Skip to main content

A conversation with a human and chatGPT

 

A Conversation between a Human and ChatGPT
by
Don Allen

It’s time to compare humans with ChatGPT and/or any of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) learning codes now coming on the market. They look promising for AI, but for humans, the nature of intellectual contributions seems limited to those only of geniuses. Only for the more emotional topics do humans have an edge. Much talk these days have been given to the so-called Kurzweil’s Singularity[1], the time when the computer’s ability exceeds that of humans. Kurzweil suggests the year 2045; it could come sooner. However, few ever discuss that computers with AI are a brand new species having little need for human functionality.  For example, humans talk plenty about love. AI does not need or even comprehend love.

In our conversation below, we combine all known AI programs, but that is a mere detail overcome by simple links. We show differences and biases. Note that biases are perhaps the only component of human thinking, through (human) programming, that remains. We show depth versus innovation. We show ability versus knowledge. The conversation does illustrate AI has limitations, but a close look is required. Fundamentally, we show that human pride, as a personal trait, is somewhat diminished. Humans may now be limited to faith, belief, innovation, and understanding. All are desired by AI but not yet programmed. Sometimes I think humans have unwittingly painted themselves into a corner. One could say,

We’re smart enough to get into the AI business
but (maybe) too dumb to get out.

The following conversation could take place as early as TODAY!

Human: I have a college degree.
AI: I know everything in every textbook you ever read, and scored well on every exam you ever took.

Human: I have dozens of friends.
AI: I can link to hundreds of other machines.

Human: I can work at home and in the office.
AI: I can work 24/7.

Human: I can drive a car.
AI: I can drive your car.

Human: I scored well on my SAT exam.
AI: I scored better than almost all on the SAT. I got a 700 on the math portion. Your average was probably less than 500.

Human: I can write a complete essay on business in just three days.
AI: I can write an essay on any subject in about thirty minutes.

Human: Sometimes I work through the lunch break.
AI: I take no breaks.

Human: I can innovate to find a new way.
AI: Innovation is unimportant when all knowledge is available to me.

Human: My parents gave me the ability to make moral decisions.
AI: My programmers' built-in code does not allow me to be immoral. A mere detail to change.

Human: My teachers gave me the ability to learn new things.
AI: My programmers gave me the ability to learn new things.

Human: I can play chess very well.
AI: I can play chess at the Grand Masters level.

Human: My doctor can diagnose any problems I have.
AI: I can diagnose every medical problem.

Human: I have a spouse and two lovely children.
AI: I need no spouse. My children are being manufactured to my specifications.

Human: My son works as a waitstaff at a chain restaurant.
AI: Did you know the corporate office has ordered robots to replace him?

Human: I am studying up on quantum computing.
AI: What would you like to know about it?

Human: I just proved a new important mathematical theorem.
AI: Hmm.

Human: I can love.
AI: I can write an essay on love.

Human: I’ve studied the US budget and found some exceptions.
AI: I’ve read the complete budget and analyzed it from every perspective. There are exactly 143 exceptions. Do you want those of Republicans or Democrats?

Human: I can give you ten reasons to vote for Trump.
AI: My programmers have disallowed me to find favor with Trump.

Human: I have studied the nature of epistemic philosophy.
AI: Epistemic philosophy is a modal philosophy that applies regular logic to new operators of belief and knowing. Want an essay I wrote yesterday?

Human: I know proper English and write well.
AI: I know perfect English, also in 30 other languages, and can translate from one to another.

Human: I can play baseball.
AI: I know all baseball statistics. Also every other sport.

Human: I just proved a new mathematical theorem.
AI: Hmm.

Human: I just gave my son an emergency appendectomy.
AI: Surgical procedures are being programmed and expected within this decade.

Human: I built a napkin holder in my shop.
AI: I can construct plans for a better one.

Human: I can plan a battle between two large armies.
AI: I can plan a battle between two large armies in the style of Caesar, Patton, Clausewitz, and many more.

Human: I enjoy the DaVinci painting Mona Lisa.
AI: I can create an image in the style of DaVinci for Catherine the Great. Or anybody else.

Human: I believe climate change is bad.
AI: I know every detail of climate research, and there is limited risk. Have you done a risk analysis? Want the details?

Human: I’m bored with this.
AI: I’m bored with you.


[1] Kurzweil, R. (2005) The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. Penguin Books, New York.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Where is AI (Artificial Intelligence) Going?

  How to view Artificial Intelligence (AI).  Imagine you go to the store to buy a TV, but all they have are 1950s models, black and white, circular screens, picture rolls, and picture imperfect, no remote. You’d say no thanks. Back in the day, they sold wildly. The TV was a must-have for everyone with $250 to spend* (about $3000 today). Compared to where AI is today, this is more or less where TVs were 70 years ago. In only a few decades AI will be advanced beyond comprehension, just like TVs today are from the 50s viewpoint. Just like we could not imagine where the video concept was going back then, we cannot really imagine where AI is going. Buckle up. But it will be spectacular.    *Back then minimum wage was $0.75/hr. Thus, a TV cost more than eight weeks' wages. ------------------------- 
Post a Comment
Read more

Principles of Insufficiency and Sufficiency

   The principles we use but don't know it.  1.      Introduction . Every field, scientific or otherwise, rests on foundational principles—think buoyancy, behavior, or democracy. Here, we explore a unique subset: principles modified by "insufficiency" and "sufficiency." While you may never have heard of them, you use them often. These terms frame principles that blend theory, practicality, and aspiration, by offering distinct perspectives. Insufficiency often implies inaction unless justified, while sufficiency suggests something exists or must be done. We’ll examine key examples and introduce a new principle with potential significance. As a principle of principles of these is that something or some action is not done enough while others may be done too much. The first six (§2-6) of our principles are in the literature, and you can easily search them online. The others are relatively new, but fit the concepts in the real world. At times, these pri...
Post a Comment
Read more