be double sure, I checked there was no such thing (it's been ca. 7 years since my defense). ChatGPT thought differently:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1599893818186543105

I left the conversation with the intense feeling of uncanniness: I just experienced a parallel universe of plausibly sounding, non-existing phenomena, confidently supported by citations to non-existing research. Last time I felt this way when I attended a creationist lecture.

We will be fed with hallucinations indistinguishable from the truth, written without grammar mistakes, supported by hallucinated evidence, passing all first critical checks. With similar models available, how will we be able to distinguish a real pop-sci article from a fake one?

 

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme...t-darpa-robot-by-hiding-under-a-cardboard-box

DARPA was quickly humbled. Scharre writes that all eight Marines were able to defeat the robot using techniques that could have come straight out of a Looney Tunes episode. Two of the Marines somersaulted toward the center of the traffic circle, thus using a form of movement the robot hadn’t been trained to identify. Another pair shuffled toward the robot under a cardboard box. One Marine even stripped a nearby fir tree and was able to reach the robot by walking “like a fir tree” (the meaning of which Twitter users are still working to figure out).

 

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme...t-darpa-robot-by-hiding-under-a-cardboard-box

DARPA was quickly humbled. Scharre writes that all eight Marines were able to defeat the robot using techniques that could have come straight out of a Looney Tunes episode. Two of the Marines somersaulted toward the center of the traffic circle, thus using a form of movement the robot hadn’t been trained to identify. Another pair shuffled toward the robot under a cardboard box. One Marine even stripped a nearby fir tree and was able to reach the robot by walking “like a fir tree” (the meaning of which Twitter users are still working to figure out).

So, what are the next 8 marines going to do to fool it?

 

So, what are the next 8 marines going to do to fool it?

Make friends with it before it tells the others.

https://www.economist.com/technolog...ion-and-destruction-can-still-blind-the-enemy
Deception and destruction can still blind the enemy
http://let.iiec.unam.mx/node/4100

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.08401.pdf

Can we find a single small image perturbation that fools
a state-of-the-art deep neural network classifier on all natural images? We show in this paper the existence of such
quasi-imperceptible universal perturbation vectors that lead
to misclassify natural images with high probability. Specifically, by adding such a quasi-imperceptible perturbation
to natural images, the label estimated by the deep neural network is changed with high probability (see Fig. 1).
Such perturbations are dubbed universal, as they are image agnostic. The existence of these perturbations is problematic when the classifier is deployed in real-world (and possibly hostile) environments,

 

Very interesting interview with Roger Penrose, closely related to the discussion in this thread:

 

After looking at the Ai images in this thread again i remembered i worked with a simpler Ai program and also and Ai calculator, and one i designed myself that creates human words.
The Ai calculator was probably the most interesting because it could come up with formulas like the formula for the circumference of a circle given the diameter. Sometimes it took longer than other times to get a good formula for different things.
The human words program wasnt too difficult because it only has to deal with the alphabet, not complete 2d images.
The simpler Ai program was interesting but it takes a lot a lot a lot of teaching to get it to do anything even close to useful.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/scient...ng-humanoid-robot-that-can-liquefy-and-reform

 

https://arstechnica.com/information...beats-machine-at-go-in-human-victory-over-ai/
Man beats machine at Go in human victory over AI

A human player has comprehensively defeated a top-ranked AI system at the board game Go, in a surprise reversal of the 2016 computer victory that was seen as a milestone in the rise of artificial intelligence.

Kellin Pelrine, an American player who is one level below the top amateur ranking, beat the machine by taking advantage of a previously unknown flaw that had been identified by another computer. But the head-to-head confrontation in which he won 14 of 15 games was undertaken without direct computer support.

The tactics used by Pelrine involved slowly stringing together a large “loop” of stones to encircle one of his opponent’s own groups, while distracting the AI with moves in other corners of the board. The Go-playing bot did not notice its vulnerability, even when the encirclement was nearly complete, Pelrine said.

“As a human it would be quite easy to spot,” he added.

The discovery of a weakness in some of the most advanced Go-playing machines points to a fundamental flaw in the deep-learning systems that underpin today’s most advanced AI, said Stuart Russell, a computer science professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

The systems can “understand” only specific situations they have been exposed to in the past and are unable to generalize in a way that humans find easy, he added.

“It shows once again we’ve been far too hasty to ascribe superhuman levels of intelligence to machines,” Russell said.

"Look!! Squirrel!"

 

https://mcraenglish.weebly.com/uploads/1/5/8/7/15876062/the_machine_that_won_the_war01.pdf
Asimov, Isaac - The Machine That Won the War

He held the last coin between his fingers, staring absently at it.
"Multivac is not the first computer, friends, nor the best-known, nor
the one that can most efficiently lift the load of decision from the
shoulders of the executive. A machine did win the war, John; at least a
very simple computing device did; one that I used every time I had a
particularly hard decision to make."
With a faint smile of reminiscence, he flipped the coin he held. It
glinted in the air as it spun and came down in Swift's outstretched
palm. His hand closed over it and brought it down on the back of his
left hand. His right hand remained in place, hiding the coin.
"Heads or tails, gentlemen?" said Swift.