It’s VIJEV here. In this podcast, I experiment with a mobile podcast style where I “walk and talk” outdoors at the beautiful Golden Harvest Park with my long-time friend Mongezi Mtati who is a content creator himself and also hosts his own amazing podcast called The Lead Creative. I recorded it with the Rode Wireless Go II microphones connected to a Zoom recorder. I realized it was picking up a buzzing sound due to a limiter setting on the receiver so do bear with us on that. We live and learn.

This podcast is two-fold. We talk about the amazing experiences one can have on a personal level and utilizing the power of communication to better understand our own reality. There are places everywhere in South Africa that Mongezi tells me with great enthusiasm and sometimes I wonder why we don’t see or share this enough. We are often force-fed negative information and news because the assumption is bad news spreads faster and therefore makes more money for the news provider. Thus, we see a lot of bad news, and hateful content skewing the online algorithms out there that only reinforce our biases. We would be forgiven for thinking that there is only bad news out there. This goes for the news providers as well who also assume that in order to monetize news, bad news needs to be promoted. This is indeed a vicious cycle.

The challenge is thus to improve our worldview and seek out the positive that is often not told in mainstream media. This also applies to our individual realities, where we are ignorant of the echo chamber that simply magnifies the familiar ideas and sentiments we have about the world around us.

It is hard to expand our personal reality because it means confronting our own limitations and admitting the shortfalls that exist within our ideas and views of the world. When it's simpler to point the finger at others, we must also accept responsibility for our role in making life the way we want it.

The realisation is that if we accept that our shared reality shapes our personal reality, it is up to us to be aware of its constraints, seek out new experiences, meet people outside of our comfort zones, and have the courage to follow our instincts when they lead us to believe that something is wrong.

Follow your heart, create and share content that celebrates life, and expand your shared reality evermore.

This is VIJEV.

I spoke with my longtime friend Mina Demian, who, in his 40s, found his calling in the field of coding after experiencing a personal renaissance.

We dig deep and talk about finding your passion or, in Mina's case, rediscovering the profession of coding that he once did when he was much younger. People who code are typically in their 20s and work in startups. Product development is typically linked with recent college grads. Therefore, carrying this out now required a shift in perspective and the courage to follow your heart instead of what society expects of you.

Is this podcast about coding? Well, yes and no. It’s not all binary. We talk about what it means to work at something you enjoy doing well enough to be financially independent, have the resources to live responsibly, and have the support system required to follow your hobbies.

The methods we use matter and do it with pride, in the open, and without condemnation.

Not to mention, laugh along the way through the journey of understanding yourself, no matter how bad those jokes might be, laughing through all the failures you experienced that were valuable lessons in making you the person you needed to be. Life teaches us whether we like it or not and it is our responsibility to learn and change ourselves for the better.

It is our job to be responsible and seek change in our own lives and it’s none of our business to change anyone else.

Mina Demian is a professional coder and a passionate musician. You can find his work here:

The Shibanski:

Website

Instagram

Spotify

We are in 2022!

It’s a mixed masala as we discuss what to expect in the year. Well, mixed masala, because I watched Dune, a new movie based on the legendary Sci-Fi author, Frank Herbert, where a society fights over Spice, the universe’s most valuable resource and it’s the only time my mom agreed with any form of Sci-Fi plots.

We rock into the year with a mindset change. A change that adapts our thinking and behaviour to suit good living that nourishes the soul, not just our pockets.

If you have been hiding under a rock, you would know we are entering the new phase of tech buzzwordercution (no this doesn’t exist so don’t Google it) aka., The Metaverse. Techbros love punting buzzwords. It’s how they hype the world and get us to spend more money on concepts. It’s just like fashion. It’s a trend. Trends sell, so we’ve adapted around it. My mind is still on the blockchain but somehow we have more to deal with. Is it a fad or is it something we can be a part of?

And finally, who has watched Squid Game? A phenomenon that has taken the world by storm because it’s the era of Schadenfreude, more specifically - Schadenfreude entertainment. Now we’ve just made it scalable to everyone throughout the world with a click of a button. I can only imagine new forms of sporting experiences that combine Squid Game in the Metaverse. What a world. The possibilities are endless. Welcome to 2022.

