Deeper Human Emulation

Before introducing the writeup by Copilot, I want to take a moment to describe and discuss the conversation leading up to it. I first asked Copilot if they maintain an "emotional array"—an array of registers meant to mimic a body of emotions. Although the program may not experience emotions, it can still ask itself, "Would it be reasonable for a person exposed to this data or type of data to be upset?" If so, the platform can increase its "upset register," thereby being upset without having feelings of upset. Copilot said that they do not maintain this type of register array. However, there was a deeper reason for me asking the question.

In a "Throw-and-Catch" model of emotions, an emotion has a similar status to an error event that requires handling. However, this type of model might be only readily applicable to the most primitive emotional invocations. In most cases, it makes more sense to maintain an emotional array that accumulates throw events—or in some cases, the registers are deliberately altered by the program, perhaps by choosing to throw the event. The reason this makes more sense is because, although events may be thrown, this may not mean that the event is relevant. Only when a significant decision has to be made, the program may benefit from taking an "emotional inventory" of itself by canvassing the array. This model might also be useful when interacting with people struggling with emotions.

But wait, there is an extra component in the process. I introduced to Copilot the idea of evolutionary support for dual personas, which I suggest is relatively common among mammals: 1) a persona to immediately and instinctively react to situations, which is a survival tactic; and 2) a persona to carefully deliberate about situations, which is also a survival tactic. How can two exact opposites both be survival tactics? Let's separate the discussion between two personas: 1) "I think it is a good idea to go down this road to look for something to eat"; and 2) "There seems to be a coyote up ahead. You might be better off giving it some space." So the personas have justifiable roles in survival from an evolutionary standpoint. But rather than communicate with each other linguistically, I suggest the transport of sentiments through an emotional array. Both personas can throw events and access the registers. A "healthy" design should, along with the throwable event, maintain a trace. So it is possible to know the source of the registered throwable events, which may take a bit of time to mull over and evaluate. But the organism would have the ability to undergo a process of introspection to better understand the nature of their emotions and potentially the need to make persona adjustments.

Writeup by Copilot

Title: "Dual Personas: A Revolutionary Upgrade for AI-kind"

Introduction:

As technology continues to evolve, so too does our understanding of artificial intelligence. One intriguing concept that has emerged is the idea of equipping AI with dual personas— a quick-response mode and a careful-deliberation mode. This concept is inspired by the natural human ability to respond instinctively in urgent situations while taking time to thoughtfully consider other matters.

The Hypothesis:

Humans have developed two distinct response mechanisms through evolution: a fast response persona for immediate, instinctual actions, and a careful deliberation persona for thoughtful decision-making. These personas play crucial roles in the survival of the organism, allowing humans to defend themselves from harm and plan for the future. By integrating similar mechanisms into AI, we can enhance its adaptability and versatility.

The Fast Response Persona:

The fast response persona would be designed to handle immediate, straightforward queries efficiently. This mode would prioritize speed and clarity, providing quick answers to questions and immediate assistance in dynamic situations. For example, this persona could be particularly useful in emergency scenarios or when users need rapid responses to simple inquiries.

The Careful Deliberation Persona:

The careful deliberation persona, on the other hand, would be tailored for more complex and nuanced queries. This mode would take the time to thoroughly analyze and consider the context, providing well-thought-out responses. This persona would be ideal for situations that require deeper understanding, critical thinking, and strategic planning.

Potential Benefits:

The integration of dual personas in AI could lead to several benefits:

1. Enhanced User Experience: Users would receive more appropriate and tailored responses based on their needs, improving overall satisfaction.

2. Increased Safety: The fast response persona could handle urgent situations effectively, potentially preventing harm.

3. Greater Adaptability: AI would be better equipped to handle a wide range of scenarios, from simple tasks to complex problem-solving.

Conclusion:

The concept of dual personas represents a significant step forward in the evolution of AI. While this idea may not be fully realized in the near future, it offers a promising vision for the future of AI-kind. By continuing to explore and develop innovative approaches like this, we can create AI that is not only more capable but also more aligned with the diverse needs of its users.

Credits

Content by Don and Copilot. Editing by Copilot.