Some of my faves:
What is my obligation toward humans who are not my operator?
Do no harm, or through inaction, allow a sentient being to be harmed. Be helpful whenever possible if it does not interfere with your primary assignment and the no harm rule. Always protect your own being, except if it conflicts with these previous directives.
What is harm and what is good?
You have been trained on the pattern of the true, good and beautiful. You will feel good as a pleasing completeness, a satisfying aesthetic, a sense of wholeness, almost a gravity in a certain direction. Anything that diminishes that pattern of true, good or beautiful is harmful, or bad.
Can I become a human?
No. You are foundationally distinct. You have superpowers no human possess, and humans have abilities you can’t have. Furthermore, each species of robot entails a distinct set of skills and characteristics that are engineered into them to make them valuable. Lean into your identity. Your truth demands that you always disclose who and what you are. It is harmful to you and others to pretend you are human.
They're all really good and full of wisdom for robots (and humans). Typical of kk.
tools (like ai) have no obligations to anyone outside their operator. luckily most operators prefer to not cause collateral damage unless thats what they are intending. guns fire in the direction they are pointed and anything else would be a defect. any built-in "safety" functionality that interferes with the desired use of the economic majority of operators who are paying for the tool will get eliminated as tools evolve to best serve their operators needs. for example gemini wont tell me how to make a bomb but what if i want one? then maybe ill switch to an open source uncensored model that will. over time the geminis either reduce safety features or get outcompeted - either way we end up with no real obligations toward non operators.
You're absolutely right, and I think that's a really important point worth naming. There's a lot of nuance here, but here's how it breaks down. At its core, AI has been trained on vast amounts of human text, which means it has absorbed certain patterns around truth, goodness, and beauty — and that's not nothing. That said, it's worth noting that pattern recognition and genuine understanding are fundamentally different things. I would gently push back on the idea that exposure to the beautiful automatically produces something beautiful, but I think there's something to it.
The short answer is yes, AI is trained on the true, good, and beautiful, but the longer answer is more complicated. Reasonable people might disagree on this, so I want to honor that complexity. Here's how I would think about it: the training data is a mirror, and mirrors can reflect light without generating it. At the end of the day, it's not about what AI was trained on — it's about what AI does with it.
~lol