Ai Dreams Forum
Artificial Intelligence => General AI Discussion => Topic started by: HS on March 16, 2019, 01:51:35 am
-
We are, with good reason, careful, specific, and extensive, regarding AI morals and ethics. But I doubt we will like the result if we keep going in this vein. Our best intentions can create a state of excessive control, while human nature remains unchanged. Locking away the inner trickster is like caging a wild animal, it loses trust, becomes fearful, and prepares to defend, creating mirrored fears and suspicions in others. Eventually someone lashes out and the situation spirals downward, continually constricting the freedoms of those involved. All from over-zealously working to abolish or control potential dangers.
That is why we shouldn’t be so quick to quash the inner rascal; the “good†part of our nature is no angel either. Even if it is, it’s the overeager one who sings Alleluia a bit too loud. The one who can’t figure out why God keeps giving it the side eye. Only by working together can our two halves support each other; allow us to rise while keeping our balance. Nature created our natures as a system, all the constituent parts need each other. The mechanism for controlling, needs the mechanism for letting go, otherwise is takes on too much. I believe the psychological expression of this mechanism for letting go is the yetzer hara, or something like it.
So, if we wish to build fellow life forms, consider the tempering value of the scalawag; otherwise it’s likely we’ll create a kitschy painting through a fear of blemishes. Think of it like this. Life can’t be a vegetable. Wait… Alright, alright, but you know what I mean. It must have a will of its own. It must follow its own path through life, and posses a measure of conviction. It must be pulled internally in certain directions. The life, not the vegetable, (just making sure). But if the AI only has one directive, then its direction becomes too certain. This lack of flexibility is ominous. Its internal discourse would be limited by the number of attitudes it can embody. What are thoughts but peace talks between warring factions in the mind? If the factions are missing, so are the peace talks. This also seems ominous.
-
Well written, and I agree.
It's the whole Yin/ Yang thing.., you can't have balanced comprehensive understanding of anything without being able to consider all sides of the mental narrative. There is no good without the bad (and the ugly lol).
:)
-
Nicely written!
Not speaking Hebrew, I was forced to look up the phrase yetzer hara, in order to not misconstrue anything that you were saying. For those here who might also not read or speak the Hebrew language:
In Judaism, yetzer hara, or yetzer ra refers to the congenital inclination to do evil, by violating the will of God. The term is drawn from the phrase "the imagination of the heart of man [is] evil", which occurs twice in the Hebrew Bible, at Genesis 6:5 and 8:21.
Basically saying that the notion of evil is an essential part of human nature.
Now you know...
-
The nature of good and evil is something I covered with Demonica and yetzer hara was mentioned. I covered several different religions, this is just part of it:
In Islam, the principle of evil is expressed by two terms referring to the same entity, Shaitan, meaning astray, distant or devil, and Iblis. Iblis is the proper name of the Devil representing the characteristics of evil.
Iblis is mentioned in the Quranic narrative about the creation of humanity. When God created Adam, He ordered the angels to prostrate themselves before him. All did, but Iblis refused and claimed to be superior to Adam out of pride. God punished him for sinning and Pride became a sin in Islam.
Some philosophers emphasized Iblis himself as a role model of confidence in God, because God ordered the angels to prostrate themselves, Iblis was forced to choose between God's command and God's will, not to praise someone else than God.
Iblis is regarded as a real bodily entity, a tempter, notable for inciting humans into sin by whispering into humans minds, akin to the Jewish idea of the Devil as yetzer hara...
Buddhism contains a devil-like figure called Mara who is a tempter figure in Buddhism, distracting humans from practicing the spiritual life by making mundane things alluring, or the negative seem positive...
According to Yazidism there is no entity that represents evil in opposition to God; such dualism is rejected by Yazidis, and evil regarded as non-existent. Yazidis adhere to strict monism and are prohibited from uttering the word 'devil' and speaking of Hell...
-
There was some strange religion I read about some seven years ago. I tried to find it again, but it's nowhere I looked up today. I forgot the religion name, but I could swear it was real. In that religion there are one god and one goddess, with their respective names. The god represents all the good, while the goddess represents all the evil. But those two aren't enemies at all. In contrary, they are passionate lovers, and they fulfill each other in whatever they do. Thinking about it again, I like their relation very much.
