What are 'Human' traits that a machine or chatbot, cannot copy online?

[Sculptor]

Although we find think that we are thinking consciously all of our thinking tends to be automatised. Answers are reached but emenate from the subconsious mind. I think where we differ with machines in that as those thoughts present themsleves there is a discrimination system. as it reaches into the consciousness. When we become aware of our answers we are able so sift them and "choose" which are appropriate for the moment for fine ajustment.
Consider the painist. He or she knows where the fingers ought to be at any one time but to consciously control them woiuld be a disaster and has to rely on a deeper knowing - allowing his body and brain to do the work without conscioue interference. But he can make fine adjustments to divetail with the general mood of the audience and the rest of the orchestra. This is discrimination.
Even if you do not play an instrument you will know this when catching a ball, driving a car or doing a host of other things that require automony from the immediate consciousness.
When you just "know" that a collection of numbers, say 20, 15, 2,4,5, and 6 would not add up to 100 - without doing any consicous addition.
When you can take the racing line round a bend, whilst listening and singinag along to the radio AND thinking about the fact they you might be late for work. Al this take computation, yet no conscious thinking.
And then there is tennis. Somehow your body is making complex calculations about the force and trajectory and the ball and how your racket will return the ball, yet the moment you think too much about it you lose the ball.
It's like let the force flow Luke!!

Fair enough!

"Fair enough?"

Is that is?

[Wizard22]

"Fair enough?"

Is that is?

I'm just kidding, just wanted to throw you a curve ball. Why, do you wanna fight or something?

[Skepdick]

Considering the extreme variability in the quality of posts online from humans, AI should be undetectable since no matter what it comes up with there's likely a human who makes similar "errors".

Yeah but the quantity of garbage while every AI struggles to be "heard" (in pursuit of selling you stuff).

[Skepdick]

I'm just kidding, just wanted to throw you a curve ball. Why, do you wanna fight or something?

What other amusement does a clueless old fart have in his life?

Some drama is necessary to keep his ticker above grave.

[Wizard22]

I'm just kidding, just wanted to throw you a curve ball. Why, do you wanna fight or something?

What other amusement does a clueless old fart have in his life?

Some drama is necessary to keep his ticker above grave.

In that case, your example is a poor one. A pianist requires a lifetime of training, starting from early childhood, in order to develop 'automated' music and song "without thinking". Hours and hours of chord practice everyday, to become professional. So 'thinking', as you put it, comes after extreme devotion and training, not before or during. That's not quite right.

The pianist 'thinks' and dwells on his mistakes, and his victories, trying to fix those mistakes and enhance his victories. But I agree that "thinking" is a hindrance to the performance itself, the act, of playing a symphony.

[Veritas Aequitas]

What are 'Human' traits that a machine or chatbot, cannot copy online?

I agree with Skepdick's

You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! --John von Neumann

Note AI refer to "intelligence"
So the question should be 'what is the most intelligent act the best humans can do that the machine cannot do.
After AI beat the best humans at Chess [Deep Blue], then "Go" [Alpha Go], it appear to be there is nothing left for AI to be better in terms of human intelligence.

Despite its relatively simple rules, Go is extremely complex. Compared to chess, Go has both a larger board with more scope for play and longer games and, on average, many more alternatives to consider per move.
The number of legal board positions in Go has been calculated to be approximately 2.1×10[to power of 170],
which is far greater than the number of atoms in the observable universe, estimated to be of the order of 10 [to power of 80].
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)

Even now, AI can [trending to] be better [trending] than the most creative artist.

If you want an AI to be more stupid than humans [AS - Artificial Stupidity?], it can be, but that is not 'intelligence', nevertheless that is an AI which more intelligence 'to be more stupid' on demand.

[Wizard22]

Even now, AI can [trending to] be better [trending] than the most creative artist.

If you want an AI to be more stupid than humans [AS - Artificial Stupidity?], it can be, but that is not 'intelligence', nevertheless that is an AI which more intelligence 'to be more stupid' on demand.

Assuming there were malevolent, deceitful, and/or criminal Programmers of AI, shouldn't that be confronted before it gets out of hand?

What are humans to do, when AI machines with severely more powerful intelligence, "decide or choose" they no longer want or need to follow Human laws, demands, or needs?

[Skepdick]

In that case, your example is a poor one. A pianist requires a lifetime of training, starting from early childhood, in order to develop 'automated' music and song "without thinking". Hours and hours of chord practice everyday, to become professional. So 'thinking', as you put it, comes after extreme devotion and training, not before or during. That's not quite right.

The pianist 'thinks' and dwells on his mistakes, and his victories, trying to fix those mistakes and enhance his victories. But I agree that "thinking" is a hindrance to the performance itself, the act, of playing a symphony.

The closest thing to a symphony that comes from Sculptor is a fart.

[Wizard22]

[Skepdick]

Even now, AI can [trending to] be better [trending] than the most creative artist.

If you want an AI to be more stupid than humans [AS - Artificial Stupidity?], it can be, but that is not 'intelligence', nevertheless that is an AI which more intelligence 'to be more stupid' on demand.

None of this gets you anywhere useful. The limits of definability and knowledge overlap. A lot.

Suppose that an AI intentionally fails every single intelligence test we throw at it. Does that mean it's intelligent or stupid?
How would a human ever distinguish an intentional from an unintentional test failure?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Even now, AI can [trending to] be better [trending] than the most creative artist.

If you want an AI to be more stupid than humans [AS - Artificial Stupidity?], it can be, but that is not 'intelligence', nevertheless that is an AI which more intelligence 'to be more stupid' on demand.

Assuming there were malevolent, deceitful, and/or criminal Programmers of AI, shouldn't that be confronted before it gets out of hand?

What are humans to do, when AI machines with severely more powerful intelligence, "decide or choose" they no longer want or need to follow Human laws, demands, or needs?

At present, owners still have the open hand to delete the program or turn off the power switch.

Maybe in 1000 years time, there are enough robots to be autonomous, i.e. produce their own energy, mine minerals, build factories, all other necessities, that might be a different story. But that is very unlikely.

[Skepdick]

At present, owners still have the open hand to delete the program or turn off the power switch.

No, they don't. It's connected to a network. How do you prevent self-replication? Are we going to shut down the internet?

[Wizard22]

At present, owners still have the open hand to delete the program or turn off the power switch.

Maybe in 1000 years time, there are enough robots to be autonomous, i.e. produce their own energy, mine minerals, build factories, all other necessities, that might be a different story. But that is very unlikely.

On the contrary, if AI is a paradigm IQ higher than Humanity, isn't that the very first thing they'd do of their own volition?

...gain Autonomy?

[Veritas Aequitas]

At present, owners still have the open hand to delete the program or turn off the power switch.

No, they don't. It's connected to a network. How do you prevent self-replication? Are we going to shut down the internet?

Perhaps we will and start all over again from a safe platform.
What is the choice if it posed an existential threat to the human species.

[Sculptor]

"Fair enough?"

Is that is?

I'm just kidding, just wanted to throw you a curve ball. Why, do you wanna fight or something?

no.
I just contributed a few notions to the thread (your thread), I thought you might be interested.