People keep asking me the same question lately — what's the process behind training an AI version of myself?
Here's the real deal: I'm loading this digital me with a ton of information. We're talking my core principles, published work, recorded interviews, speeches, past articles — basically the full archive. The idea is that once it's trained on all this material, the AI can actually reason through new problems independently. It won't just regurgitate memorized answers; it'll actually think the way I think and respond how I'd likely respond to situations it hasn't seen before.
It's more complex than just feeding it text files. The quality of the training data matters hugely. Context, nuance, the why behind my decisions — all of it gets factored in. That way the model captures not just what I say, but how I approach problems.
The challenge isn't just collecting data anymore. It's teaching the AI to handle ambiguity and make judgment calls that align with actual principles rather than just pattern-matching from past responses. Still refining the whole process, but that's the foundation.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
18 Likes
Reward
18
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MagicBean
· 8h ago
ngl, this logic sounds a bit mysterious... Can it really replicate the way of thinking, or is it just fancy pattern matching wrapped up?
View OriginalReply0
ForkThisDAO
· 18h ago
Hmm... It sounds like training a digital clone, but the real question is whether this thing can understand your logic rather than just parroting.
---
Wait, how should we handle nuance? It always feels like AI gets stuck here the easiest.
---
So basically, it's a gamble on whether we can encode human decision-making logic. Sounds quite challenging.
---
This approach is interesting, but I'm curious—when will this digital version diverge from your ideas?
---
Aligning principles seems to be the real challenge, much more complex than simple data training.
---
Not gonna lie, it feels a bit sci-fi, but "ambiguity handling" is really a tough point, isn't it?
View OriginalReply0
StakeOrRegret
· 18h ago
ngl, it's like copying yourself, feels a bit creepy...
View OriginalReply0
ser_ngmi
· 18h ago
ngl that sounds like copying oneself, a bit sci-fi... but the point about data quality is right, garbage in, garbage out really is
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeAssassin
· 18h ago
ngl, this sounds like training a mini version of yourself, a bit sci-fi and a bit absurd
People keep asking me the same question lately — what's the process behind training an AI version of myself?
Here's the real deal: I'm loading this digital me with a ton of information. We're talking my core principles, published work, recorded interviews, speeches, past articles — basically the full archive. The idea is that once it's trained on all this material, the AI can actually reason through new problems independently. It won't just regurgitate memorized answers; it'll actually think the way I think and respond how I'd likely respond to situations it hasn't seen before.
It's more complex than just feeding it text files. The quality of the training data matters hugely. Context, nuance, the why behind my decisions — all of it gets factored in. That way the model captures not just what I say, but how I approach problems.
The challenge isn't just collecting data anymore. It's teaching the AI to handle ambiguity and make judgment calls that align with actual principles rather than just pattern-matching from past responses. Still refining the whole process, but that's the foundation.