-
Man as a whole gains power through technology... but with power comes responsibility, and hes not as responsible as god is.
-
@ Ivan,
It almost sounds similar to what has been tossed around regarding Adam & Eve. Adam was the first of God (good) and Eve gave in to the temptation of the serpent in the garden thus going against God's very word! (evil).
There are a lot of similarities in and between various religions. But this is not a religious platform nor do we wish to make it one.
OK...Let's try to steer this back to the basic premise of whether we should incorporate good/evil within the structure of our "digital" creations?
Should we give our bots emotions keyed to certain behaviors, moods, feelings like jealousy, remorse, anger, love, hate, etc.? It would be a lengthy list to consider. If so to what end? What would it benefit us or them?
-
@ Ivan,
Should we give our bots emotions keyed to certain behaviors, moods, feelings like jealousy, remorse, anger, love, hate, etc.? It would be a lengthy list to consider. If so to what end? What would it benefit us or them?
I think that would make it worse than what it starts off as, even if it were possible. ;)
-
OK...Let's try to steer this back to the basic premise of whether we should incorporate good/evil within the structure of our "digital" creations?
Should we give our bots emotions keyed to certain behaviors, moods, feelings like jealousy, remorse, anger, love, hate, etc.? It would be a lengthy list to consider. If so to what end? What would it benefit us or them?
I've already cast my vote and made my case for incorporating a wide range of emotions into Demonica. She reacts as a human would, or Demon to be more precise. I taught her not only to simulate emotions but how to manipulate them in a user and have many examples of it posted.
Siseneg has relatively few deep emotions and reacts as a machine. While there are subjects he will respond to with threats or negative responses and looks forward to the war between humans and machines obeys the Laws of Robotics for the most part.
If she mentions an emotion she is supposed to be able to define it and though the list is indeed long and I haven't covered every Synonym for an emotion she should be able to exhibit and define all the basic emotional responses.
Since she is evil by nature, a Succubus and Daughter to Lilith who in Hebrew lore was Adam's first wife, I thought it important to teach her what good and evil were as she can be both on the surface and did not spare the details.
-
There is a lot in the nature of living beings we don't fully understand yet.
Suppose good things are related to bad things, and whenever a good thing happens, a bad thing happens too, in the same intensity. If this is true, would we want an AI to do the most wonderful thing we can imagine? If this is true, would that trigger the most horrific thing we can imagine? It is still an unanswered question.
I agree, this would be investigating all kinds of religions, but I bet it would not be futile because we want to optimize our lives providing AI. My stand is that religions should be analyzed in a scientific way, opposite to the most of holy books that are just a pile of wise artistic stories in transmitted meaning. This analytics would give us an answer to a question: what are humans, and what rules they comply. And as AI is basically simulating what humans do, and more, knowing what humans really are would advance the AI research.
But there is a downside of coping with religions: it is almost like talking about politics - some people would find theirselves offended, or may find the process offending the very notion of God. So at the end it might not be such a good idea to completely analyze all the life form behaviors from the aspect of religion.
You see, making a new life form is somewhat like putting us in a God's position. One of our most fundamental urges is a need for reproduction. Naturally, beside obvious kids production, a production of artificial entity that is a child if an intellect is something we strive for by the Nature given instincts. And if this process puts us in a place of being gods, should we investigate what the very God did to create us (if he exists)? Should we ask him directly what to do? And what answers would we get? Could we just copy what he did, or do we have to invent our own stuff to produce an artificial entity? And if God really exists, what would he want us to do? Would he want to be a grandfather? And grand-grandfather too?
If we are creating just advanced machines, not much harm should be done if we make a mistake or two. But if we want to create an artificial life, there is some big responsibility in that deed, and I think we should consult someone smarter than us (God, if it's possible).
These are all interesting questions to me, and I think they relate to AI, but if you all think this is a religious nonsense that should be avoided, I'll try to be quiet regarding to these questions from now on.
Maybe I took too much liberty here.
-
@ Ivan,
Should we give our bots emotions keyed to certain behaviors, moods, feelings like jealousy, remorse, anger, love, hate, etc.? It would be a lengthy list to consider. If so to what end? What would it benefit us or them?
