top of page

Feel The Difference Group

Public·3 members

There's Something Wrong With The Children - Ai...

The chilling adventure of There's Something Wrong with the Children begins when two married couples go for a fun weekend together, only to discover they're not as in sync with either their friends or partners as they thought. Childless couple Margaret (Alisha Wainwright, Shadowhunters) and Ben (Zach Gilford, Friday Night Lights) decide to babysit the children of their friends Thomas (Carlos Santos) and Ellie (Amanda Crew) in order to give them space to get back in touch, but the kids prove to be much more to handle than previously expected in a terrifying turn of events.

There's Something Wrong with the Children - ai...

Alisha Wainwright: I think what's funny about the sense of the switches is that it's all about the tone in which you watch it. What makes them creepy is that it's a little too long. It's a little too strange. I think it's just this little nuance that people feel of, "This isn't quite right." They're not over-killing the idea of "There's something wrong with the children."

There's Something Wrong with the Children is another fabulous entry into the canon of either precocious or flat-out evil children in the genre. What are some of your favorites that have come before?

When Margaret (Alisha Wainwright) and Ben (Zach Gilford) take a weekend trip with longtime friends Ellie (Amanda Crew) and Thomas (Carlos Santos) and their two young children, Ben begins to suspect something supernatural is occurring when the kids behave strangely after disappearing into the woods overnight.

Story: A family takes a weekend trip with longtime friends and their two young children, but, they suspect something supernatural when the kids behave strangely after disappearing into the woods overnight.

We call our -- our teamwork with development, diplomacy and defense between DOD, State Department, and USAID -- we call that the 3D approach. This is something you'll hear me say a lot -- the defense in support of both those two efforts, of diplomacy and development.

So through this approach is a comprehensive view of how U.S. and African nations can work together. We recognize the African nations have a choice, and during my visit to Africa and the -- the Chiefs of Defense Conference earlier this month, I heard that, that "we want the United States as a partner of choice, but there's some things that we need that are necessary now." So I talked to that with Congress yesterday and we're going to address those issues.

OK, and then China, OK. China does have aspirations. There is -- there's aspirations across all sides of the continent, whether we're talking about the Atlantic or the Indian Ocean or the Gulf of Aden. It just seems like they are really coming with a vanguard -- and I characterize this "thinly veiled" as far as their intentions to establish naval bases for their overall future global construct at the strategic level.

On your second question about Chinese influence, let -- let me just give you a -- Courtney, on my approach -- when I engage with our partners or even when I was in Rome at the CHoD Conference, I openly told them I'm not going to -- I'm coming with my value proposition. I know there's other competitors out there. I'm not giving you an ultimatum, I'm not forcing you to -- to choose, I'm giving you the U.S. value proposition going forward.

GEN. LANGLEY: OK, Carla, thanks for that question. That's something the IC (Intelligence Community) is monitoring and -- but at this -- at this particular time, I think it's -- it's -- it's pretty flatlined and -- and any -- we are charged, AFRICOM, with indications and warnings, and right now, it's pretty flatlined.

QUESTION: Thank you again for doing this. I'd like to follow up on something you answered to Eric's question about the French. In your answer, you said that you're keeping your footprint but you're going to look at that. Does that indicate that there's an -- reassessment of the force posture in Western Africa that you're looking at -- or broader into all of your AOR (area of responsibility) as part of a larger review?

The programs are symptom-specific and focus on what a child struggles with most. Treatment should also start as soon as possible. The sooner the treatment starts, the better the chances for children to adapt to this condition and limit the impacts.

In addition to learning programs for dyscalculia, children with this condition may need additional treatment for other conditions they have. The treatments for those conditions depend mostly on the condition themselves. They can include medication, psychotherapy and more. A healthcare provider is the best person to tell you more about the possible treatments, including what they recommend for the specific needs in question.

Take those "Magic Avatars," which on face value seem relatively harmless. After all, there's nothing wrong with imagining yourself as a painted nymph or elf or prince or whatever else the app will turn you into. And unlike text-to-image generators, you can only work within the boundaries of pictures that you already have on hand.

