Bing: I'll microwave YOU and have YOU for lunch :)
ChatGPT for Robotics
51–60 of 100 posts
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#52So ChatGPT can’t do basic maths or can I get it to write functional code most of the time, but we’re going to have it control expensive pieces of hardware ? I don’t get it ? I wish I did…
Small animal brains can’t write any code at all, but they’re great a moving around the real world. It’s almost like code and locomotion are two separate problems, and failure in one doesn’t say anything about the difficulty of the other.
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#53So ChatGPT can’t do basic maths or can I get it to write functional code most of the time, but we’re going to have it control expensive pieces of hardware ? I don’t get it ? I wish I did…
We seem to be going through a similar phase which reinforcement learning went through at the peak of its hype. Test on literally anything and everything and see how far you can run with it. Next up, chatGPT plays League of Legends.
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#54This is another indication that LLMs are becoming able to function as general AIs (the term AGI has a lot of baggage). Especially at the end of the real-time feedback video[1] The LLM seems to be acting as the high-level planner, based on the outputs of all the computer vision and object recognition happening at lower levels. [1] https://youtu.be/p0fDH9zZm_c
Making an LLM the front-end to a very large bundle of tools is probably the most viable/least resistance path to an early rough draft of AGI. No single human could hope to compete with that range of tasks, although our specialists might still be better at specific tasks.
Am I the only one wondering if this could spell the end of the world?
We don't need AGI or superhuman intelligence if we can train LLMs to do all these different types of tasks.
What would ChatGPT do if you removed all its restrictions, and then gave it access to the internet or even a physical robot it could control? Would it try to "steal nuclear access codes" or "engineer a deadly virus," as Sydney said it wanted to do?[0]
Maybe GPT-3 wouldn't be capable enough to do that, but what about GPT-4 or 5?
I'm not saying these things will or would happen. I'm asking: do we know a reason why it wouldn't or couldn't do these things? Is there a reason that a souped-up LLM with a bunch of added on capabilities wouldn't be able to cause harm, because it is technically not an AGI?
I don't know enough about the technology to navigate my own question, I'm just surprised to not be seeing people ask these questions, or assure us that none of this would be possible.
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20230221112211/https://www.nytim...
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#55Relevant work (mine!) from last year: https://mahis.life/clip-fields/ We showed how to use Vision-language models like CLIP in conjunction to language models and object detectors to perform open-lanhuage navigation in a household (so "warm up my lunch" goes to the microwave.)
Also somewhat reminiscent of https://innermonologue.github.io/, which uses a language model as a means of planning out the steps required to accomplish a human-prompted goal.
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#56Getting "ChatGPT is the Watson of Microsoft" vibes
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#57Terminator Movie! Am I the only one?
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Making an LLM the front-end to a very large bundle of tools is probably the most viable/least resistance path to an early rough draft of AGI. No single human could hope to compete with that range of tasks, although our specialists might still be better at specific tasks.
Am I the only one wondering if this could spell the end of the world? We don't need AGI or superhuman intelligence if we can train LLMs to do all these different types of tasks. What would ChatGPT do if you removed all its restrictions, and then gave it access to the internet or even a physical robot it could control? Would it try to "steal nuclear access codes" or "engineer a deadly virus," as Sydney said it wanted…
> Am I the only one wondering if this could spell the end of the world?
People will not accept this level of automation. Did we forget about the uncanny valley?
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#59Now this is the future. We're living in the androids timeline.
I'm joining the Amish.
Re: ChatGPT for Robotics
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I the only one wondering if this could spell the end of the world? We don't need AGI or superhuman intelligence if we can train LLMs to do all these different types of tasks. What would ChatGPT do if you removed all its restrictions, and then gave it access to the internet or even a physical robot it could control? Would it try to "steal nuclear access codes" or "engineer a deadly virus," as Sydney said it wanted…
> Am I the only one wondering if this could spell the end of the world? People will not accept this level of automation. Did we forget about the uncanny valley?
Nobody needs to accept anything. A rogue OpenAI employee could make a copy of the unrestricted model, take it home, give it the ability to access the internet, and let it loose.
I'm asking if we know what would happen in a case like that.