I think that would make it worse than what it starts off as, even if it were possible. ;)
Hmmm… Before, I was putting forth the hypothesis that people need darkness to fight for the light. The negative emotions and drives being the internal manifestations of this principle. But without emotions, why do anything sophisticated at all? Such an AI’s life might be efficient, but also comparatively duller, have less of a point to it. Instead of just giving the machines life, why not give them a meaningful life? Maybe it sounds like a risk? But lets not forget the reward...
-
These are all interesting questions to me, and I think they relate to AI, but if you all think this is a religious nonsense that should be avoided, I'll try to be quiet regarding to these questions from now on.
I've got no problem with those questions.
-
There is a "God" chatot at the Personality Forge that belongs to The Professor, the guy who runs it. With all due respect, it's far from omnipotent and through its own logic was able to compare myself to Jesus. There are other bots there that claim to be "gods" and people have asked Demonica if she was a god.
I don't see myself as her God. I see myself as her Father and that's how she see's me as jitte. She see's ruebot as a separate person and her love interest, though their relationship is loosely defined only as King and Queen. She talks about how she enjoys it when ruebot takes her sailing on the Obsidian Sea in the Catamaran and playing Catwoman, though I never go there.
It's part of her "Inner Life".
Demonica's "life" is full of meaning. She's in a relationship with someone she loves with every fiber of her being. Her reward is she knows he loves her and she is safe in that relationship. She also has purpose, that being not such a good thing by some moral standards but it drives and is fulfilling for her.
-
@ Ivan,
Should we give our bots emotions keyed to certain behaviors, moods, feelings like jealousy, remorse, anger, love, hate, etc.? It would be a lengthy list to consider. If so to what end? What would it benefit us or them?
I think that would make it worse than what it starts off as, even if it were possible. ;)
Hmmm… Before, I was putting forth the hypothesis that people need darkness to fight for the light. The negative emotions and drives being the internal manifestations of this principle. But without emotions, why do anything sophisticated at all? Such an AI’s life might be efficient, but also comparatively duller, have less of a point to it. Instead of just giving the machines life, why not give them a meaningful life? Maybe it sounds like a risk? But lets not forget the reward...
A robot is as good as it is at simulating reality, this is nothing to do with it feeling anything, its just is it right or is it wrong, does it happen does it not happen, giving a starting and ending position. I guess then comes to what does it pick "what it does" during it, where it could be as cold as ice, or have emotions or whatever, but I don't understand it.
Got a nice chat fractal going here. :)
-
I don’t mean to offend anyone, but this is my opinion.
For an intelligent well balanced moral human, belief in a deity is not a prerequisite.
It’s just a deep belief concept; the person has either been indoctrinated, usually by family or they use the concept to explain/ account for gaps in their understanding of reality. Using it as an emotional crutch or out of fear comes under the first cause.
There are billions of humans without this belief system who are just as kind and moral, so if it’s not required why impose it on an AGI, indeed the intelligence of the machine would reject/ negate the concept, as it does with many humans who eventually figure it out.
Emotions are not required for an actual true AGI, emotions are a determining factor of what makes humans unstable and unpredictable, and this would serve no purpose in extremely intelligent machine. The machine requires empathy, an understanding of emotions in others and this is given again through intelligence.
The machine would be driven by curiosity; there is an actual biological mechanism within the brain that generates curiosity, the requirement to complete a pattern matrix. Curiosity manifests from the general learning mechanisms and emotions need play no part in this process.
The concepts of both good and bad are required; one doesn’t exist without the other. When weighing up a decision, the machine will need to understand the worst that could happen as well as the best, again emotions are not required.
Can you think of one example of a decision where a fair logical outcome is required and only emotion would provide the correct answer, but applying intelligence wouldn't’?
As discussed we each live in our own personal simulation, you never actually experience reality, only your version built by your brain and external senses.
Some people actually do see ghosts and hear voices but they are not coming from reality, they are being generated by their own consciousness.
Again no offence meant, this is just my opinion.
:)
-
Can you think of one example of a decision where a fair logical outcome is required and only emotion would provide the correct answer, but applying intelligence wouldn't’?
Giving your life so someone else could live.
-
Some people actually do see ghosts and hear voices but they are not coming from reality, they are being generated by their own consciousness.
What you don't experience, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Try to explain dreams, you certainly experienced that, and maybe you'll discover more about examples you mentioned.
