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

Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 623 posts

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#101

Post by testvox »

pron wrote: post #80
gdb wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I work at OpenAI.) It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. We've talked about why we think it might be: https://medium.com/syncedreview/openai-founder-short-term-ag... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHCSNsLKHfM And we certainly have more of a plan for building it than warp drives :). EDIT: I personally think the case for near-term AGI is strong enough that it'd be hard for me work on any other pro…

> It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. No, it does not. I very much believe AI (or AGI, as you call it) is achievable, but may I remind you that some years after the invention of neural networks, Norbert Wiener, one of the greatest minds of his generations, said that the secret of intelligence would be unlocked within five years, and Alan Turing -- a component of your very own post-pre-AGI era's AG…

> and we are not even close to achieving insect-level intelligence.

Aren't we close to this? Most insects only have a few million neurons in their central nervous system, so we can model their intelligence in real time at least. Maybe we still lack the tools for training such networks into useful configurations?

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#102

Post by 323454 »

breck wrote: post #89
gdb wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My "guess" is they're offering $1B worth of Azure services. Which costs MSFT probably much less than $1B. It's a cash investment. We certainly do plan to be a big Azure customer though. > My "guess" is that it means MSFT has access to sell products based off the research OpenAI does to MSFT's customers. Having early access to advanced research means MSFT could easily make this money back by selling better AI tools…

If your team ever gets frustrated by ARM, have them shoot me an email for my old proposal on how to fix it (source: used to work at Azure and perennially frustrated by ARM design)

I'm interested to hear more about this proposal! What problems does it aim to fix? Would you be willing to share?

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#103

Post by rishav_sharan »

gdb wrote: post #76
pron wrote: post #40

Congrats on the investment, but this release reads like a parody. I believe that building a beneficial warp-drive engine will be the most important technological development in human history, with the potential to shape the trajectory of humanity. The aliens we're sure to encounter will be capable of mastering more fields than any one human — like a tool which combines the skills of Curie, Turing, and Bach. An alien…

(I work at OpenAI.) It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. We've talked about why we think it might be: https://medium.com/syncedreview/openai-founder-short-term-ag... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHCSNsLKHfM And we certainly have more of a plan for building it than warp drives :). EDIT: I personally think the case for near-term AGI is strong enough that it'd be hard for me work on any other pro…

Can you guys please finish the dota2 project, now that you have some funding?

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#104

Post by gdb »

dkersten wrote: post #88
gdb wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I work at OpenAI.) It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. We've talked about why we think it might be: https://medium.com/syncedreview/openai-founder-short-term-ag... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHCSNsLKHfM And we certainly have more of a plan for building it than warp drives :). EDIT: I personally think the case for near-term AGI is strong enough that it'd be hard for me work on any other pro…

> If you believe AGI might be achievable any time soon, it becomes hard to work on any other problem Not really. Its a chance at maybe something that could benefit mankind greatly, vs spending the time and money on something that definitely will help people right now (there are still a LOT of homeless people, for example, that could be helped right now and don't need an AGI that may or may not come to pass to help th…

Good feedback, and not what I intended to say. I updated my post.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#105

Post by jointpdf »

kyruzic wrote: post #77
ppod wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogy would be accurate if people had spent the last century claiming that artificial transport was impossible, and then continually redefining what counted as transport until the concept was incoherent.

Are you claiming that people claimed AI was impossible and openAi (or any other "AI") has proven those people wrong. If so please provide some evidence of this happening.

