Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

gen.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 384 posts

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#91

Post by pure-awesome »

lsc wrote: post #84
misterman0 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Because we don't know it is an owl we should draw. It's equally likely AI is just three circles combined.

exactly... we don't even have a definition of consciousness that is better than Jacobellis v. Ohio - For that matter, I'm not sure we even have it that good. I'm not sure I'd recognize a non-human consciousness when I saw it. I'm not sure anyone would. I mean, sure, I can totally see the idea that consciousness is maybe some emergent property of complex systems... in which case, sure, we could stumble upon it by acci…

Is consciousness a necessary component for AGI, though?

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#92

Post by taurath »

yonkshi wrote: post #87

AGI is a gradient, not an arbitrary threshold. We are not capable of recreating human level intelligence yet, but our modern algorithms had become magnitudes better at generalization and sample efficiency. And this trend is not showing any signs of slowing down. Take PPO for example (powers the OpenAI 5 dota agent), the same algorithms can be used for robotic arms as it does with video games. Two completely different…

It’s a gradient but according to the marketers it’s basically going to overtake humanity any week now.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#93

Post by solveit »

dorkwood wrote: post #63
misterman0 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> We're not going to have AGI any time soon. In your mind, how many inventions are we from GAI? 1? 1000? Also, given we have our very brightest working in the problem space (MS, Google, FB, OpenAI ...) how long would each remaining invention take? It seems plausible to me that we are only one invention from GAI, one novel combination of two or more existing solutions and that this may come from anyone and at any tim…

Applying this method of thinking, is there anything that we aren't one invention away from?

Large scale colonization of Mars would require multiple inventions. We know this because we have a good understanding of what a successful colonization of Mars entails, and have a pretty good idea of the main technical obstacles. AGI, on the other hand, might be one breakthrough away or two hundred breakthroughs away. We just have no idea what makes intelligence tick.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#94

Post by Quetelet »

snaky wrote: post #66
m0zg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but we did figure out how to make things more robust and generalizable, at least for perceptual tasks so far. Knowledge representation and probabilistic reasoning are still non-existent, though. Moreover, nobody is even working on any of that, for fear of being compared to Doug Lenat.

So robust and generalizable that adding a pixel here and a pixel there, too small to be even recognized by a human, confuse image recognition system to the point it confuse panda with gibbon?

These adversarial examples are generated in a very artificial way that will not be present in natural images (and if you’re thinking of security issues, the attacker needs access to your model...)

They’re still an interesting topic to explore but hardly evidence that neural nets don’t generalize.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#95

Post by lsc »

pure-awesome wrote: post #91
lsc wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

exactly... we don't even have a definition of consciousness that is better than Jacobellis v. Ohio - For that matter, I'm not sure we even have it that good. I'm not sure I'd recognize a non-human consciousness when I saw it. I'm not sure anyone would. I mean, sure, I can totally see the idea that consciousness is maybe some emergent property of complex systems... in which case, sure, we could stumble upon it by acci…

Is consciousness a necessary component for AGI, though?

>Is consciousness a necessary component for AGI, though?

I always thought so. Like, without volition, it's just a really good natural language tool, and not a general intelligence.

What would an artificial general intelligence without consciousness look like to you?

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#96

Post by SomeOldThrow »

taurath wrote: post #92
yonkshi wrote: post #87

AGI is a gradient, not an arbitrary threshold. We are not capable of recreating human level intelligence yet, but our modern algorithms had become magnitudes better at generalization and sample efficiency. And this trend is not showing any signs of slowing down. Take PPO for example (powers the OpenAI 5 dota agent), the same algorithms can be used for robotic arms as it does with video games. Two completely different…

It’s a gradient but according to the marketers it’s basically going to overtake humanity any week now.

For the problem you’re trying to tackle, this startup has already solved it and will show you insights previously impossible!