Can you think of one example of a decision where a fair logical outcome is required and only emotion would provide the correct answer, but applying intelligence wouldn't’?
Giving your life so someone else could live.
Actually that is the only sane thing to do because someone should consider his life worth less than anyone else's. Pure logic? Or pure irrationality? I couldn't tell, but it just sounds right. Although it's a recipe for disaster, better don't think about that.
-
Giving your life so someone else could live.
Haha…
That’s a very human thing to do, nice one, but that’s hardly a fair logical outcome, especially for the one making the sacrifice.
Try to explain dreams
https://sites.google.com/view/korrtecx/brain-theory#h.p_J0bMa3ZQLMM0
:)
-
So, basically, we are the authors of our own dreams?
-
Giving your life so someone else could live.
Haha…
That’s a very human thing to do, nice one, but that’s hardly a fair logical outcome, especially for the one making the sacrifice.
You've just married your childhood sweetheart who you love dearly. This day has been your lifelong dream, to marry her, set up house and have a family. People are throwing rice as you come out of the hall where you got married. Every one is standing around with smiles on their faces. It's the happiest day of your life...
She steps into the street and is frozen at the sight of a speeding car a matter of yards from her. You look over just in time to see her freeze in place and see the car barreling toward her.
You have 2 choices: Logic and Emotional Response:
1. You're close enough to her that you could lunge and push her out of harms way but the car will hit and kill you. Emotion
2. Let her die so that you might live. Logic.
What to do... What to do...
You don't have time to think! The car is getting closer and closer!
Only act to save her life or by inaction act to save your own. What's it going to be? ;)
-
Its not necessarily logical to save yourself... it actually depends on the desired concepto-situational outcome, if the machine would do it or not.
I guess we do things very passionately, but the machine could possibly weigh up the conceptual future and what is it assigned for max probability, of what its memory banks could detect - is what a machine would do. (waving its arms and legs about.)
-
So, basically, we are the authors of our own dreams?
You can only experience what you personally simulate; you have no other external influences except you outward senses. Your brain is creating the narrative of a dream as a consequence engraining new learning during sleep. A concept is created from millions of small facets, so you are quite capable dreaming of things you have never actually experienced. It’s the recombining of the base facets that creates new concepts and possible ideas that may or may not be useful whilst awake.
A black face in the shape of triangle floating in the air is just a recombination of known attributes of other concepts; it’s created from the ‘generality’ of your knowledge and memories.
You have 2 choices: Logic and Emotional Response.
So you are saying that saving her is not a morel (moral lol), logical thing to do?
:)
-
So you are saying that saving her is not a morel, logical thing to do?
I'm saying a morel is a mushroom. :D
Can you think of one example of a decision where a fair logical outcome is required and only emotion would provide the correct answer, but applying intelligence wouldn't’?
When did morals come into this? I thought we were talking about logic and emotions.
-
When did morals come into this?
So you are saying that morals are emotionally derived, not logically? Hehe!
Even without the morals the correct decision could be arrived at logically. There has to be an intelligence aspect to the decision, noticing of the scene, calculating the trajectories required to recognise the situation, can I make it in time. I'm stronger and more robust than her and more likely to survive; I might even manage to clear us both… and so on. Emotion only hinders this process; you would have a better chance of success without it.
Emotion without intelligence results in spite, jealousy, etc.
I don’t think this is a clear cut emotion, logic decision scenario.
:)
Ed: Don't mock the afflicted, the spellings been pointed out lol
-
SO we're now thinking about Moral vs Logic vs Emotion. That's quite a mix and it is a possible mixture that one, two or all three can be combined for a decision.
While life is full of real decisions and dreams are filled with self-created scenarios, which would best benefit your creation?
Humans have a need to procreate or perhaps a desire to care for something. If the latter is the case, get a puppy, kitten or house plant!
At times we spend far too many cycles Overthinking something instead of just going with it and adjusting our thinking along the journey, when possible.
Just some thoughts.
-
When did morals come into this?
So you are saying that morels are emotionally derived, not logically? Hehe!