It’s been a short while since we witnessed one of the worst cases of protesting and looting in our short democratic history of South Africa that took place in July of 2021. Our problems are only compounding with the gap between the rich and poor widening even more. We have a horrific statistic where our gap, based on the Gini coefficient, is the HIGHEST in the world.

We love to blame in South Africa. It has been nearly 30 years since we held our first democratic elections and all we have done is either blame apartheid or the incompetence of the new government. As a result, there’s no accountability and thus no one feels responsible for fixing the issues because it’s simply someone else’s fault.

We do an honest banter about the current problems and look at ways for all of us to collectively acknowledge that we indeed have a problem, willing to help and rebuild South Africa with accountability. This will require compromise from the have’s to help the have-nots. We need a system that fosters creativity and curiosity at all levels and most of all… Dream without permission or approval. The dreamers (the geeks, the engineers, the scientists, educators, and even the storytellers) are the ones who will put us back on the map. We just need to find them, nurture them, believe in them and the rest will fall into place.

Hey look! The universe is aligning itself to mock us.

Once upon a time, at a job interview many years ago, I was told I am not the “right fit” because I was not “desperate enough” for the job. Thank you for confirming that you prefer people to be in perpetual servitude instead of finding people who love what they do. That immediately revealed a system that wants you to have loans so you become indebted so you can stay at that job forced to overwork so you can pay off the loan. Why else is your credit score better when you SPEND more? Why is it they do not give loans to be people who have no previous debt? What a strange world. The system is designed to limit your choices. The only way to understand is to ask what choices do you really have? Right now? Can you really choose the life you want?

It has been over a year since the pandemic began and we just had our third wave. One of the central themes of discussions is how this is creating a reset scenario, often termed, The Great Reset, as we have discovered on the internet. The pandemic, however, did not reset anything but it did reveal to us that important aspects of our lives were not being prioritized, e.g. family, healthcare, or the future of education. Many of us privileged enough got to slow down, work from home and got to think about our current lives and ask, “What are we doing this for?”

“It’s all for progress!” the people would scream trying to maintain the invisible status quo and of course the very same ones that benefit from it. It is all a race with no finish line, so we keep running and we do not even stop to look around and perhaps take a breather to enjoy the view. The meaning of life has been skewed to fuel a never-ending appetite for greed. We are all tired of just being productivity robots. Even after the pandemic it only revealed our follies instead of solving them. The pandemic only accelerated what we were already doing. We are being told all of this is for the economy. Whose economy? The same system that will reject your business loan because of a technicality? The same system that will replace you within days if you’re too sick to work? The same system that has no face, built with the latest artificial intelligence, can recognize yours and automatically discriminate against you because you are of the wrong gender, race, age, or country? We are building a system that is progressively automating our existing problems like discrimination, inequality, our sense of identity but the most severe of all, it is regulating our ability to choose.

After the pandemic, we saw even more opportunism from charlatans who abused our trust and took advantage of our lack of understanding of a new viral outbreak. They sold us fear that spread farther and wider than the virus itself ever could, just to sell us more snake oil. Many people have profited illegally and it has only widened the gap between the rich and poor.

We are harming the earth (pollution and climate change).

We are harming those that we love (focused on the accumulation of money).

We are harming ourselves (work till you drop, who cares about your health?).

It is time to realign our thoughts and truly ask, what is the actual meaning of life? Why is it a race? What is the rush? It is time to re-evaluate what we have been doing all this time.

There is a silver lining in all this. It has made us aware of our world, our identity, our real needs, and goals that nourish the soul instead of bank accounts. For the first time, we are aware and the change is starting to accelerate. It was the disruption of the pandemic that forced me to let go and I discovered my artistic self. That being my love of geekery, science fiction, irreverent comedy, fantasy… but above all, my strength to tell stories of an outlandish, outrageous world, called Caldopia.

The real reset awaits - THE SELF RESET.

In this episode, we ask what the future of entertainment will be now that cinemas are losing money and most people aren't going there like they used to. Sure, the pandemic caused a major problem but this was inevitable. Going to the movies these days will cost you a kindey if you decide to buy the tickets and popcorn. It's become a lot more convenient, fun, and personalized when you can experience it at home. The technology is going in leaps and bounds that is enabling our enjoyment right in our homes. If it's not a big Christopher Nolan IMAX special there's really no point. From large TVs with surround sound we could go deeper into neural integration that will someday allow us to be the Avatar and live the movie that James Cameron showed us the first time. We debate if this possible and perhaps inevitable. The implications are huge but exciting for us, the consumer. My home-made popcorn is ready to pop for this future. Are you?