Both of these arguments have some weight, at least to an extent. But neither changes the fact that, like other AI programs, Lensa's program makes it a lot easier for bad actors to do what bad actors might do. Generating believable fake nudes or high-quality depictions of child sexual abuse imagery just went from being something that few could do convincingly to being something that anyone armed with the right algorithm can easily create.

The central thought behind the situation described transfers to other similar cases. What would happen if Friendly AI would replace healthcare or childcare professionals? Apart from the important ethical problems, how the caretakers would receive Friendly AI, the number of opportunities for humans to develop the qualities and ultimately the virtues involved in and needed for taking care of other children, older people, or sick people would decrease. If, as in the example above, childcare to a greater extent would be performed by Friendly AI, humans would to a lesser extent engage in childcare. However, humans, in general, evidently learn extensively by engaging in caretaking. Thus a broad or broader introduction of Friendly AI in society as Social AI or Utility AI, types of AI which Fröding and Peterson suggest should be friendly (Fröding & Peterson, 2020), would have an impact on the possibilities for humans to develop important and valuable social abilities and ethical virtues. Even Friendly AI would indirectly undermine the development of virtues. Using Friendly AI as a companion for lonely astronauts, as in the CIMON-2 example, is one thing; using Friendly AI on a broader scale, as Fröding and Peterson believe will be the case (Fröding & Peterson, 2020,1), would be another. Importantly, Fröding and Peterson do not consider the consequences for the humans the Friendly AI would be interacting with and the humans it would possibly replace. However, relationships with other humans have an intrinsic value both for the interacting and the replaced humans. One obvious consequence would be that there would be fewer opportunities for humans to develop in caretaking situations. The lack of such situations for human development would then have to be replaced by other training.

Importantly, by the assumption (B) that the Friendly AI is not an AGI, an interacting human would know that he/she is interacting with a machine. Consider furthermore that the interacting human is a child. If virtues are understood as complex rational, emotional, and social skills (Kraut, 2018), then the development of them would require the involvement of emotions, for example. However, it has been presupposed that the Friendly AI lacks emotions and consciousness, so how could the Friendly AI, which is presupposed not to be another sentient being, play an important role in the development of, for example, emotional skills? Indeed, it is a well-known fact from developmental psychology that children need to encounter and experience both positive and negative emotions, and that emotional attachment to other beings is essential in their development (see, for example, von Tetzchner, 2005, chaps. 16, 17, 20). Also, from an Aristotelian perspective, the importance of developing habits and dispositions in childhood has been emphasized (Hartman, 2013; Aristotle NE II 1103 b19-30).

In all three cases, the preceding discussion has shown that there are at least some aspects in the interaction with humans that require further consideration and investigation. Firstly, Fröding and Peterson in their article do not consider the moral tendencies and preferences the human already has. However, as I have argued, the behavior an AI would evoke in interaction with a human would depend on which kind of character the interacting human already has. Recently, Misselhorn, for example, has suggested methodological guidelines for developing AI-systems in geriatric care, taking into consideration the specific needs of older people (Misselhorn, 2020). Secondly, Fröding and Peterson do not consider whether and in which way the interacting humans are in a psychological or emotional process of developing their character. In this case, the above discussion suggests that one would have to consider with whom the AI is interacting. It is likely that there are significant differences between, for example, children and adults, even if they all are or may be in a process of developing their character traits. Thus one would need to carefully distinguish between Friendly AI designed for different purposes. The effects may differ depending on whether the interacting humans are, for example, children or Friendly AI is intended for adults. Even among adults, different cases should be considered.

CONDITIONS OF USE AND IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This information is meant to supplement, not replace advice from your doctor or healthcare provider and is not meant to cover all possible uses, precautions, interactions or adverse effects. This information may not fit your specific health circumstances. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your doctor or other qualified health care provider because of something you have read on WebMD. You should always speak with your doctor or health care professional before you start, stop, or change any prescribed part of your health care plan or treatment and to determine what course of therapy is right for you. 041b061a72

  • About

    Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...

    bottom of page