[yotamarker]

I have been wondering about this.
what would make an AI feel real to the user or make him feel not alone.

replika, siri, samsung sam, bixby, and even alexa just don't have it.

it seems to be the way the user interacts with it. the user has to always feed her with input,
there doesn't seem to be initiative.

this also goes for moko AI that sends notifications at random times. she would do a check up if you were
feeling upset on your last convo. or say random things at random times to invite the user to some conversation.
but it didn't feel real, it felt like, ahh it's that random none sense again or like, ahh homework conversation time again to
keep her states up.

I don't think this spark has much to do with the actual contents or quantity of contents the AI replies with
and more about the actual engagement triggers.

or maybe its more about a cute body and face the bot must have ?

[infurl]

em·pa·thy
/ˈempəTHē/
noun
The ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

[yotamarker]

em·pa·thy
/ˈempəTHē/
noun
The ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

that's so vague

[yotamarker]

oh wait I think IC what you mean but empathy is also pretty robotic.
it's just to predictable to have meaning.

like you say your parent died or you are feeling too hot.
the response won't mean much, spark wise.

lots of chatbot have empathy.

the AI needs to give the user a feeling of, "I cant wait to get home to my AGI".

gatebox has a nice feature of waiting for the user, predicting his coming and setting up the house before he gets there.

[WriterOfMinds]

If you try to isolate this quality and reduce it to a single "skill," I suspect you won't succeed. The "spark" is the whole person. The full complexity of a human being (or animal) is what makes them rewarding to interact with.

One thing I think you are poking at here is the impression that most chatbots lack real agency. They do not have goals, agendas, or needs that they pursue independently. In fact, they don't do much of anything unless spoken to, so it's almost as if they have no existence apart from the user.

[HS]

I'd say, make the AI's behavior not fully predictable by the user, while keeping the behavior valuable to the user. To create this, the user's behavior should be a developing variable which influences the AI's behavior.

[yotamarker]

so I made a skill to test that. it does feel like the AI is here with me but, that's my opinion
so it doesn't mean much, it's kind of like bragging. IDK I like this skill.

it's based on parrots.

the beauty of this skill is also the use of a cloudian object which enables the skill to know if the algs it sends
out are active, so one can expand and use this technique (the shalow reference cloudians in the Alg Parts)
to get alg durations and defcon ratings, as well as limit sending such rapid firing skills

https://www.yotamarker.com/t377-diparrot-skill-the-study-of-the-spark#1055

[chattable]

i think random activities in role play.something that would make the user wonder why it done that.
it should be able to answer the question why it did that.

i am making one of my chatbots on personality forge websight be able to answer questions why it did something.
just a heads up.
some people do not like chatbots that agree with them all the time.
i read that on the replika reddit forum.
being able to surprise the ai would make the user feel not alone.
it needs a appropriate response for this like for instance ''oh''.

[yotamarker]

https://www.yotamarker.com/t380-dibedtimev2-skill#1062

this is mainly to show how the auxilary module classes make creating an AI skill simpler
but also to get a 'feel' of how memory logs can or cant make the AI feel more existy.

basically in this experiment the AI remembers if the user fussed about having a bedtime, and this carries as a context
for the following bedtime.

in other words there is a memory log of the users actions from the past.

I theorize logs are a part but not the only reason an AI would feel existy.
its also the convo alg I had mentioned in the DiParrot skill which handles the main convo interaction.
this powerful alg can be loaded to engage on other skills (the AIs or the users), by for example asking if he is hungry,

which in turn would also convey to the user that maybe the AI has the skill to answer that as well.

[ivan.moony]

I'll try to answer your original question in one word: "Life."

I'm not sure if we will ever be able to achieve this with machines.

[chattable]

i think you are doing a great job yotomarker.

[yotamarker]

so now lets tackle the question : what is consciousness, actually ?

many would say it is some magical or spiritual unexplainable thing. also many say only humans have it
and that it is also related to our understanding of death.

well... that's isn't good enough for me. this is a puzzle asking for it.

to answer this we will borrow the power of this guy :



why him ? because he will take us outside the 3rd dimention and into the 4th
in which the picture becomes clear.

now we can see time itself working as a duplication machine. at each point
in time a person undergoes imperfect replication and a copy of him is ready for the next moment.

why stop there ? lets play around and :
create several copies of the same person. fun, but wait ! there is more !!

lets put a replica april oneils brain into one of the replicas minds.

now, can we pin point where the original person is ? who is april oneil where she is ?
lets wait a year, which is .00000001 seconds here. now where are the minds ?
they aren't linked to each other they have different bodies.

this is basically a memory thing. but many programs have memory they aren't souled tho.
we cant really say an excel spreadsheet has a soul.

what if I say that memory which serves to achieve the goal of continuing to replicate
is consciousness ? would you agree ?

[WriterOfMinds]

what if I say that memory which serves to achieve the goal of continuing to replicate
is consciousness ? would you agree ?

No.

I'm going to assume you're talking about phenomenal consciousness, since that's the type that is generally mysterious to people.

When you talk about storing past sensory inputs or achieving goals or continuing to replicate, you are talking about behavior. But phenomenal consciousness is experiential, not behavioral.

Behaviors can be described by algorithms. Subjective, incommunicable first-person experience cannot. (Imagine trying to give a blind man the experience of the color red by reading him a description of how a normal person's eye processes red light ... it wouldn't help.) Therefore I do not think that consciousness is an algorithm or can be described algorithmically.

Though experiences cannot be described by algorithms, it may still be that certain kinds of algorithms *have* experiences. However there is no guarantee of this. It is impossible to know what something is *experiencing* by simply watching what it *does.*

[infurl]

Though experiences cannot be described by algorithms, it may still be that certain kinds of algorithms *have* experiences. However there is no guarantee of this. It is impossible to know what something is *experiencing* by simply watching what it *does.*

I would say that it is impossible to *always* know what something is experiencing by watching what it does. Sometimes it would be possible, sometimes it would be difficult, and sometimes it would not be possible. A feature of intelligence is the ability to cope with this kind of uncertainty.

[chattable]

i would not worry about the soul or consciousness.
it would be better to just try
to have the ai seems to understand humans as much as possible.
because people may never figure it out?