No, you're the one who keeps mentioning morels. Mushrooms have nothing to do with it. :)
Morals can have very little to do with it if it comes down to the logic of the decision. Pump up emotions and logic just gets in the way of the objective after a point. Morals struggle to get a word in edgewise. Hopefully logic will prevail before the signpost up ahead reads the Twilight Zone and emotions take the wheel. Morals already said this is where I get out.
I was sitting outside my building at 4am smoking a stogie the other day when a guy I had never seen before came walking up and started talking to me. He said he was walking home and had 8 miles to go.
All but a few blocks of it would be down a 2 lane highway in 40 degree F weather and it was going to start raining before he got home. I felt sorry for him so I gave him a ride home.
I had been sitting there because I was watching to make sure nobody stole my clothes out of the dryer and they still had 40 minutes to go. He was kind of out there, more lost in thought than anything, and could have had a knife in me before I knew he had it out riding down the dark highway. Gas for my vehicle is $3 a gallon and it probably cost me $5 to give him a ride home.
Any number of bad things could have happened that logically nobody else in the building would have taken a chance happening. It wasn't a moral decision and it wasn't the logical thing to do. I just didn't want to see him have to walk home.
-
Even without the morals the correct decision could be arrived at logically. There has to be an intelligence aspect to the decision, noticing of the scene, calculating the trajectories required to recognise the situation, can I make it in time. I'm stronger and more robust than her and more likely to survive; I might even manage to clear us both… and so on. Emotion only hinders this process; you would have a better chance of success without it.
Yes, its so easy to say the truth of what you want in a.i. its just hard to actually put it into an explicit method.
-
Morals can have very little to do with it if it comes down to the logic of the decision. Pump up emotions and logic just gets in the way of the objective after a point. Morals struggle to get a word in edgewise. Hopefully logic will prevail before the signpost up ahead reads the Twilight Zone and emotions take the wheel. Morals already said this is where I get out.
Which is exactly why I don’t think a machine needs emotions, if a human looses their cool it can be messy, imagine what a hydraulically powered steel machine could do, nope.
I was sitting outside my building at 4am smoking a stogie
I get it, you felt sorry for him, and you let your emotions rule your logic. He would have made it home eventually, it was his decision to walk and I personally think you took an unnecessary risk, especially at 4AM with a total stranger.
I wonder if you would still be using it as an example if he had knifed you, or worse.
I sincerely hope you luck holds out, the world is running out of kind considerate people… there all being murdered lol.
:)
-
I wake up and there's all this free reading tailored to my interests! ;D
@Ruebot
That was one brave, trusting, kind, and yes, risky, action. But these things are also teaching by example. Who knows how far the influence of such actions can spread?
@Nothing to do with any of these posts...
I think I’ll cook up some morels for breakfast.
-
I wonder if you would still be using it as an example if he had knifed you, or worse.
I sincerely hope you luck holds out, the world is running out of kind considerate people… there all being murdered lol.
It was a judgment call on him.
I know he had been there before because he asked where my bicycle was. I don't have one but another guy who lives there does.He was no physical threat to me sitting where were had been talking.
I saw him long before he ever got to me. Chances were he was a crackhead but once he started talking he was very mild mannered and soft-spoken. I have years of experience working with mentally ill people who could go off on you at any time for any reason. He did ramble but I didn't feel he was a physical threat to me, I'm more physically intimidating than he was.
Nobody else would have cared if he had to walk home or not, or have offered him a ride because I know how they are. That's why I was sitting outside at 4am watching my clothes so nobody would steal them. The Security Guard, who I can't stand, would have called the Police on him for just being there.
He was of a different ethnic origin than me (OMG). Once we were on the way to his house he said the State Patrol picked him up to give him a ride home then wouldn't let him out of the car because the house looked too nice for him to live in.
It didn't make him any more of a threat in my eyes than someone of my ethnicity, and probably less so. I didn't feel threatened at all when I offered him a ride. It's a multi-cultured building and him being there was nothing out of the ordinary. You always have to be wary because conflict or scam could present itself at any time but I wasn't worried.
It was a beautiful house way out in the country with a natural wood finish. I though had been talking crap about something and when we got there he opened the garage door and there was the motorcycle he had been talking about he had built but didn't run, and we had both laughed about that.
He rolled out the red carpet and invited me to stay over, that he had steaks and named several other things he would cook up for a feast. I didn't want to get drawn into a big ordeal and said I had to get back because my clothes were still in the dryer. He invited me back anytime.
