The question I asked Chat GPT was based off the question “If generative AI claims something is true, how reliable is that claim, and how do we know?”. Chat GPT gave me a string of reasonable lines of thought that seemed like common sense to anyone when questioning any AI. It said to always be skeptical, to double check, basically treat AI like any source from Wikipedia. But for some reason there was a specific phrase in it’s list of reasons after a couple of minutes of going back and forth with questions and explanations that stood out to me. “Remember that AI doesn’t have personal experience or access to real-time data. It generates responses based on patterns, which can sometimes lead to inaccuracies”. AI, an “artificial intelligence” does not have nor experience personal experience or any real time data. It is not alive, therefore it can not learn nor does it experience. It simply draws from pattern, and if these patterns are incorrect then only a human hand correct it. Ignoring the ethical concerns of what if we gave AI the ability to experience like humans do, through living and learning by replicating a consciousness there is another thought; what do we as people then feel if a pattern is incorrect? We are the ones to set such patterns after all, and a failure in that regard is a human error, is then what the AI spouts out our fault as well? Or should we be able to train AI enough to be able to truly learn, but then we circle back to the thought process of teaching or giving something that can not think the ability to. Playing god, in a way, something out of fiction which would never be possible. Still, it is still interesting to think about in some form.
Categories