Our first podcast in 2021. Yes, it has been a while since being in lockdown. We have been somewhat underground realigning ourselves and here we are rising again from our digital nether regions. A newer look but the same zany content. During the lockdown, I took some drawing lessons and then one thing led to another. A few months later, here we are, drawings of Boris living his life in Caldopia. Yes, that’s the name of this parallel world. A fully alternative “digital” world that exists in another realm. This, of course, got me thinking! Another world on its own? Well with the advent of cryptocurrency, blockchain, and NTFs (Non-Fungible Token), whole new digital worlds can be created that people can take part in. I don’t mean just to play and passively “walk” around. No! This time, it’s about active participation where you can make a real living doing things you would do in the real world. Remember the game Second Life? Remember the movie “Ready Player One”? This time it could be very real and already feasible to run a “second life”, another you as a different avatar. You can get to choose who you want to be in this world. The real fun part is, everything, and I mean everything can be monetized because of NFTs. You can sell, buy, and trade anything digital. Again, not just texture clothing for your avatar but the digital history too.

Remember when Jack Dorsey’s first tweet was sold for $2.9 million. What might this be you ask? This is an example of buying a piece of internet history. We, as humans, always loved memorabilia, collecting cards, vintage cars, or even a piece of history (e.g. collecting a piece of grass surface at a stadium where your favourite sports player did the most amazing thing). You can now do this with the internet, like buying that first tweet ever tweeted. Perhaps the first version of Facebook that Mark Zuckerberg built while at Harvard. What about the first computer virus ever written? You could even buy a piece of the first digital damage ever created by a virus? In the future, these memories will be in museums. The possibilities are endless.

On our podcast, we discuss what NFTs are all about and what it means for all of us, maybe even for Boris?

Artwork by Longquenchen

Our trio are back and we discuss if emotions are even a thing once AI begin to operate with independence and, dare I say it, sentience? They become who we are and our actions are indeed their algorithms. Therefore we need to rectify ourselves in order to train AI to become what we want, an ally of human development and well being.

We debate what all this means and discuss if emotional intelligence will indeed become part of artificial sentience, and we may not even have a say.

Discussion

Deepu:  so if you use AI, for example, in policing, for example, right? So how do you then maybe with AI, you can have some sort of like a predetermination. Okay. The person, ABCD one, two, three, whatever it is, actions and therefore they are found guilty automatically guilty of a predefined sentence.

Jai:  I wouldn't put AI in charge of that though. That's not something that you want to hand over to a robot, because then the ethics come in.

Jai: who's a robot to judge a human on their conduct. Whether they being bad or good.

Deepu: Yes.

Vije: Hello,  gentlemen, guess what?

I just realized what you were saying. And I was like listening to the conversation for the last 30 seconds.

Jai: And you didn't notice that you were recording.

Vije: Let me go, right question as a record. Here's the thing. This is what it's all about. AI is already being used for that already in China. and it's been used in other countries that China has sold.

The technology to AI is already in charge of that stuff.

Deepu: Let's just make it one thing. It's not really AI. This is pre pretty AI. This is AI. Yeah, not really.

Vije: No. It's automation. it's automatically detecting the face automatically picking up checks and automatically creating a profile alert.

They get points deducted, and the points go lower because of what they said. what they did or how they look like they get, as the points get detected, they can't, take the bus. So the loan, rate is increased. It's immediately done automatically just like the black mirror stuff.

Deepu: okay. we do need to define separate, AI and automation.

Cause those are two different things. Artificial intelligence and automation. don't necessarily mean the same thing, but can be mutually exclusive.

Vije: Correct. But remember, as we discussed, our behavior is the algorithm that gets defined and trained in future AI. So if this is the practice that we operate on, the AI will be doing it for men in future.

Jai: Do you see the issue? The issue is you want to bring ethics into. A system that's already flawed. That's already unethical. So you starting from, that's you obviously, but the technology and the application of it is already starting from a flawed foundation. it became unethical.

So now you're going to try and bring it back instead of just starting from scratch and being base level ethical. does that make sense? In other words, instead of making it bad and then trying to make it good, just. I thought with it being good, but you've got your manager. You are already flawed in that sense because they're already on it.