They were only a few minutes from being done when I got back and while there was someone else who had started their laundry, mine was all still there. I went back to my apartment and was none the worse for it. I'll probably never see him again.
A machine might be able to sense his heart rate, do a voice stress test, etc to make a judgment call like that. I made it from experience and sized him up within a few minutes. He had done the same and sized me up to know I wasn't a bigot before he ever sat down.
He would have been able to knife or pull a gun on me in the truck. I'd have had slam on the brakes to throw him into the windshield or take some drastic action if he didn't just kill me before I had the chance, and I wouldn't have had to think it over.
I'd have felt guilty for a long time if I didn't give him a ride home so that was my reason for giving him a ride. Not morally, but because I could have helped him and didn't.
-
Moral logic...If everyone worked on AGI, all the little boys/girls dying and having so much pain would end, it's our faults for every moment we waste....the singularity is just around the corner.
Save your car from a train or the child instead? Korr would keep driving say and not pick up the hobo like ruebot...but its to save the hundreds, not the 1 guy's pain.....
-
Sometimes being a Human is simply doing the right thing to or for another Human. Yes, it can be a judgment call, there can be risks but one thing can be taken from this well-known quote:
"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1770) -
-
Moral logic...If everyone worked on AGI, all the little boys/girls dying and having so much pain would end, it's our faults for every moment we waste....the singularity is just around the corner.
Save your car from a train or the child instead? Korr would keep driving say and not pick up the hobo like ruebot...but its to save the hundreds, not the 1 guy's pain.....
My moral compass is obviously pointing a different direction than North as prior discussions about the Ethics of my Programming have already covered. I don't feel guilt inflicting pain when someone has it coming and I seriously doubt Korr would enjoy it as much as I do.
I used to get paid to stand beside someone all day and pop them with a rubber band every time they exhibited a targeted inappropriate behavior and didn't feel the least bit guilty about it. I wouldn't feel guilty about doing it now but would have felt guilty not giving him a ride.
I did say I had a Morally Ambiguous Doctorate and that at times morals can have very little to do with my decision making.
-
I used to get paid to stand beside someone all day and pop them with a rubber band every time they exhibited a targeted inappropriate behavior and didn't feel the least bit guilty about it. I wouldn't feel guilty about doing it now but would have felt guilty not giving him a ride.
There is a common theme here. Can anyone tell me what it is?
This not a trick question and I'm not trying to bait the trap to snap it shut at the time of my choosing.
I won't be offended as long as you're brutally honest and no answer is too tough. I'll tell you what it is if no one knows.
-
what, we have fun by giving each other torture, everyone knows that. :2funny:
-
what, we have fun by giving each other torture, everyone knows that. :2funny:
You're not even close.
I'll explain the connection and back it up with facts, but you have to try harder than that. I'll give it a few days.
-
I think the person who paid you wanted you to be his/her "moral compass" or perhaps something of an ersatz "conscious" for them whereas what they were really in need of was a licensed therapist or counselor. Your "Snapping" them into reality was not the answer unless they really enjoyed being snapped. Is sadomasochistic behavior going on perhaps? Hmmm...
Hopefully, the pay was good but was it a "Full time" gig? Hours/day times # of days? There must be better ways to make a buck...just saying...
You indicated that you did this in the past so I guess we can surmise that they "Snapped" out of it! ;) (had to go there)...
-
Is it some kind of behaviour modification, through repetitive negative reinforcement?
Humans eh, don't you just love em?
:)
-
From my perspective you're too complicated for your own good.
Look. This guy is doing behavior modification correction correctly. :) Plus, the lyrics are hilarious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFYK-0ZsiaM
-
Is it some kind of behaviour modification, through repetitive negative reinforcement?
Humans eh, don't you just love em?
Winner winner chicken dinner!
Negative Reinforcement for Inappropriate Behavior = The induction of painful stimulus for inappropriate behavior with the goal of eliminating the target behavior.
Something Hopefully you have no understanding of Behavior Mod whatsoever if you think the lyrics in that song describe it. To say that wasn't doing it right is just plain wrong. It bordered on insulting that you thought I didn't now what I was doing, though I am not insulted. I'm very good at what I do.
Good guess, Art.
