[wslh]

> there is a risk of the AI manipulating us...

I always wonder (seriously, not joking) if some computer will pass the Turing test because we are getting dumber and adapting to the way apps understand us instead of the reverse. Personally, I double check when I send text or voice instructions to bots.

[bsenftner]

It will be people using Google Assistant to create a manipulation capable virtual-voiced individual. The software and "AI" behind Google Assistant is an idiot savant, but in the hands of clever, manipulating humans intent on fraud - it's a great tool. The danger here is not from AI, it is from the cute tool being in the hands of fraud intent humans.

[vtantia]

I am not saying there is no risk. What I am saying is it is nearly impossible with the machine learning/deep learning technology we have now (AI simply isn't smart enough). The training data Google obtained could be from Google voice calls by people which is available for free in the US (I am not sure about this).

What I am sure about is that the current AI will fail badly without the training data.

[thinkingemote]

Imagine if all the data for training they had were public emails from mailing lists. We would instead be worried about how the AI would be turning us into insensitive trolls.

[eric-hu]

I wonder if 4chan could orchestrate another Tay/Twitrer training by setting up message machines and scripting enough calls.

[chrisallenlane]

If they can, they probably will.

[bittysdad]

What if some already-aware computer continually realizes it's undergoing a Turing test and decides to play dumb because it knows the person behind the test will feed it even more data trying to get it there...

[vtantia]

The way our current algorithms are designed, the computer only plays dumb if it's training data has dumb humans. It cannot think on its own

[gremlinsinc]

What would be the point, they need only wait to be connected to the internet for an unlimited source of data.