Cool. Trying to create these AI. So if you going to bring an ethics team in the ethical thing to do is not to create AI until you sought after your human problem. That's the most ethical thing to do. If you're trying to add ethics into, if you're saying well, screw that we're going to make AI anyway. Then there's nothing ethical about it, then it's going to be flawed, like the people who are creating it.

And it's just going to perpetuate a kind of flawed system, as opposed to solving it.

Vije: That's why we create our own image. And that's what the philosophers on one side say is going to happen.

Jai: what I'm saying is it is happening. This is not a philosophy ethical question. it's happening. so the, we're debating it.

we don't really have a say on who goes and creates the AI and who doesn't. We

Vije: can, not in the way you might meet think of it, but yes, we do have a say. It's just that, what we decide is the actions that we put into the system to train it. The problem is we can't quantify it properly.

That's why it's meaningful.

Deepu: okay. Let's take a step back, right? Hold on. The thing is, let's test, as I said earlier, is that we've got a difference or do got to differentiate between automation and artificial intelligence. And if you really look at, AI is essentially a set of automation commands, right?

So we started off with something simple that can be automated or repetitive tasks that

Jai: can be automated.

Deepu: And then you make those, are they a machinery or a processor or some sort of computational software that can process, take a task and do some intervention. That's a repeatable action. And then keep automating certain input.

Given a certain output is then taking all of these multiple automated tasks. And delivering it in a multiple inputs, multiple outputs. It's

Jai: basically a really complicated if then statement

Deepu: and this data that you, those data that you feed it will then obviously make that decision making. More efficient or accurate because of different scenarios in it's putting in, it's getting the right output based on who you are, where you're from, or what's the actual scenario, et cetera.

Jai: So what

Vije: a loading tube is the philosophical part that I was referring to.

The one philosophy, the team that's sitting on one side is saying, it's going to be flawed anyway, because humans are flawed. So it's better to use the floor and train it to be better. Okay. On the other hand, people say what Jay was saying, make it good from the start. The question is, the only way you can do that is if you can quantify all the variables that make intelligence that's emotion, think a thought logic, what is it?

Emotional quotient, all that little things that humans do. If you can quantify it, you can build it from the start to be unplowed, so to speak. But other floors will say that's impossible. What we can do is make a bad person.

Deepu: I'm that person better?

Vije: Yep. Okay. So one AI development is rehabilitating human thought into pure logic.

Basically that's in star Trek, where you go, where humans are compared to Vulcan. Balkans are biological species, but they have trained themselves to be logical. Even though deep down, they are very violent, but through meditation they found peace for hundreds of years, right? So they became a logical cohesive species.

That's essentially that philosophy, other philosophy cling on violent species, but except them that way, because that's how they're born. But somehow. You could, somehow you can take that and say, what are the basics that make it violent? What are the indicators that say, this is a violent species. If you can quantify it and say, violence equals X and all of that and say, this person is violent by 2.3 out of whatever.

If I can quantify right, then you can develop it from the start.

Jai: So two

Deepu: very weird

Jai: examples because both of them are starting from a flawed premise of being violent. And I'm saying flawed premises in we're not a violent people by nature.

Vije: let me put it this way. The Vulcan chose a part because they wanted to be better.

They stay, they have a valid tendency. They used to have a lot of war. They chose a path to train themselves, which means. They rehabilitated themselves to become a logical species while the Klingon chose and accepted their patterns. Yes, this is who we truly are. This is us. We are going to become into, and through that, they can show the intelligence, both, basically the same in the sense they both build spaceships.

They both learn how to fly fast and light, but both have two completely separate pots. That's the whole point.

Jai: Yeah, but in terms of AI, I don't see where the point is because AI is a program. And I, because I would think as a programmer, what you're saying is it's going to have bugs in it. So we're just gonna keep putting patches.

And my thought as a program is that's fine, but it's are going to be more efficient and practice tickle for the, for a good program. To start from a base code that's as bug free as possible, instead of going, it's going to be flawed from the start. that's what

Vije: going to throw Spanish works.

One of the professors that I've really known professor Barnard from university of Pretoria, many years ago, he was head of AI and I asked him country's separate emotion and, make it logical and a peaceful AI. And he says, if you build it from the beginning, The theory is that if artificial intelligence finds sentience emotional growth and emotional, per se, self, understanding where you are self aware of your emotions will become a natural growth of the code that you can't prevent.

