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

111–120 of 623 posts

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#111

Post by mchouza »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #97
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…

I think you guys are genuinely trying to better humanity, I have no reason to doubt that. I wish you realized how big and thick of a bubble you live in, and how your thinking is so heavily influenced by it. My humble advice to you and your team is to spend more time with real people, with real problems. Or perhaps people from other parts of the world, that haven't been brainwashed by the Silicon Valley jargon just ye…

I am quite confident all the current employees of OpenAI qualify as real people. They certainly have problems and probably a good share of those problems are "real" too.

Of course their priorities may be off and they could be open to be persuaded to work in a different direction. But I don't think that condescension would be very effective for that.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#112

Post by throwaway713 »

Well, this is about the surest confirmation that AGI is going to happen within the next few years. Why? Because whenever HN responds with a bunch of negative sentiment, whatever was sharply criticized ends up doing really well: see the post announcing Dropbox or the post announcing Instagram’s acquisition.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#113

Post by edanm »

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...

Why would it? How do Godel's incompleteness theorems factor in here?

It's a common mistake to think the theorems say more than they really do, or apply in more cases than they really do. AI is simply based on the idea that we can reach at least the level of human intelligence, in artificial software/hardware, which, considering that we ourselves are pure hardware/software and nothing magical, should absolutely be right.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#114

Post by derefr »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #97
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…

I think you guys are genuinely trying to better humanity, I have no reason to doubt that. I wish you realized how big and thick of a bubble you live in, and how your thinking is so heavily influenced by it. My humble advice to you and your team is to spend more time with real people, with real problems. Or perhaps people from other parts of the world, that haven't been brainwashed by the Silicon Valley jargon just ye…

The moon program wasn’t solving a “real problem” in any sense, but the offshoot R&D of achieving this practically meaningless feat solved a lot of “real problems” by advancing a lot of technologies.

What makes you think that an AGI program won’t have the same kind of offshoot-technology impact on the world? It’s not like it would go “nothing ... wait for it... AGI”; there’d be a lot of tools, processes, and paradigms developed along the way, and also lesser AIs developed that might solve real problems for e.g. government resource allocation or military strategy, which would have outsized impacts on vulnerable countries and populations.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#115

Post by derefr »

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...

If it did, how would human brains exist?

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#116

Post by dkersten »

gdb wrote: post #104
dkersten wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

By the way, just to be clear, I'm not saying that you shouldn't work on it or that I think the time/money should be spent elsewhere, just that it isn't the be all end all of possible things to work on.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#117

Post by wetpaws »

dade_ wrote: post #109
testvox wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You don't need planes to flap the wings in order to fly.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#118

Post by modzu »

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…

guardrails in terms of policy, if not technical details, are still valuable.

the thing is, there are actually lots of reasons to think AGI cannot be constrained in this way. open AI researchers know this.

so that means, the promise and the charter are irrelevant. open ai will never release a general AI.

but in the meantime, deep learning is still reaping. every day it's being applied to something new and solving real, tangible problems. there's money to be made here, and that is what open AI seems to really be doing. being philosophical and "on top" of the futuristic moral dilemmas, whatever, is just marketing? and in the unlikely event that an AGI is created that can be tamed, great for open ai! if an AGI is created that cannot be tamed, what then? if it's really worth a trillion dollars, is it really just buried, or will the charter simply be rewritten?

you know, this reminds me a lot of all the great physicists working on the atom bomb, thinking it was never going to be used.

Re: Microsoft is investing $1B in OpenAI

#119

Post by macleginn »

tiborsaas wrote: post #106
testvox wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

We still cannot convincingly model behaviour of even simplest individual organisms whose neural circuitry we know in minute detail.
Post reply on HN