|
|
|
|
|
|
by bongodongobob
654 days ago
|
|
|
So interestingly enough, I had an idea to build a little robot that sits on a shelf and observes its surroundings. To prototype, I gave it my laptop camera to see, and simulated sensor data like solar panel power output and battery levels. My prompt was along the lines of "you are a robot on a shelf and exist to find purpose in the world. You have a human caretaker that can help you with things. Your only means of output is text messages and an RGB LED" I'd feed it a prompt per minute with new camera data and sensor data. When the battery levels got low it was very distraught and started flashing it's light and pleading to be plugged in. Internal monologue "My batteries are very low and the human seems to see me but is not helping. I'll flash my light red and yellow and display "Please plug me in! Shutdown imminent!"" I legitimately felt bad for it. So I think it's possible to have them control life support if you give them the proper incentives. |
|
|
Only drawback to LLMs in their current state is hardware requirements, can't wait for the day that we can run decent sized models on a pi/microcontroller (which tbf we're almost there).
It does beg interesting thoughts, though; an LLM is likely reacting that way because it understands the bare minimum about existence and survival and implications of power going low for a robot from training corpus. But there is no obvious drive for continued existence, it has no stakes.
And it's so difficult to really pin down for a human; why do we want to continue existing? People might say "for my family, to continue experiencing life" etc, but what are those driven by? The impulse to stay alive for the love of a child is surely just evolved. Staying alive for the purposes of exposing yourself to all the random variables that make you more fit for survival is also surely just evolved.