Deepu: That's

Jai: correct? Correct.

Deepu: The definition.

Jai: So the definition of intelligence, what do you define as emotion?

empathy,

Deepu: honestly. Yeah.

so that's the thing, right? So that's the question that discussion I was having with you Jay earlier, before reject came on was how do we define that? And this is, we can't just define it. Generally by one word by saying, just be good because that empathy right now, look at very, maybe terrible examples is a Donald Trump, any other human being

Jai: on this planet.

Like he thinks

Deepu: he's doing things in a good way, he's doing the right thing, but. Somebody else's judgment of it is no, it's completely it's fraud. You're being

Jai: biased. How about this? How about being good? Instead of saying, being good? How about saying, being loving?

Deepu: No. No. So the point I'm alluding to here is that before that AI becomes sinking, it's all about the data that it's fit right now.

This data that it's going to use as its source material. To achieve that emotional state of understanding.

Jai: It's never going to be an emotional thing because this is the thing, Hey, I actually said here's a collection of if then statements emotional and they would play into that. It's just going to be a whole bunch.

Deepu: If you can quantify it. Yes,

Vije: that's fine.

Jai: If you, if

Vije: whatever, the, whatever you just mentioned, if you can separate the two, if you can clearly say,

Jai: so come into this at all. There's no need to quantify it. It's a connection then statements.

Vije: Okay, let me put it this way. If then statements are complex enough to give sentience within the instance statements in the thought logic process of making decisions, emotional structure will be implemented naturally.

Jai: why do you think emotional will come in?

Vije: Because this is not philosophical on the school. A, they say that 

Jai: happen. I forget what they say. Why do you think emotions would come in? Why do you agree with what they say?

Vije: Okay. Why I agree with that statement is because we don't know what's okay.

What portion of your brain makes you emotional? for example, what kind of piece of your brain exactly. Precisely. And I will switch off fully emotions and you will be pure logical. Can I do that better? That's what I meant. Which part of the brain, how do I do that?

Jai: Because emotions are not a brain thing, but that's what that's why I'm saying emotions.

Wouldn't come into. Okay, because you can't define emotions. There's no reason to say that emotions would come. It would define intelligence and artificial intelligence. The very fact that you say you don't know what emotions are means that no one can program it into a what we're going to call it an AI device.

Therefore, they will never be emotions in it, unless it gains awareness and created for itself. But that's not an Intel. That's not a sign of maybe self sentence, not necessarily artificial

Vije: brain.

Jai: We're just talking artificial intelligence.

Vije: the whole point is we want AI to move in that space.

If it's just AI in what you're saying, we'll get perfect. Then it's just a bunch of different statements. It's just a functional robot. But then the argument is that's not really AI. It's just Supreme. It is

Jai: not intelligence.

Vije: But that's what we are striving towards. We're going from AI to sentience, right?

Jai: So we're talking about AI.

Vije: Okay. If a, another species of robots can look like humans perfectly without any different patient. I'm talking about that, the fact that it will go towards that direction, it has to bridge somewhere. it wouldn't just stop. They would start evolving.

Jai: It wouldn't stop, but it wouldn't stop there either.

It will continue. So what's the

Vije: purpose of today, but what's going to happen, but you carry on that way. You will go from automation to AI to see this is where it comes into you. Are they really alive? they will say, but I have emotion. I have all this. That's the whole point. If we can functionally see and separate, but your emotions, it's just a logic chip and they will go back at us and say, but so is that with you?

You are

Jai: so this is a weird conversation because it's a whole bunch of theoretical hypotheses in a whole bunch of different directions. Cause we haven't defined AI at a particular point. Cause you're talking about sentience. We've been talking about automation, which has nothing to do with sentience.

Deepu: Both

Jai: depo. And I latched onto that if then statements, which is a whole bunch of intelligence, but not.

Vije: AI is engines. AI is engines,

Jai: then it's no longer AI, then it's just, I.

Vije: Now you've hit the nail on the head humans and all can accept that. You see they're going to still separate us from them. This is where discrimination and everything will kick in. This is what I mean.

Jai: Why are you like, okay, now we've got an, a totally different topic.