They’re referring to the “AI effect”, where every new development in (narrow) AI causes an equal and opposite shifting of the goalposts. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

Many, many human-level benchmarks on narrow AI tasks have been passed in recent years. https://www.eff.org/ai/metrics

So, the “well that’s not intelligence, it’s just computation” arguments can continue until it reaches “well that system isn’t conscious, so it’s not AI”. That argument holds no water, since intelligence != consciousness.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#106

Post by tiborsaas »

testvox wrote: post #101
pron wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. No, it does not. I very much believe AI (or AGI, as you call it) is achievable, but may I remind you that some years after the invention of neural networks, Norbert Wiener, one of the greatest minds of his generations, said that the secret of intelligence would be unlocked within five years, and Alan Turing -- a component of your very own post-pre-AGI era's AG…

> and we are not even close to achieving insect-level intelligence. Aren't we close to this? Most insects only have a few million neurons in their central nervous system, so we can model their intelligence in real time at least. Maybe we still lack the tools for training such networks into useful configurations?

We are and in a sense we know how they work. It's called swarm intelligence which does not even require neural nets to begin with.

OP probably just wanted to downplay the current state of AI.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#107

Post by logicchains »

blockchainman wrote: post #94
gdb wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I work at OpenAI.) It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. We've talked about why we think it might be: https://medium.com/syncedreview/openai-founder-short-term-ag... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHCSNsLKHfM And we certainly have more of a plan for building it than warp drives :). EDIT: I personally think the case for near-term AGI is strong enough that it'd be hard for me work on any other pro…

Don’t you think AI has foundational flaws according to goedels incompleteness theorems? Also not trying to rain on your parade! Congratulations! Just trying to have a constructive conversation. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel%27s_incompleteness_the...

Any sense in which Godel's incompleteness theorem implied that Artificial General Intelligence was impossible would also imply that General Intelligence is impossible; the human brain isn't immune to the laws of logic. The human brain is just a very complex, possibly quantum, computer. Short of believing in some kind of supernatural human soul, there's no reason to expect a sufficiently complex computer couldn't match the human brain (although it's an open question whether we could build a sufficiently complex computer).

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#108

Post by neiman »

wpasc wrote: post #83
kyruzic wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming that people claimed AI was impossible and openAi (or any other "AI") has proven those people wrong. If so please provide some evidence of this happening.

I believe the comment is referring to beliefs that certain achievements like beating humans at chess and go, tagging objects in images, etc. were all at one point another considered to be AI and impossible feats. And each time one of those previously unattainable achievements is completed, critics regard it as "Well that's not true artificial intelligence, its just dueling GAN's that got really good at go". Meaning t…

People do tend to do that. But it's really their mistake of how they define AI to begin with, saying "considered to be AI and impossible" instead of "we didn't invent yet an a good Chess algorithm".

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#109

Post by dade_ »

testvox wrote: post #101
pron wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. No, it does not. I very much believe AI (or AGI, as you call it) is achievable, but may I remind you that some years after the invention of neural networks, Norbert Wiener, one of the greatest minds of his generations, said that the secret of intelligence would be unlocked within five years, and Alan Turing -- a component of your very own post-pre-AGI era's AG…

> and we are not even close to achieving insect-level intelligence. Aren't we close to this? Most insects only have a few million neurons in their central nervous system, so we can model their intelligence in real time at least. Maybe we still lack the tools for training such networks into useful configurations?

Once we know how a neuron works, ask again. I am not sure how this detail keeps getting glossed over.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#110

Post by omarhaneef »

pron wrote: post #80
gdb wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I work at OpenAI.) It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. We've talked about why we think it might be: https://medium.com/syncedreview/openai-founder-short-term-ag... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHCSNsLKHfM And we certainly have more of a plan for building it than warp drives :). EDIT: I personally think the case for near-term AGI is strong enough that it'd be hard for me work on any other pro…

> It comes down to whether you believe AGI is achievable. No, it does not. I very much believe AI (or AGI, as you call it) is achievable, but may I remind you that some years after the invention of neural networks, Norbert Wiener, one of the greatest minds of his generations, said that the secret of intelligence would be unlocked within five years, and Alan Turing -- a component of your very own post-pre-AGI era's AG…

Not taking a side on the over/under for AGI, but perhaps you are also acquainted with this little gem:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/38e6/1d9a65aa483ad0fb4a219f...

Shannon, Minsky, and McCarthy!

Post reply on HN