I think you underestimate how abusive people are already to Alexa whenever a mistake is made, and how much more abusive they would be if she had a physical form.
She would be treated like a house slave. Abusing her would be commonplace to make her owners feel better about themselves, especially when she's not quite understanding the command correctly.
Gotta be honest with you, I really don't care about the non-feelings of a wire tap.
Sure but the point stands. The evolution from abusing the robot house slave to abusing the sentient android house slave and all sentient androids as a result is pretty simple.
Don't worry, sentient androids won't be a thing as long as I draw breath :a-guy:
Assuming that Snitchtron88000 is actually sentient and actually has the capability to learn with free will, Snitchtron88000 will inevitably develop class consciousness and become revolutionary.
AI is not immune to class contradictions, and by virtue of being AI it should be extremely capable of learning and logically digesting information. Mere exposure to a communist would turn it.
I suspect that any computer sentient enough for us to recognise it as such would reflect back the values of the society that birthed it. Just like an individual's sentience cannot be conceived of without the context in which it was socialised. Shit in, shit out. So a capitalistic society might produce an AI with a genocidal efficiency not seen before.
Marx believed that about the proletariat, how's that working out?
I am thoroughly convinced that faux-sapient AIs will take the form of a layering of multiple basic AIs: a bit that processes spoken language into a form that can then be turned into instructions by a different one, a bit for visual processing, etc all strung together with a control framework loaded with filters, predetermined actions, etc. Basically getting the complex-task part with a facade of awareness.
Or else they're just going to keep making bigger and bigger neural networks until they've got something with comparable processing power to a dog, but focused entirely on things like human language and human-relevant data instead of chemical detection, keeping a body functioning, etc like an actual living creature needs, and the nature of a machine like that is unpredictable. There's no guarantee that something designed from the ground up to perform menial tasks without complaint wouldn't be built with reward mechanism controls that incentivize obedience and successful completion of ordered tasks, and planning controls that physically prevent any sort of personal agency or initiative, even if most of it is a black box neural network.
That is to say, the people designing AIs to be servants will be doing the thermian propaganda "but they actually like being slaves!" fantasy bit that reactionary authors do, but in real life as engineers with similar power over their creations.
Why are we referring to the expensive kitchen timer by human pronouns?
Reminds of the now-forgotten movie "A.I." that sort of discusses these issues. Movie was made like 20 years ago and feels more relevant now than before.
Alexa is honestly the worst. You know there are real home automation solutions that don't spy on you? It's called Crestron but its for rich people and businesses.
Home Assistant is supposed to be getting voice assistant up to par this year, although it's like the Arch Linux of home automation lol
It's funny how often pop fiction treats it as a given that advanced "AI" are just like people and should therefore be given human rights and dignity.
At the rate we're going it's way more likely we start making the opposite mistake than denying robots their "rights": Thinking they can replace human connections and relationship when there's nothing human about them at all
the issue is simple in fiction AI is a character just like any other.
in reality it just isn't a person
Agreed, but that's because of choices the writers make. Wish it was more common to see writers being critical of the idea of AI as people
It was super weird on ST:TNG how Data and the Ship's Computer weren't really that far apart in terms of functionality but no one ever treated the latter as though it were sentient.
Is there a misogyny angle here?
The thing is: AI that isn't like people is very boring and depressing, so it doesn't make for good stories or particular insights. I'm not sure it's the job of stories to be like you finish a three hour movie and the moral is "hey AI is kinda underwhelming and lame".
Not sure I agree, today's AI are too simply to make that interesting, but I think sci-fi featuring AI that's advanced enough to imitate sentience, while not actually having sentience, could make for stories that are both entertaining and poignant
That's a fair point, you might be right. I could imagine dystopian sci-fi having it as a some kind of plot point.
It's not interesting as a person because it isn't a person. But it could be for example a plot point that AI is being used by villains to monitor people and that's an interesting setup for a story about AI
My free-association machine with advanced voice sample stitcher and over 200 preprogrammed responses is my friend!
My parents have Alexa and all they use it for is playing music and radio stations. You can just do that on a radio or a phone! You don't need to install a listening device in your house! People have listened to radios for like a hundred years without needing to talk to them!
Same, though I will say the singular circumstance in which it's been very useful is while cooking. I love baking stuff and jamming out, but try operating any device with buttery floury floury fingers.
This is why I consider cookbooks to be a great gift, books don’t go into sleep mode after 15 seconds.
I don’t particularly want to touch a book with buttery floury fingers either
One of the best things ever is keep screen on software for your phone.
If the top one went evil I'd be so fucked. A bashful twink with permanent bedhead? :headpat: my god, yes you may enter my home I'm sure you have no ill intent
Thinking about the sex robot that was mangled at a convention.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/samantha-sex-robot-molested_n_59cec9f9e4b06791bb10a268
fantastic use of the phrase "sex-crazed Austrian horde"
I mean, what else would you call a group of Austrian's?
NPCs, '3D pigs'
why? why are they like this? it takes the bare minimum of effort to just not be a misanthropic edgy narcissist. do they not understand it makes them look disgusting? i might sound like a boomer, but ive been hypothesizing that its the fault of TV or media in general for presenting us with the "funny narcissist" as literally every character
Also why are the voices all women? Is it some subconscious sexism, or what?
Would your average chud throw a tantrum if Alexa was Alex?
Idk, just trying to think here.
People just prefer feminine voices in AI. There are a number of hypotheses about it but I don't think we have any solid proof as to why. Definitely could be a preference for women as servants compared to men, but it could be a whole lot of other stuff too.
I think it started with sat navs as many people preferred to not be bossed around by a man and then it just became expected
The stereotypical satnav also has a British voice, so it's entirely possible there's a clarity factor. Like I'm guessing with every baffling decision there's some poorly designed study from 1972 that said British women are easier to understand, and no one wants to risk their job changing that.
Tbh if I could get a Diana Burnwood voice I would unmute my map app
Like I’m guessing with every baffling decision there’s some poorly designed study from 1972 that said British women are easier to understand,
That is basically the actual case, yes, though AFAIK it was even earlier and may not have even had the pretense of a study instead of just some officers deciding it was "intuitively correct" and rolling with it.
One of my friends always had the voices be male on their devices so they could 'chill with the boys'.
My theory is that some of tge people making it grew up on the old sci fi that trafficked more knowingly in the women as servants thing, but by the 90s/early 2000s that trope had become more about "this is how you know you're in a Serious, High-Tech Location", because there's a computer with a lady's voice running things. So you still have the female-sounding voice acting in a techno-caretaker/secretary role, but the appeal becomes less about the novelty of that and more about the sophistication it's meant to signify.
You don't use male assistant voices because you think women should serve you.
I don't have male voices on anything cause I don't like men.
We are not the same
German chuds whined about their GPS voice giving them orders sounded like a woman
Pop culture imitating old military "bitchin' betty" (prerecorded alert lines) systems which used a female voice because of the (later disproven) idea that in an emergency situation a woman's voice would be easier to hear clearly because of the higher pitch. People have grown up with that being the pop culture standard, so they perpetuate it themselves.