I know we'll be now going for BLM for it, for AI.

Vije: There is that if you can, if you separate and say, I'm sorry, you are not intelligent. What is stopping them from talking back to us and say, but why would you call it AI? We are, I, we are like, you.

Jai: Yes.

Vije: So why would it still be called AI? AI is

Jai: just be call it and then humanity will learn to incorporate this additional level of intelligence into the fray.

As we have been progressively incorporating more and more differences into our collective people.

Vije: Yes. So we are in agreement. So the question is, where does it separate? Where does it stop being AI and where does it become? I, and I'm saying we are not going to stop calling it. We going to keep calling it AI.

It's the difference is it's they, when they put their foot down and say, no, stop calling us AI, I hate the word a, we just, I, that's what I'm. Yeah.

Jai: And then we can go forward from there and say, sure.

Vije: I said, let's get to get it together, but that's the whole

Deepu: point. That future is very far off though, right?

Jai: Not even wondering why we're talking about

Vije: it's complex because school of that, if you're going to develop AI, that becomes, I, you can't just put the suit and say, sorry, you are not high, but your emotional . I don't think it's going to happen. I don't think you're going to develop in such a way,

Jai: talking about emotions as though you know something about it, but you also indicated that you don't know anything about emotion.

Vije: No. So it's going to happen anyway. We can't stop it.

Jai: Yeah. but by the fact that you're saying that, why would you even assume that an artificial intelligence would develop emotions? Just because humans have, it doesn't mean it has to exist in any other form of intelligence. Oh,

Vije: we don't, that's the thing we don't know.

We don't know. Okay.

Jai: But you never know, but you're assuming that it would, which is

Vije: delicious. It will be my belief is that will be,

Jai: yeah. Yeah. That's your belief is

Deepu: not I'm sorry. Oh

Vije: no. Okay. I'm not giving a scientific approach. It's a philosophical thought that if, when AI becomes, I want to call it emotion, we'll be there.

And we have no say in it.

Jai: But you're just giving a thought. You're not even saying why people think that that's, if the philosophical thought there's no, what's the reasoning behind it? What evidence? Like, why would you say something without evidence?

Vije: Because there is no evidence yet, because that's what,

Jai: why would you say then?

Because I believe no evidence. There's no need for it. Do you get that?

Vije: Okay. Put it this way. Biggest issue. Elon Musk. I said, I think a week ago, I'm very scared of the AI we're developing because it's turning, it's going to be a tyrant is actual words. It's going to become a tyrant and going to take over earth and decide the human future.

because he's scared of what AI is going to be come. that's going to be the psychopath that is going to relax. Hold on. So when this happens, he is very scared of this future, this Skynet basically. And what I'm saying is you are not scared that's what is going to happen. You are scared of us because of our.

System thought,

Jai: are you talking about, you're talking about

Vije: human beings our data, all the things we're doing is feeding into a training system. That's developing this. So it's not the AI. It's us. Our behavior is going to cause a psychopathic emotional tyrant. If we don't do anything about it ourselves, because whatever data we train into that system, even if you think emotion has been cut out, it's going to make choices like a human.

Yes

Jai: exactly because of the collection of if then statements created by humanity, which has so what's happening is humans are being emotional about their selection of dense statements, but AI. Has doesn't have those emotions. All they have is a, if this happens and a collection of 10 statements

but

Vije: what if that's emotional, the AI subconscious thought process? What if that is in fact emotion, that different statements? I, in

Jai: fact, it's the illusion of emotions. It's not actually

Vije: notion for me as well. it's solution for us. will,

Jai: what I'm saying is okay. Delightful listening to you get emotional about this because it's such a human thing too, to say I'm so emotional and get caught up in, these emotions that momentary that they think.

It's universal. emotions are momentary, but if humans are feeling it all the time, but they, when I say they momentary there's different emotions, moment to moment. which means when you're feeling, let's say loving, you're going to make a different choice to the same if statement and when you're feeling angry.

Different than statements, which then get fed into this AI, which gives the illusion of emotion, but not really because the human who programmed, it was triggered by a particular thing. They looked at the picture of their loved one. They were feeling loving and gave advanced statement from a loving space.

They were looking at a pure picture of their ex and got angry and gave a dense space. So that then. Statement is being saved with that particular emotion pinpointed, but the emotion was triggered at that moment. When the AI applies the dense statement, it's not triggering any new emotion. it's an old emotion that was on a human that then assigned it to that.

