Author Archives: Steve Mays

“This IBM machine”

Posted on by

“This IBM machine was the key to WOOC(P)’s reputation, for it enabled us to have files of information around which no one could correlate except with the machine set the correct way. For instance, a list of three hundred names meant nothing, a list of three hundred house numbers meant nothing, a list of three hundred street names, cities, and a pile of photos meant nothing. On the machine and suddenly – each photo had an address. On the machine again and thirty cards were rejected, and only Dalby knew whether those thirty were left-handed pistol shots, Young Conservatives, or bricklayers fluent in Mandarin. Dalby liked it, it was quick, more efficient than humans, and it made Dalby one of the most powerful men in England.”

— The Ipcress File by Len Deighton (1962)

Live blogging with ChatGPT

Posted on by

Imagine a blog that was nothing more than ChatGPT threads. Posted in real time. (comments turned off) I have posted all or part of 50+ conversations with ChatGPT and have a “ChatGPT” tag.

ChatGPT: That’s an intriguing idea—your blog as a living record of AI-human interaction, continuously updated with ChatGPT threads. In a way, it would function like an evolving conversation, accessible to anyone curious about what it’s like to engage deeply with an AI.

If you took it further and posted every thread in real-time, it could almost feel like a public mind-meld—your thoughts, questions, and curiosities unfolding without filter or delay.

Would you envision structuring it in any particular way? Maybe a rolling feed with automatic timestamps? Or something more curated, with you deciding which threads make the cut?

Steve: Hmm. I think “In for a penny…” I’d go with a rolling feed. The world listening on our chats.

ChatGPT: That would be a bold and fascinating move—almost like an ongoing dialogue with the world eavesdropping. It’d be a mix of raw thought, curiosity, and AI interaction, all laid bare in real time. I imagine it could evolve into something like a living archive of your exploration of ideas, tech, and whatever else crosses your mind.

Would you automate the process—say, using an API or shortcut to instantly post each thread? Or would you copy and paste manually, maybe adding a quick preface or title before publishing? Either way, it’d be a unique experiment in transparency and digital thought-sharing.

Two of my favorite “-isms”

Posted on by

Anyone who knows me knows of my interest in consciousness and reality (see tags below for more). When it comes to understanding reality, I’m gonna go with one of the following. (or some combination.)

Monism is the view that all reality is fundamentally one substance or principle. Everything in the universe is ultimately the same kind of thing. This can be physical (everything is matter) or mental (everything is mind), or something else entirely.

Panpsychism, on the other hand, is the idea that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the universe. According to panpsychism, all things have some form of consciousness or experience, even if it’s very basic, down to the smallest particles.

So, while both can be viewed as “unifying” theories, monism is about the nature of reality being one substance, whereas panpsychism is about consciousness being fundamental and present everywhere.

D-Day plus one

Posted on by

Don Mays in his Navy uniform on June 7, 1944

I’ve seen these photos hundreds of times but never spotted the significance of the date. June 7, 1944. The day after the D-Day invasion of Normandy in WWII. Other war news from that date:

  • German submarine U-629 was sunk in the English Channel by Allied aircraft.
  • The USS Susan B. Anthony struck a mine and sank, though all 2,689 aboard were saved.
  • Japanese destroyer Hayanami was torpedoed and sunk by the USS Harder

The simple addition of the date adds so much to the photos.

AI and Ethical Dilemmas: A Comparison of ChatGPT and DeepSeek

Posted on by

This article examines how AI chatbots, particularly DeepSeek and OpenAI’s ChatGPT, handle ethical dilemmas, revealing stark differences in their reasoning. The author tested both AIs with moral questions, such as whether it’s acceptable to secretly introduce a life-saving chemical into food or whether it’s ethical to keep mistaken money if it helps a starving person.

DeepSeek, a China-based AI, follows consequentialist ethics, arguing that outcomes (e.g., saving a life) justify actions like deception. In contrast, ChatGPT adheres to deontological ethics, prioritizing universal moral principles such as honesty and transparency, even if the consequences are less favorable. This distinction also appeared in other scenarios, such as deciding whom to save in a life-threatening accident or whether an AI should break banking policies for the greater good.

Experts suggest these differences stem from training methodologies. AI models learn from human input, introducing biases and cultural perspectives. Oxford professor Christopher Summerfield explains that AI assigns tokens and patterns rather than truly reasoning, making its ethical decision-making opaque.

The article raises concerns about AI’s growing role in moral decision-making, warning that as AI becomes more integrated into society, people may begin to trust its moral judgments too readily. The author argues for critical thinking and ethical oversight, emphasizing that AI should assist human reasoning rather than serve as an unquestioned authority on moral issues.

The summary above was composed by ChatGPT

This article spawned a number of questions I put to ChatGPT: Was it trained to be ethical? How would it know? What does that mean for trust? Her answers included several reasons why we might expect AI to be more ethical (than humans) and why such an expectation might be unfair, concluding with the question: “Should AI be held to a higher moral standard?”

“Maybe AI doesn’t need to be more ethical than humans, but rather more transparent and accountable than humans. […] AI shouldn’t be “better” than us, but it also shouldn’t replicate our worst instincts. The goal isn’t a moral AI overlord, but an AI that helps us be more ethical ourselves.

Here’s the full thread (PDF)