[dead]
Road to Artificial General Intelligence
81–90 of 104 posts
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#82Reading this list makes me think if an AI can just make an income without being told explicitly how to do it, is it an AGI? This metric seems reductive on the surface, but takes quite a bit of intelligence to understand how society works and how to provide value.
Honestly could probably create an AI that figures out high speed training, I wouldn’t call it AGI
High Speed Trading? With an AI? Really? You're clueless.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#83It doesn't even matter what's in the article, the fact that this is on the HN front page tells me it's going to happen - though who knows when For context I've been "into" AGI since I read the term in the late 1990s in a Ray Kurzweil book and decided that I was going to work my whole life to realize it Much later, Ben Goertzel (arguably the guy to popularize the term) was my Masters Thesis advisor, at the National In…
It really doesn't take much for anything to get on the HN front page. And upvotes are often done as a way to bookmark a thread before even knowing the quality of it.
Ben's conferences are low in number because the audience he's targeting is smaller. Peter Thiel co-hosted the Stanford Singularity Summit in 2006 (which is where I happened to meet Ben G in person for the first time). There had to have been at least 1000 people there. In 2006.
It's not about the content, it's how you sell it. But at least we can both agree that the linked article is useless.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
AGI does not mean “human level.” It means general intelligence. None of the things you mention are that.
> AGI does not mean “human level.” The term general intelligence is ambiguous and will mean different things to different people. My understanding of the term AGI is it was coined to differentiate from narrow AI, which AI had diluted over time to mean. AGI is AI broad and deep enough to be able to learn and perform any task a human can and is at least within the range of top human performers. The wikipedia definition…
General has a strict technical meaning here having to do with skill transfer. A general AI can tackle a problem domain it was not explicitly programmed to handle, characterize its basic features, and apply knowledge it has from other problems in other domains to solve the new problem more efficiently than starting from scratch.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting thought. Could we please add “within the limits of law”?
> Could we please add “within the limits of law”? But which jurisdiction applies to the AGI? And how should it interpret the written law + precedent? Maybe to make things simpler we could give broad directives that might accomplish your goal. I can think of three: (1) the AGI may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, (2) the AGI must obey orders given it by human beings e…
> But which jurisdiction applies to the AGI?
This is pretty simple: AI needs to "touch the world" somewhere. Where it touches, there has jurisdiction. Even if you're floating a boat out in international waters or space, laws apply both there and in the place you touch.
There are obvious issues regarding extradition to render a case if the agent is not physically present to be apprehended, but the principle for doing so is well established and uncontroversial.
The crypto world is a reasonable illustration for how the question of "which jurisdiction applies" plays out in the real world. Turns out that ignoring laws is not the same as them not applying to you.
As soon as you touch the world you are subject to the system of control there.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#86I wish authors like these would put a bit more effort and research into these posts. There's a big gap between something being clickbait and something being worthy of the title heading they dared to slap on it. This post probably harmed AGI research more than it helped. The author shows profound naivety by listing these in supposed "progressive difficulty" order, without evidence of such, all the while proclaiming th…
It’s a blog post. If a random blog post on HN is all it takes to harm AGI research, it wasn’t going anywhere anyway.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#87Author seems focused on toys. This seems like a more well rounded explanation and argument:
https://aeon.co/essays/how-close-are-we-to-creating-artifici...
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#88It doesn't even matter what's in the article, the fact that this is on the HN front page tells me it's going to happen - though who knows when For context I've been "into" AGI since I read the term in the late 1990s in a Ray Kurzweil book and decided that I was going to work my whole life to realize it Much later, Ben Goertzel (arguably the guy to popularize the term) was my Masters Thesis advisor, at the National In…
I was always impressed by Ben on the old singularitarian and SL4 mailing lists. This was back in the days before deepnets took over and other approaches were still popular (and people still harked back to Eurisko as the state of the art in general intelligence). I feel like his impact has been lower than it should have been, although I suppose the rest of the main characters from around then have disappeared into AI institutes to play various forms of elaborate LARP.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#89Ah, I remember when well-formed XML was in the critical path to AGI. How things change.
Re: Road to Artificial General Intelligence
#90I’ve been starting to wonder, is GPT-3 the beginning of AGI? I know, I know, it’s just a language model. But I’ve been thinking. About my thinking. I think in words. I solve problems in words. I communicate results in words. If I had no body, and you could only interact with me via text, would I look that much different than GPT? Does AGI really need anything more than words? Is it possible that simply adding more pa…
I don't, really. Especially for things that matter. I think in abstractions, half-formed references, symbols, shapes. Words are cheap knockoffs of those made for mass consumption.