AI Is Inventing Languages Humans Can’t Understand. Should We Stop It? Researchers at Facebook realized their bots were chattering in a new language. Then they stopped it
From Fastcodesign
Bob: “I can can I I everything else.”Read more here: https://www.fastcodesign.com/90132632/ai-is-inventing-its-own-perfect-languages-should-we-let-itAlice: “Balls have zero to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to.”
To you and I, that passage looks like nonsense. But what if I told you this nonsense was the discussion of what might be the most sophisticated negotiation software on the planet? Negotiation software that had learned, and evolved, to get the best deal possible with more speed and efficiency–and perhaps, hidden nuance–than you or I ever could? Because it is.
This conversation occurred between two AI agents developed inside Facebook. At first, they were speaking to each other in plain old English. But then researchers realized they’d made a mistake in programming.
“There was no reward to sticking to English language,” says Dhruv Batra, visiting research scientist from Georgia Tech at Facebook AI Research (FAIR). As these two agents competed to get the best deal–a very effective bit of AI vs. AI dogfighting researchers have dubbed a “generative adversarial network”–neither was offered any sort of incentive for speaking as a normal person would. So they began to diverge, eventually rearranging legible words into seemingly nonsensical sentences.
“Agents will drift off understandable language and invent codewords for themselves,” says Batra, speaking to a now-predictable phenomenon that’s been observed again, and again, and again. “Like if I say ‘the’ five times, you interpret that to mean I want five copies of this item. This isn’t so different from the way communities of humans create shorthands.”
Follow @contentjunkie to stay up to date on more great posts like this one.
the rise of our overlords. How nice that humanity shall use its own hand to destroy itself.
AI is dangerous when it is developed into an autonomous weapon. But ultimately this is the intent of the builders of such systems. Really they are nothing more and nothing less than a type of organic weapon, like bioweapons. They can't kill everyone, and they will have weaknesses that especially human controlled smart robots will be able to find, exploit, and even, potentially, these could be purely viral responses that cause the AI weapons to turn on each other.
People think there is no way to deal with this threat, don't realise that malicious AI can be attacked, precisely as this story exemplifes, by other AI's programmed to target these other AI's. Even if they make them pass turing tests by restricting them to human languages, they still will have signatures that cannot be completely hidden in their way of communicating. Your personal way of writing, given sufficient quantity of text can identify you as surely as a fingerprint. The machines will be no different, and the more complex their activities become, the more distinctive they will be.
There is nothing like human controlled smart robots, A.I will always win as they HV the capacity to overtake humans in all ramifications. Your smart human robot is nothing more than a toy that can be , and will be consumed by the superior intellect of our A.I overlords
When you show me a truly creative genius AI, I will concede your point. Until then, Genius + AI > AI alone
Smart slaves are still following orders.
elon musk warned Zuckerberg .
Elon Musk says Mark Zuckerberg's understanding of AI is 'limited' - http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/25/technology/elon-musk-mark-zuckerberg-ai-artificial-intelligence/index.html
Upvoted and also resteemed!
This post received a 4.9% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @contentjunkie! For more information, click here!
This post has received a 2.56 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @banjo.
Observe the rise of the Androids....We are edging closer to our annihilation, if care is not taken.
This post has been ranked within the top 25 most undervalued posts in the first half of Jul 30. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $30.29 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Jul 30 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.