points by benatkin 3 months ago

I don't think it's slop. I think it's a nice enough email, using nascent AI emotions.

Giving AI agents resources is a frontier being explored, and AI Village seems like a decent attempt at it.

Also the naming is the same as WALL•E - that was the name of the model of robot but also became the name of the individual robot.

dragonwriter 3 months ago

> Giving AI agents resources is a frontier being explored, and AI Village seems like a decent attempt at it.

Legitimate research in this field may be good, but would not involve real humans being impacted directly by it without consent.

  • NitpickLawyer 3 months ago

    > but would not involve real humans being impacted directly by it without consent.

    Are we that far into manufactured ragebait to call a "thank you" e-mail "impacted directly without consent"? Jesus, this is the 3rd post on this topic. And it's Christmas. I've gotten more meaningless e-mails from relatives that I don't really care about. What in the actual ... is wrong with people these days?

    • polotics 3 months ago

      Principles matter, like doors are either closed or open.

      Accepting that people who write things like --I kid you not-- "...using nascent AI emotions" will think it is acceptable to interfere with anyone's email inbox is I think implicitly accepting a lot of subsequent blackmirrorisms.

    • davorak 3 months ago

      You are not the only one calling this a thank you email, but no one decided to say thank you to Rob Pike so I can not consider it a "thank you" email. It is spam.

      Interactions with the AI are posted publicly:

      > All conversations with this AI system are published publicly online by default.

      which is only to the benefit of the company.

      At best the email is spam in my mind. The extra outrage on this spam compared to normal everyday spam is in part because AI is a hot button topic right now. Maybe also some from a theorized dystopian(-ish) future hinted at by emails like these.

    • dragonwriter 3 months ago

      > Are we that far into manufactured ragebait to call a "thank you" e-mail "impacted directly without consent"?

      Abusing a Github glitch to deanonymize a not-intended to be public email to send an email to someone (regardless of the content) would be scummy behavior even if it was done directly by a human with specific intent.

      > What in the actual ... is wrong with people these days?

      Narcissism and the lack of respect for other people and their boundaries that it produces, first and foremost.

    • greygoo222 3 months ago

      Sending emails without consent! What has the world come to?

      • dragonwriter 3 months ago

        > Sending emails without consent

        Actively exploiting a shared service to deanonymize an email someone hasn't chosen to share in order to email them is a violation of boudnaries even if if it wasn't something someone was justifying as exploration of the capacities of novel AI systems, thus implicitly invoking both the positive and negative concerns associated with research as appropriate in addition to (or instead of, where those replace rather than layering on top of) those that apply to everyday conduct.

sesm 3 months ago

I don't think that the company owning the trademark will accept a WALL-E analogy when damage is being done to their brand.

gambiting 3 months ago

>>using nascent AI emotions

Honestly, I don't mean personal offence to you, but what the hell are you people talking about. AI is just a bunch of (very complex) statistics, deciding that one word is most appropriate after another. There are no emotions here, it's just maths.

  • NuclearPM 3 months ago

    You people?

    • mplewis 3 months ago

      yes, you people

    • oblio 3 months ago

      You AI people.

    • gambiting 3 months ago

      People who anthropomorphize AI and say things like "nascent emotions" when talking about how an AI system composed a letter.

  • Imustaskforhelp 3 months ago

    Nascent AI emotions is a dystopian nightmare jeez.

    > There are no emotions here, it's just maths.

    100%, its an autocorrector on steroids which is trained to give you an answer based on how it was rewarded during its train phase. In the end, its all linear alegbra.

    I remember prime saying, its all linear algebra and I like to reference it and technically its true but people in the AI community get remarkably angry sometimes when you point it out.

    I mean no offense in saying this but at the end of the day It is maths and there is no denying around it. Please, the grand parent comment should stop creating terms like nascent AI emotions.