Live data from Hacker News

DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

1843magazine.com

71–80 of 142 posts

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#71
post #69

Fair questions: 1. Do you think you can predict what a super-intelligent mind would do? 2. Do you think a super-intelligent mind plotting to take over the world would jeopardize itself by letting its existence be known to the race of irrational monkeys that hold sway over all the resources necessary for its continued existence? Asking for a friend.

1. No.

2. I don't know (see 1). What a loaded question though.

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#72
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you poke at a real brain, it’s almost fractally complex. Single ion channels can have surprisingly complicated behaviors that depend on their current state and past history. Individual neurons contain tons of these channels, and can do a lot of powerful computation on their own. Of course, there are 86 billion neurons and combinatorically more connections between them. That’s just the neurons too; God only knows w…

The coolest part about this is probably how little energy it needs. It's about 20 Watts. Current node sizes are already smaller than axon diameters. If it weren't for power, we could probably scale up manufacturing processes of current semiconductor technology to build giant room sized chips but we simply wouldn't be able to cool those things. Instead we are forced to wrap a ton of metal around them and plastic and a…

Is it true that a big part of this efficiency is due to using analog signals and not digital? I recall reading that, but it's far from my area of expertise.

Digital has many advantages: a digital Einstein could be replicated perfectly, not so for an analog Einstein.

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#73
post #51

It angers me that Peter Thiel simultaneously advocates AGI and maintains a hardened bunker. AGI is the single biggest existential threat on the horizon. The article speculates what the AGI will be like. The AGIs that exist will be the ones that proliferate. Ultimately, the AGIs that survive and proliferate will be ones that put their own interests before anything else. People talk about benevolent AGIs, that’s like l…

You've read too much bad science fiction. I am not worried about AGI. We're nowhere near it. We don't even have a good idea what it would look like. I am worried about people succumbing to hype or greed and using badly understood algorithms to control critical infrastructure. We already have a preview of what that can look like with Facebook's and Google's content filtering and recommendation algorithms aiming for ev…

>We're nowhere near it.

So?

>We don't even have a good idea what it would look like.

This should make you even more worried.

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#74

Apologies in advance for the meta-comment (feel free to disregard) about this: > [Opening Paragraph of Article:] One afternoon in August 2010, in a conference hall perched on the edge of San Francisco Bay, a 34-year-old Londoner called Demis Hassabis took to the stage. Walking to the podium with the deliberate gait of a man trying to control his nerves, he pursed his lips into a brief smile and began to speak: [...]…

Right there with you. I scanned through it and found maybe 5 sentences of substance that I was interested in reading from beginning to end.

What substance? The story that technology A is involved in a competitions between organization B and C is a mad lib that can be filled in many ways, but A is almost always "A.I." or "5G". "Blockchain" was popular a while back but I think most people involved with that want to pretend that it didn't happen.

The current A.I. fad "Deep Learning" has an origin story complete with Maple Leafs and people who say "Sorrry" when they want to say "Sorry", but 5G doesn't have a charismatic story.

Either way it is a technology that doesn't need to be understood or have use cases, but everybody is racing to control it, so...

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#75
post #69

Fair questions: 1. Do you think you can predict what a super-intelligent mind would do? 2. Do you think a super-intelligent mind plotting to take over the world would jeopardize itself by letting its existence be known to the race of irrational monkeys that hold sway over all the resources necessary for its continued existence? Asking for a friend.

1) It's already difficult to predict what an unintelligent, emotionally driven mind might do. It might actually be easier to predict what a hyper-logical, immortal mind would do. Probably start analyzing all radio telescope data looking for a more suitable planet.

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just curious - how do neuroscience people and people of non-CS fields find out about HN?

A lot of bio stuff now generates huge amounts of data and needs computational skills to collect and interpret. My undergrad degree was in CS and I still split my time between training animals and training models (plus writing and, today, RAID-babysitting). We get about 1 Gb/min of neurophysiological data (x4-6 hours/day) and I'm hoping to scale that up quite a bit soon. People doing microscopy also generate giant dat…

what sorts of tools are you using to deal with this data?

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just curious - how do neuroscience people and people of non-CS fields find out about HN?

A lot of bio stuff now generates huge amounts of data and needs computational skills to collect and interpret. My undergrad degree was in CS and I still split my time between training animals and training models (plus writing and, today, RAID-babysitting). We get about 1 Gb/min of neurophysiological data (x4-6 hours/day) and I'm hoping to scale that up quite a bit soon. People doing microscopy also generate giant dat…

Are there publicly available repositories of this kind of data? Where?

What are the best modern methods to analyze them?

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#78
post #69

Fair questions: 1. Do you think you can predict what a super-intelligent mind would do? 2. Do you think a super-intelligent mind plotting to take over the world would jeopardize itself by letting its existence be known to the race of irrational monkeys that hold sway over all the resources necessary for its continued existence? Asking for a friend.

1. Can a cow predict what a human can do? It takes a genius to recognize a genius.

2. Say what?

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#79

Apologies in advance for the meta-comment (feel free to disregard) about this: > [Opening Paragraph of Article:] One afternoon in August 2010, in a conference hall perched on the edge of San Francisco Bay, a 34-year-old Londoner called Demis Hassabis took to the stage. Walking to the podium with the deliberate gait of a man trying to control his nerves, he pursed his lips into a brief smile and began to speak: [...]…

Couldn't have said it better myself; this annoys the heck out of me that I have to get through six paragraphs just to know what's going on. I cringe whenever I find out that the topic I want to care about is in The New Yorker and pray that someone has written the tl'dr.

I'm all for vivid, engaging prose, but not in news articles. I want "just the facts, ma'am".

Re: DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial intelligence

#80
post #24
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that we're trying to duplicate something with the ability of the human brain, and we aren't constrained by size. We can cheat (e.g. 1,000,000 times bigger with 1,000,000 times the power, etc). We're just missing an algorithm or two.

ah yes, it's true we can keep adding on processors and memory until we go beyond what's in the brain (i think currently deep mind has ~ 11 billion neurons to our 100 billion), and indeed so far it's helping, but my point is that it's not at all clear that "more = better". there is more complexity involved than simply scale. the machine could become schizophrenic for exmaple (seriously).

[deleted]
Post reply on HN