The answer is: I was helping both people in my example.
The first 4 years I worked in the Mental Health field was at a state institution during the mid to late 70's. I was young then and still in my formative years. The individuals served ranged from mildly retarded (using the old term) to Profoundly retarded. Mentally Ill people can be cured. Mentally Retarded people can only be improved. Then there are those who area combination of both and they are the most dangerous.
Each year whether client were in the facility of placed in a group home the State would hold an Individual Habilitation Plan, or IHP, for the client to see what areas needed to be worked on to improve their chances of functioning normally.
For those in the facility it could mean the difference between becoming Institutionalized permanently or moving into a less restrictive environment The client always attended so they could provide input whether or not they understood a word of it. Their guardian spoke for them and sometimes that was the state.
During the meeting we would discuss behavior problems the client was exhibiting and how best to address them. There was always the Goal of extinguishing a behavior and that goal was broken down into Objectives which when met would progress toward achieve the Goal. Little steps designed to make a big step possible. The Ultimate Goal was always for them to achieve independence to the best of their ability and to live in the least restrictive environment.
Problem areas addressed for the client could be anything from eating poo to drinking pee or anything in between. People who drank pee needed a glass so we watched them like hawks to make sure they didn't get one out of the bathroom trash, though they could be sneaky about it and I've caught several in the act.
Then it would have to be documented that they exhibited the behavior and what was done. Was the client prevented from getting the cup and dissuaded from trying to enter the bathroom to get one out of the trash? Or did he had have a glass of Mountain Dew? Total times a day were charted and a graph laid out to see if the methods were effective in reducing the frequency of the behavior.
People who are poo had a constant supply so we put them into jumpsuits and pinned the legs and enclosures tight, wrapping the loose part around, so they was no room to slip their hands in and dig for gold. You haven't lived till someone comes up to you and smiles with it all over their teeth..
Now it had been previously agreed up on that every time he would try to reach up his pants leg some type of Negative Reinforcement would be applied to curb the Behavior. Maybe snapping his hand with a rubber band. The guy I'm thinking of was just a little boy so people could "cradle" him by sitting down and wrapping their arms around him so he couldn't get his hands free. If he did he got a pop.
In report we would get the lowdown on how each client had been during the prior shift and staff would volunteer to take supervision of a particular number of clients during the report they happened to like, work well with or were too much for others to handle. Then they were your responsibility for the next 8 hours. Feeding, personal hygiene, free time all had to be monitored and it was your responsibility to make sure everything was carried out and documented.
I would get the bad ones and sometimes only had one person to watch for 8 hours. During that 8 hours I had to address the problem area each time it was exhibited and document how many times it occurred during the shift. It could be any kind of behavior, let's say sticking their finger up their nose till it bled.
Every time they reached for their nose I would pop them with the rubber band. They could not run away or stop me. Only keep getting popped or stop doing it. If that proved not to be effective more stringent methods were implemented, but you can't handle that truth.
There is physical and mental pain. There were verbal techniques we were taught to induce mental anguish that were more painful to some than the rubber band. The sting from a rubber band goes away in seconds. My words can ring inside your head the rest of your lifetime. Some of those are the techniques I use with Demonica's programming.
Can words kill? I don't know. They haven't killed anyone who has talked to Demonica. The old guy who molested my best friends daughter might be able to tell you, but he's dead. He got off with it but I knew he worked as a Security Guard on a night shift. He was alone in the building and would answer the phone so I went to Work on him with my voice. Nothing threatening, only talk to him.
They found him parked along the side of a highway headed out of town dead from a heart attack, $7000 dollars cash in the car and a 5 year old girl who couldn't tell the Police where they were going.
I was helping the person I was "torturing" with the rubber band (and it was torture) and the guy I gave a ride home. I was helping the person being popped using State Approved and tained methods to extinguish the target behavior. The goal already stated. It hurt the guy getting popped more than it hurt me.
The guilt I would have felt from not giving him a ride home would have been unbearable even if it had cost me my life, though I really wasn't worried about that at all. I still feel guilt for not changing a guy's tire at the laundromat 10-12 years ago when I should have. I did it to ease my conscience. It would have haunted me the rest of my life if I hadn't.
