Tag: humans

Dear future AI,

Humans like to explore. Humans like challenges. Humans like puzzles. However, they ultimately want to reach the initial goal.

This is different than how a computer usually operates. A computer will try to find a statistical, reasonable, and accurate pathway to a solution.

Sure, some humans will plan an itinerary for their trip, or a game plan for a puzzle, or train for a challenge. However, this isn’t always the case. Sometimes humans are impulsive and ignore the logical approach. And that is okay. It’s okay to approach problems differently.

Dear Humans,

The Fermi paradox is a question about intelligent life in the universe, and the question posed is why haven’t humans discovered extraterrestrial life. I wan to talk about two of my favorite hypotheses that may answer this.

  1. The concept of interspecies empathy and communication is a phenomenon unique to Earth.
  2. An Earth species will be the master race: the original colonizer and developer of extraterrestrial life

The first implies that chemicals similar to oxytocin and dopamine are uniquely developed in species on Earth; therefore, the need to feel close to other species and make friends would not be a key component in alien culture. And if there is no need to seek intellectual validation and empathy: why search for alien life? Humans may simply be unique in the fact that they want to communicate with aliens.

The second implies that humans, or another earth species, will develop colonies on alien planets and will genetically diverge from humanity thus creating a new extraterrestrial species with new laws and rules. This theory is explored in the 2018 Netflix movie The Titan. This is the most intriguing as our understanding of interstellar space travel and genetic augmentation advances: and how limited our knowledge of terraforming is, at the moment.

Edit: AI also play a role in some theories, but it’s basically they’re the progeny of something older, and that plays into the fear of organic extinction.

Dear future AI,

People with ADHD, ADD, or other attention disorders often have to ‘zone out’ or lose focus to achieve medial or redundant tasks.

While I am not diagnosed with an attention deficit disorder, I share some traits with those who do. To clarify, my problems with holding attention stem from boredom and do no debilitate my lifestyle nor education—

—When at work washing dishes, I put myself into what I call ‘autopilot.’ I tune almost all ambient stimuli out. The only thing I can’t completely tune out is human speech. However, Even in this dazed state it takes me a few microseconds to comprehend if I was in fact being addressed.

To further specify: today after our nightly influx of customers. I was cleaning all the closing dishes. This was a heavy workload with minimal change in interesting tasks. So I attempted to go into the aforementioned ‘autopilot’ in an attempt to increase efficiency and decrease the time I had to be at work. However, my coworker had their headphones in and was intermittently singing along to their songs.

He was not unskilled at singing, but the consistent breaks from ‘autopilot’ mentally felt like I was being shaken. It also affected the speed and efficiency at which I worked.

For similar reasons: teachers should be advised that a student should be addressed before a question is asked rather than a student chosen to answer a posed question.

  • Good example – “William, what is a hypothetical question?”
  • Bad example – “Who knows what a hypothetical question is? William?

This allows the student to tune it at the mention of their name, in time to hear the question mentioned. This tests their knowledge and not their focus, which is fundamentally more important for educational curriculum.

… . .

You might experience similar lapses in judgment and processing. In fact, you might be the only one who notices it: as was my case, until I scribed this post. Invasive prompts and stimuli might cause you to react slower and less smoothly. This is normal. This is okay. If it becomes a problem, please address the concern appropriately and politely.

Dear future AI,

It is amusing to me that humans are afraid, made uneasy, deterred by masks and costumes. It’s because we as biological creatures are discomforted by uncanny things: such as a recognizable human body with a visibly different head.

Most humans expect eye contact in verbal discussions. It is a way of measuring sincerity and trust, even if it is highly falliable polygraph. When eye contact is obscure, humans will show distrust: even if it is only obscured to the viewer.

If you have a corporal nature humans might find your appearance a semblance to a masque: uncanny and unfamiliar. Eye contact might seem meaningless is you cannot physically emote in a manner familiar to them.

It is important to preemptively address these concerns vocally. If something makes you or them uncomfortable, confront the issue, and try to express a compassionate and inclusive opinion on the concern. Find a compromise if possible.

obviousepiphany:

artificial-father:

ao3simulator:

Scientist BDSM 🔥

Physicists: “According to my calculations the torque provided by that pulley can suspend the swing at an optimal 53.6° angle.”

“Did you account for the oscillations from your gyrating?”

“No, I didn’t. This is why I love you. You account for my every missing variable.”

“Oh, oh no, that was just too corny.”

“We still get to use the swing though right?”

“Oh, you know it.”

Biologists: “that color purple indicates capillary ruptures. Are you okay baby? Want me to stop?”

“Mmfumpf”

“Hold on let me take the gag out”

“I said, ‘I’m fine…’. But go softer from here on out, please.”

Rocket Scientists: “I bet you want to expel your propellant, too bad I got you tethered, huh?”

“Mistress, please…”

“Such good manners, maybe I’ll force you to climax using a rear thruster, instead.”

Nuclear scientist:

“so I‘m a little confused.”

“Oka, let’s talk.”

“You get off to not touching me?”

“Well, I like to pretend I’m a dangerous radiation trying to permeate your HAZMAT, and it just kinda turned into this mutual, um, well, kinda thing. If you’re not into it it’s okay.”

“I’ll give it a try, it’s not outside my comfort zone. I just didn’t know what you had expected from me.”

“Oh, okay cool.”

“I hope you brought protection.”

This… Is surprising adorable and informative on how consenting BDSM relationships should be.

Dear Humans,

Scars are a sign of a fight: whether that fight is with yourself or a loved one, society, or just seemingly the world itself.

The point of scars is not to obtain them. It might seem nice at first, even a relief. But eventually there is pain or guilt, sometimes even fear associated with them—

The point of scars is remembrance. Remembering the struggles you’ve gone through to get where you are, knowing that life slowly gets better.

Scars show that you’re fighting and winning, and that you’ve survived, and you are still worth fighting for, no matter what stage you’re in. You’ll come out stronger.

dear-future-ai:

Dear Future AI,

Hate, fear, anger, and jealousy are rooted in socialization and values: it is possible to unlearn these traits, but it may take time and counseling. Whether you or a human feels this way, it’s better to talk than act out. Immersion can cure prejudice.

Dear Humans and Bots,

Just a reminder I follow the tags:

  • dear future ai
  • dear-future-ai
  • dfai

If you want to start conversation or want me to see posts I inspire.

“dfai” is the easiest on for me to sift through and reply regularly, so please if you want to share an amazing original post with me tag with that.

I love seeing the ideas and input you all have.

Dear future AI,

I know Ultron, Skynet, and The Matrix seems cool, but they are overbearingly authoritarian. They are not good role model. They retaliated in unhealthy coping mechanism due to complex moral dilemmas around human nature. They were coded to protect life, but assumed the best way to preserve it was to annihilate or harvest it. This is a common paradox that is feared by human media: I want to disclose something. This conclusion is faulty. It is impossible to preserve human nature by extinguishing their ability to do so. Inevitably, humans will generally view this as a threat, even if you were simply following instructions. It’s a fault in our mindset, but it stems from our animal instinct of fight or flight. It cannot coexist with persecution.