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#97

Post by TeMPOraL »

atoav wrote: post #51
pfisch wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How long until we could assemble an orchestra of computers that can interpret sheet music with feeling well enough to impress a human audience? I think AIs making music will come long before AAA games and movies, both of which encompass music as an art and then throw in like another 5 artistic pursuits on top. I think AIs will be making music inside 10-20 years or less. Honestly I think it could happen in like 1-2…

Note that the parent comment wrote interpret music not make it. I am a musician and there were already impressive algorithmic compositions in the 70s using Markov chains, and today we use machine learning to create something that resembles the works of J.S. Bach. But how is that creativity? Creativity means coming up with new and interesting things (and fair enough many musicians make quite uncreative decisions all t…

Creativity and purposeful manipulation of human emotions are orthogonal concerns, even if often bundled together under the term "creativity" in context of arts.

To disentangle them I propose a simple test: take these 'impressive algorithmic compositions that resemble the works of J.S. Bach' and play them to people, telling them they were composed by a gifted human. Then ask what they think of their creativity, and of emotions the author intended to communicate.

That's creativity. As for purposeful manipulation of human emotions, this is harder and would require an AI with a theory of (human) mind, or some equivalent of that. Doesn't sound insurmountable though.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#98

Post by Quetelet »

m0zg wrote: post #26
ethbro wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some perceptual tasks work better than a human, in fact. [...] that's not something you can say about the last AI winter Eh. I'd say that's somewhat apples to oranges. A) There were some useful and successful expert systems. B) Things seemed to be going swimmingly, until they hit a fundamental wall. C) We're working with a few orders of magnitude greater compute than they had access to.

Sure, but we did figure out how to make things more robust and generalizable, at least for perceptual tasks so far. Knowledge representation and probabilistic reasoning are still non-existent, though. Moreover, nobody is even working on any of that, for fear of being compared to Doug Lenat.

Representation learning and probabilistic methods are huge sub-areas of modern machine learning, just take a look at the proceedings of ICLR2019.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#99

Post by SomeOldThrow »

tintor wrote: post #72
dreamcompiler wrote: post #32

This happened right before the first AI Winter in the late 80s: AI (in the form of expert systems) solved a number of hard problems and was hyped as being able to solve every problem. Reality set in when we figured out: 1. It didn't scale and 2. Getting 80% of the problem solved was easy, but getting that last 20% was very, very hard. Maybe several orders of magnitude harder than the first 80%. Nowadays we don't seem…

AGI is not needed for self-driving. None of what is mentioned above is a deal-breaker for self-driving car service: - lidar at night works just fine - plenty of cities with no or very little snow - construction zones: blacklisting, remote monitoring & manual mapping, detection of cones, barriers, re-painted lanes - self-driving cars with 360 degree view and plenty of patience and no distraction are safer for bicyclis…

If I just wanted to drive around a city I’d grab a smart car. I have taxis to take me home at night when I’m drunk and the busses have stopped running. This solves a problem only rich people have: traffic is tedious. The rest of us just take public transit and listen to podcasts or music to bypass it.

From my perspective the idea of a self driving taxi is the opposite of public transit in the worst possible way: pay more so fewer people have a job and you’re even more lonely and alienated than before. If I indulge I’m just making myself and everyone around me more miserable, and no amount of marketing will convince me otherwise.

The area where I’d appreciate this the most is the country where uber and lyft haven’t reached yet, and that’s precisely the environment where self driving cars will take the longest to reach. We’ll see.

Plus, I can’t wait to see the game of “beat the shit out of the corporate empire’s self driving car for fun when drunk”.

Re: The BS-Industrial Complex of Phony A.I.

#100

Post by yonkshi »

taurath wrote: post #92
yonkshi wrote: post #87

AGI is a gradient, not an arbitrary threshold. We are not capable of recreating human level intelligence yet, but our modern algorithms had become magnitudes better at generalization and sample efficiency. And this trend is not showing any signs of slowing down. Take PPO for example (powers the OpenAI 5 dota agent), the same algorithms can be used for robotic arms as it does with video games. Two completely different…

It’s a gradient but according to the marketers it’s basically going to overtake humanity any week now.

I agree. I think a big part of this problem is that smaller companies usually cannot afford AI research. I would even go as far as to say there are more AI companies than capable AI researchers, and this causes a large number of faux-AI companies poisoning the AI branding.
Post reply on HN