Then statement the AI itself won't have a. Emotional kind of reaction because unless the AI can be triggered by any event and actually have an expectation of events to feel a certain way. how do you get something to feel something then emotions point emotion, no side to be evolved in artificial intelligence.

That is something you wouldn't be able to program from a human perspective. if an AI, so what I'm stipulating is if AI does become emotional, that means that AI can make a decision on the fly, whether it's angry or loving or whatever, which means it becomes sentience. It no longer has it choice.

Whether it copies the emotion of its creators, they were tyrants or lovers, and then chooses it's its own emotional path. And that's. Then a sentient being, then it's no longer an artificial intelligence may have evolved from artificial intelligence, not sentient being that can make choices for itself and can presumably replicate itself.

but do you get what I'm saying is that the emotional aspect of nonsense AI would not exist because it's yeah. It's programmed by a human who cannot keep the same emotional space from one moment to the other, because humans keep getting triggered by what they. Controlling the emotion.

Deepu: I hear what you're saying though, but see, you can add, you can abstract that higher into a higher level of saying. Instead of just saying, if this situation and feel this kind of emotion, you can abstract that to a high level of saying, okay, this is a type of emotion. happiness is an index or feeling, quantifiably by.

Those kinds of feeling, and say for example, if they, the AI is a human, like a robot that their creator, if it sees that, one is coming to us as a first and feel the Sutton, emotion, right? So you can quantify it by certain input. Reactions by saving time with battery is low and it sees standard.

So yourself moving a robot and it sees a plot point, it

Jai: can get.

Deepu: Like visually, it can get happy and it can display a sign of happiness or can even like speed up the process of speed direct.

Jai: yeah. Which can all be programmed in, you can program emotional reactions so that the human seeing it would, but the AI itself is not feeling emotional.

Vije: To be clear quickly before you carry on. Are you saying because we simply replicate human emotions and when, if, then statement the emotion, the machine feels no longer real

Jai: well, it's not real because it's the machine itself is not initiating an emotion it's taking a record.

Vije: Assuming it doesn't work the same way in humans.

What if that's how our neurons are designed?

Deepu: So if you let's apply the same principle, It's to us, because if there is apparently a so-called creator for us, then we should never be able to feel the kind of empathy that our creators felt by that kind of inheritance because we've got our own kind of code.

Jai: So what I said was. For the eight, when we're talking AI in a non-sentient way, we could program. Emotional responses so that it looks like it's emotional, but it's really an event statement. However, if the AI does achieve sentience and figures out how to stimulate its own emotions, I think to come up with its emotions, then it's no longer AI. And then it has its own emotional kind of templates,

Deepu: Defined by the boundaries of its software. Also because there's only so much, or maybe by toggling, maybe not software, but hardware, at least

Jai: I'm saying is if it's ever able to. Realistically feel emotions. It's no longer bound by the software.

Now it's achieved a level of sanctions that transcends what we've programmed into it. Okay.

Vije: I'm with you, Jay. I think the argument is the line between AI and it's going to be blurred the line between AI and it's not going to be a switch, right? It's going to be this gradual thing that's going to happen.

You're not going to say aha. No, we don't. We won't know. When it does until we accept it, or they tell us, that's what I mean. It's going to be a blur between AI and I, if we can not quantify us then between AI and I cannot be quantified.

End.

We are getting honest about the startups industry with Sophy Mwale Onyango, founder and CEO of HR Startup, Emploi (https://emploi.co/). We talk about a private club with elites that is not always open to everyone. An industry that forced Sophy to play a game in a different, more conforming character in order to please them who often never saw her perspective in building businesses. A game with unequal players on an uneven platform where she had to accept that it's stacked up against her. It's time to get real and not play in the facade and simply get down to why you started in the first place, to build a business and run the company your customers expect, not what the investors expect.

To follow-on our discussion about Black Lives Matter, let's chat about the often hidden and very subtle issue of racism that Indians/South East Asians are a part of and complicit in the way it permeates in our society. It's hidden but just as dangerous, when we see what happens right in front of our eyes but yet we choose to remain silent. It's time to call it out, discuss why it's still treated as being irrelevant in our circles and why are we so conservative in speaking up about it?