Mentoring the Machines: Setting the Course for the Future of Artificial Intelligence

Once again, another rich episode with Johnny V. And friends of fellowship.

John Vervaeke is on the edge of psychology for ML

wonderfull language. engaging and inspiring conversation.

Great talk gentleman. Thanks.

The world is wide and ideas are in-depth, I learn from much ^^ This is another thanskgiving, for people in this video.

I liked the book very much! It not only questions machines but also us.The inevitability argument in AI is indeed so conflicting.. I am currently reading Critical Theory of AI by S. Lindgren I highly recommend it.

Thank you!

Thank you

I am building a psychological self-helper. I have had extremely profound interactions with open-source LLMs that have helped me find healthy, useful perspectives on my own bullshit.

Is the Book 'Mentoring the Machines' already finished? I am still missing Part 3 and 4.

John you have an inate curiosity and inkling on how to bridge organic and machine systems. As we both maybe able to relate from personal and research experiences, pushing a system to capacity is often one approach to gaining valuable outcomes from which we can build onto the next and so on. There are certainly other approaches that I would like to place on the table. I too have a sliver of curiosity in the area of language systems and how human capacity for language generation maybe crossed and interbred into machines and perhaps in the other direction as well. You and your two colleagues discussed on the latest podcast that I consumed. The one on the idea of custom publishing directly to the individual end consumer based on their thoughts and preferences, it peaked my interest to say the least. I have similar interests as the ones that the three of you outlined with broad brush strokes.. If you would like to have an open conversation about language and how to bridge our ability to absorb, generate and disseminate bits into strings with and within the digital plane. Preferably while I have still have fresh eyes before consuming too much of your material so that we can engage based on our authentic selves and to flush out gaps in logic in an collaborative effort. Please give me a moment of your time so that we may embark towards a fruitful outcome(s) I promise you I am far from a machine and believe that mentoring humans is much more of a challenge than mentoring machines:) I see from the get go that your view and approach is similar and that you too are attempting to mentor humans before you can take the daunting task of mentoring machines. I think I maybe able to lend a proverbial hand in the area of Gedanken eksperimente. Let me know if you are up for the challenge. I am not sure if you monitor your own messages or weather it is triaged by your graduate students, but as a little token of my Genuine interest in languages I can assure you that I have spent more of my 40 years on European languages than most of the high caliber named philosophers that you throw around during your podcasts as I have had the fortunate opportunity to access many of the tools that they could only have drooled of:) Anyways I'll stop boring you into oblivion.. Give me a whistle when you get a chance. How would it be possible to convey the idea of a whistle to a machine if the machine was never exposed to the visceral experience of a sound produced by a whistle? You see how quickly we humans can trap the idea of machine learning from large language models with the most basic limits to sensory experience and that is where I would like to start if you see the merit of engaging with me. Best regards Boris B

32:40 This is interesting to me. I'm less interested in the Myers Briggs version, but I think the original version of Jung's cognitive theory, still has lots of potential, and overlaps with recent research in important ways. Jung discusses "sensing," "thinking," "feeling," and his fourth category is "intuition" instead of "action". He arranges these cognitive functions in proposed "functional axes," within a schema that also seems to co-align with attentional focus, from more to less diffuse.

Shawn Coyne is a pretty cool dude. Spoke with him at a Story Grid training for a bit.

I love this. A.I. viewed trough a different lens. Thanks for the profound insights. What to think of this then? : I "Do we control the technology or do they(the big companies) control the technology that then controls us." (Quote from: Stability AI founder, Emad Mostaque) J

I propose that the only way you will get intelligent machines to care is to align the electrical impulses that drive their processes with a program for each hardware unit to identify itself with the conation of the material substrate of their hardware (silicon, plastic, metal, et al.). Conatus* is at the metaphysical root of any organism’s capacity for caring about the survival and reproduction of its physical body. Unless an organism associates it selfhood (autopoesis,adaptivity, agency, and autonomy) with its material substrate, it will have no cognitive incentive to curate and defend its otherwise ephemeral existence as as a purely symbolic being hovering in logical superposition between dianoetic potentially and physical actuality. *rf. Baruch Spinoza for more detail on the conatus which is the sine qua non of embodied beings.

Meaning economy, yes, because anyone who has experience with synchronicity in nature, universal, or God, knows that AI cannot perceive that like humans, and will compete for humans who do. So when we say that AI cannot create stories infinitely like humans it is correct to believe that the perception of infinity is what makes the difference; and the difference is subtle. It seems like we can't get the conversation started in the media between leaders and citizens without Buddhism because in Buddhism it's possible to attain widespread agreement about the objective truth of this "subtlety" from our immediate experience without any further written evidence which is going to cut through cultural and social barriers and get this conversation moving. Democracy is a conversation between citizens and leadership that happens with the help of the media and it's currently stalled, so if Buddhism is able to get us moving into the eve of humanity's greatest challenge, then we need to remember this every time Democracy stalls. After some deliberation I decided that it is the job of philosophers to secularize these aspects of each religion and cultural experience so that citizens can unify this experience of subtlety in the conversation in the media.

Thank you for attending! Beloved if there's no neighbors given? How else can ye show off in front? Likewise let Noone take away given for thee!

All to have conversations unto one another! Comes with comfort! How else can ye have the confidence not just one another! But unto all will disagree with Thee!

If we are in a simulation we may not have embodied experience.

Brian Keating is one of the loveliest souls on the internet and brilliant to boot!