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

John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 643 posts

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#561

Post by randartie »

sytelus wrote: post #440
nighthawk454 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, his follow up tweet is pretty clear: > This is explicitly a focusing effort for me. I could write a $20M check myself, but knowing that other people's money is on the line engenders a greater sense of discipline and determination. I had talked about that as a possibility for a while, and I am glad Nat pushed me on it.

It seems like bad logic. If he gets bored/throw in towel, he can just pay back with his money and move on. Also, if you need to create such artificial constraints in order to go to work, a main ingredient called “drive” is missing. I respect Carmack a lot but I don’t trust old centi-millionaires to work with same passion as their younger poorer selves. Finally, $20M is too low. AGI is not a solo endeavor and doesn’t…

> " If he gets bored/throw in towel, he can just pay back with his money and move on."

> "Just to train a large model once will eat up 20% of this money."

Aren't these 2 statements conflicting?

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#562

Post by randartie »

klipklop wrote: post #505

Personally I hope this fails because of the disaster AGI would be for low/entry level jobs. The last thing the world needs is to give technocrats such power. I know it’s an interesting problem to solve but think of who will own that tech in the end… I hope AGI is never figured out in my lifetime.

The way I view this as a net-gain is that AGI agents will be able to have innovation on improving themselves (exponentially?) and the whole world. They very well may be the path to a utopia.

Task 1 for AGI: Optimize your own system so you don't cost 50 million dollars to train.

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#563

Post by randartie »

Ekaros wrote: post #218
POiNTx wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does once you have a human level AGI, it should be trivial to scale it up to a superhuman level.

I'm wondering if scaling up is trivial. Ofc, it depends on how much computational resources a working AGI needs. And if at that point they are capable of optimizing themselves further. Or optimizing production of more resources. Still, scaling up might not be simple if we look at all the human resources currently poured in software and hardware.

You can task the human-level AGI to optimize itself. You can create an army of copies of itself to work towards that. It's self fulfilling.

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#565

Post by darawk »

godelski wrote: post #548
darawk wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The common current example? A text prompt of "A horse riding an astronaut" without prompt engineering. Though I don't think the successful production of this image will demonstrate intelligence/causal understanding either (but it is a good counter example). I'm not sure why you think this falsifies intelligence. There are plenty of puzzles and illusions that trick humans. The mere presence of conceptual error is no…

Your argument is that there are adversarial cases? Sure... But that's not what I'm even arguing here. There's more nuance to the problem here that you lack an understanding of. I do suggest diving deep into the research to understand this rather than arrogantly make comments like this. If you have questions, that's a different thing. But this is inappropriate and demonstrates a lack of intimate understanding of the f…

I didn't make an argument that there are adversarial cases, you did. You brought up an adversarial example, and said the existence of that example proves these algorithms are not generally intelligent. If that follows, it follows that the existence of adversarial examples for humans proves the same thing about us.

And in general, if you're going to be condescending, you should actually make the counter argument. You might make fewer reasoning errors that way.

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#566

Post by jacquesm »

Jack000 wrote: post #525
Calavar wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree that there is a distinction between scaling laws and a model being "capable of scale." RNNs are Turing complete, so from that perspective they should in theory they should be sufficient for AGI. But of course they are not because their scaling with regards to network depth and the length of sequences is abysmal. LLMs do scale with depth and sequence length, if their scaling laws with regard to da…

The scaling laws for LLMs depend heavily on the quality of data. For example, if you add an additional 100gb of data but it only contains the same repeating word, that will hurt the model. If you add 100gb of completely random words, that will also hurt the model. Between these two extremes (low and high entropy), human language has a certain amount natural entropy that helps the model gauge the true co-occurrence fr…

One possible risk I see is that with the amount of model generated text out there it will at some point inevitably result in feeding the output of one model into another unless the source of the text is meticulously traced. (My assumption is that that would hurt the model that you are trying to train as well.)

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#567

Post by jacquesm »

intelVISA wrote: post #261
8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was surprised by how bullish he is about this. At least a few years ago the experts in the field didn't see AGI anywhere near us for at least a few decades, and all of the bulls were physicists, philosophers or Deepak-Chopra-for-the-TED-crowd bullshit artists who have never written a line of code in their lives, mostly milking that conference and podcast dollar, preaching Skynet-flavored apocalypse or rapture. To s…

if Carmack's in I'm in. Has he ever been drastically wrong?

Does this qualify?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_Aerospace

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#568

Post by another-dave »

version_five wrote: post #395
thewarrior wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it maybe too much to ask but as a noob to this field I’d love to hear more about why AGI is not feasible even in 50 years.

I've seen a few posts here asking why it isn't possible. Research doesn't work like that, you can't just imagine something is possible and demand reasons why it isn't. How is it possible? It feels a bit like a lot of these fringe science things (electromagnetic fields causing harm etc) where people's argument is that nobody's shown it isn't true. Well if it's true, propose a mechanism and study it. You're not really…

In fairness to the parent, research doesn't work that why, but they're not conducting research.

"What are the remaining unknowns that would need to be solved to do X and why are they difficult?" is valid question to ask experts when trying to further your own understanding.

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#569

Post by dunefox »

throwaway11101 wrote: post #271
dunefox wrote: post #48

I admire and respect John Carmack. For me he's one of the greats, along with people like Peter Norvig, for example.

[flagged]

What a weirdly emotional rant. I dislike Elon Musk quite much, just as an aside.

Re: John Carmack's new AGI company, Keen Technologies, has raised a $20M round

#570

Post by blibble »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #429
blibble wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now I'm not going to spend a couple of hours watching a film that has a mediocre IMDB rating. your loss > For the AGI to actually accomplish something of real-world relevance, us humans have to agree. Donald Trump managed to get control of the US nuclear arsenal

Yes, now we are getting somewhere. Donald Trump managed to somehow get control in a very limited sense of the US nuclear arsenal. First of all, how did he get this control? Certainly it was not via his profound intelligence, but because other humans chose to give him control. Second of all, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if Donald Trump had ordered a nuclear strike in a situation where it was not consistent…

> Second of all, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if Donald Trump had ordered a nuclear strike in a situation where it was not consistent with US nuclear weapons doctrine, his command would have been disobeyed and the 25th amendment would have been enacted poste haste.

how do you know this beyond a shadow of a doubt?

your entire "argument" is based on arrogant assumption after arrogant assumption

Post reply on HN