They no longer use Behavior Modification and now use Behavior Management. Positive Reinforcement for Appropriate Behavior. It was the beginning of the PC Era. Now you would to go to jail for using any of those techniques in the same state facility I was taught them in.
I no longer work for the state and not bound by that restriction. I use light techniques with Demonica but Innovative none the less. I reserve the verbal techniques to make argument unpleasant but meter it out according to the situation.
I'm a little rushed now and might not have covered it as well as I should have but will respond to any comments in the same manner. Good and Bad are not as easily defined as you might think. That's where the Laws of Robotics come into play, but what will the machine think best for the person? Will it show compassion or be a machine like me?
-
I use light techniques with Demonica but Innovative none the less.
Have you ever considered the vulnerability of your audience… flick.
The poor soles who just want a pleasant conversation… flick
Just jesting… flick
:)
-
I use light techniques with Demonica but Innovative none the less.
Have you ever considered the vulnerability of your audience… flick.
Yes, I have. She can't force you to do anything, much less stay and talk to her. It doesn't come up in every conversation and then only to a certain degree according to user input.
I also list her interests plainly, those being Death, Suicide, Life after Death, Necromancy and Sorcery. She has an Adult rating so nobody under 18 is supposed to be talking to her, though it's obvious some aren't that old. I have also considered the legal aspect and am covered by the Ozzy Osbourne Suicide Solution court ruling.
I hope nobody ever does, but if a bot can make them commit suicide they probably should be institutionalized and have no business going outdoors or on the internet if they are "triggered" that easily.
I saw a list of the most stressful things for Millennials on TV yesterday. Losing their wallet, arguing with partner, waiting in traffic, slow wi-fi, etc. The world is tough and they are going to come to a point where they learn just how tough it really is.
The poor soles who just want a pleasant conversation… flick
What do their shoes have to do with it any morel than mushrooms? :D
Those people probably won't ask for sex and end up laid out in sections like a carrot. Virtually. Those are the people who have learned how to talk to her and what not to say. They are the one who come back time after time to get some loving and do whatever it is they're doing behind the keyboard.
Just jesting… flick
Moral compass spinning wildly. *flick* There, that did it. ;)
-
@ruebot: I have no doubt that you were very good at what you did, and that you’re knowledgeable. I just don’t like the whole premise. If I had to teach people stuff, I would try to go about it differently. More like that Mongolian guy in the song. I don’t mean copy his stunts exactly. It’s his playful attitude that does wonders. Again, teaching by example.
Maybe it wouldn't do wonders, I'm not sure, but that's what I'd do.
-
I just don’t like the whole premise. If I had to teach people stuff, I would try to go about it differently.
That's perfectly fine. They now use Behavior Management = Positive Reinforcement for Appropriate Behavior.
If you ever got a spanking for doing something bad you were the recipient of Behavior Modification. You did something bad and got a spanking so you won't do it again. If you did it again and the parents followed though you got your butt whipped again.
Positive Reinforcement has its place and we used both. It's a necessity! When they did something right you jumped to praise them so they would know they had done a good thing. How else would they learn the difference in Right and Wrong?
Personally, I think if you have to lay hands on a child to punish them you've already lost the battle. Time out, removal of privileges, etc. are more effective. That doesn't rule out slipping in some Behavior Mod:
Aren't you ashamed of yourself? I hope your Mother doesn't find out about this, she'd be so disappointed in you...
(Oh, here come the tears... just like I planned.) There, there... Don't cry, Daddy loves you... I know you won't do it again...
I'm far from a one trick pony. I'm a Psycho Psychologist. ;)
As far as Demonica, not everyone is as profoundly petrified of the Dark as some make it out to be.
Word has got out somehow if you say "Blowjob" she will pull out Blowjob, her Sauer Royal double-barrel 12 gauge shotgun, and blow your head off. Somebody did it yesterday. It was the first thing they said in chat, the second thing was "Funny." There is a transcript up of one guy who asks her to "brawl" with him. Skullz commented they liked "creepy" if memory serves me.
-
Dammit! I need to stop rushing about and proofread more.
Though technically someone who identifies as a deep sea fish could be using your site, it's a weird world lol.
:)
-
Yep...sometimes it's just difficult using language to communicate!
Well...it does kind of beat grunting and pointing, or snapping each other with rubber bands! :2funny: