Yeah, I’d be uncomfortable, but immortality is immortality.

Now, if the requirement was a daily barebacking by the ultra-rich engineering their cum to be the elixir of immortality, I’d be a little more conflicted.

People say AI start hallucinating bizarre sentences is a problem, but I’m beginning to wonder if it simply gazed too deeply into the internet abyss.

I came in here for this comment. When the choices are “criminal fighting the immensity of the ocean”, “guy named for all the cows and famous for shooting/being shot by other cow guys”, and literal nobility, it’s a solid deal. Of all three, one has the lowest chance of death, highest quality of life, and you pretty much got to do whatever you wanted depending on the era. The law that let you kill offending lower classes for twenty days of house arrest was only struck off the books in the mid 19th century.

Didn’t realize the monkey paw was granting these powers lol.

Nobody asked to be born

“Wake me up when the world is worth living in.”

Oh my god.

I could have so many tabs.

It seems like a simple enough fix, though also setting a weird precedent. Instead of directly fixing things, just keep adding layers of machine learning to produce improved outputs.

The future of AI isn’t spaghetti code, but spaghetti AI chains lol. Probably why people much smarter than me are the ones working on machine learning.

Right, but the primary difference is that the AI is both creating errors and magnifying them in a horrifying Cronenberg feedback loop, where incest doesn’t actually introduce errors.

That said, there’s a known trait called inbreeding depression where fitness is reduced as a result of repeated inbreeding, however it can result is purifying selection that removes deleterious genes and recessive alleles that are unmasked by the inbreeding and actually increase fitness. If they could adapt some sort of testing algorithm to prevent rampancy maybe they could “breed” diffusion algorithms or just curtail the outputs of the current ones.

Though there’d probably be some strange feedback loops if it was set up as two adversarial models where one is trained to slap down weird outputs and the other is trained to adapt to rejected outputs.

I can’t believe my second comment on Lemmy is gonna be about incest.

If you only have great genes, multiple generations of sister-wives will produce children with those exact same great genes. The problem with incest is that if you carry alleles for recessive disorders (and most people do), inbreeding makes it more and more likely that two copies of the recessive gene will be inherited and expressed since family members generally carry the same recessive genes. That’s why banging strangers is generally a good idea, since they usually carry a different set of recessive disorders than you do.

If there were a brother and sister (or any pairing) with a pristine genetic code, then as long as they remained inbred the first birth defect or genetic disorder to affect their family line will be a completely novel random mutation that formed as a result of pure time and chance over dozens or hundreds of generations. It’s also why inbreeding is a standard tool for animal and plant husbandry.