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

There is no A.I.

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 523 posts

Re: There is no A.I.

#131

Post by crabkin »

tracerbulletx wrote: post #27

All of these arguments seem to think that the brain isn't also generating a statistical ordering of semantic words and actions. Obviously the brain has a way more complex network of subsystems with various specialties than the artificial models we have today and is able to generalize language, math, and positional reasoning and mix it with the older parts of the brain for reward and training mechanisms and it can do…

Yes they seem to take the view into account, but this sentiment as if the question is settled and we aren't anthropically-projecting, or whatever the term is, is premature. Just because two processes produce a superficially similar result, does not make them the same process. What you just described after conceding that though the brain may be a statistical inference machine it still seems like magic.

It is telling that you talk about all those things happening in "real time." Ask any super-regarded philosopher, from Plato to Wittgenstein (yes I'm excluding Dennet et al), and that would be quite the hoot to point out.

Re: There is no A.I.

#132

Post by gitfan86 »

tuatoru wrote: post #130
gitfan86 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you, the philosophers and religious people are more than welcome to discuss what is "true" intelligence or humanity I'm more focused on the fact that GDP as it was measured in 2020 is going to 100x in the next 5 years.

GDP is measured both as production and as consumption. The figures have to be the same, within a "statistical discrepancy". The consumption is final consumption: goods and services used by households. You are asserting that households will each have 100 times the income that they do now (and be spending the same proportion of income as they do now). Edit: I believe that if most companies, or even a significant minori…

I'm saying that many things that cost $100 in 2020 will cost less than $1 for the exact same thing in 2028. It is already happening in 2023. How much would it cost in 2020 to get a 2000 word essay written at a 10th grade level? What is the cost of the same service today?

When a service costs goes down 99% that 99% goes directly into GDP growth.

Re: There is no A.I.

#133

Post by throwaway8503 »

ravenstine wrote: post #100
throwaway8503 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since LLMs can't do arithmetic, one has to think there's more going on, at least in the arithmetic part of the brain, than is going on in LLMs.

Dunno if there's some trickery going on under the hood, but GPT-4 does basic arithmetic correctly.

This is what I got on ChatGPT today. I assume it used GPT4:

        Prompt            ChatGPT           Actual       Match
  397,356 * 930,547   369,685,207,932   369,758,433,732  FALSE
   36,330 *  26,951       979,458,630       979,129,830  FALSE
    8,681 *   9,330        80,911,430        80,993,730  FALSE
      278 *     903           250,734           251,034  FALSE
       82 *      77             6,314             6,314  TRUE
Edit: # of correct digits (counting from leftmost) only exceeds 3 on the smallest pair. It drops to two, as well, on the 3x3 set.

Re: There is no A.I.

#134

Post by cyber_kinetist »

jstummbillig wrote: post #120
tracerbulletx wrote: post #27

All of these arguments seem to think that the brain isn't also generating a statistical ordering of semantic words and actions. Obviously the brain has a way more complex network of subsystems with various specialties than the artificial models we have today and is able to generalize language, math, and positional reasoning and mix it with the older parts of the brain for reward and training mechanisms and it can do…

Agreed. One of the more interesting things about AI is how it forces humanity on a trip to consider what it means to be human. There is no soul, creativity or inspiration. There's only (very complex) agency. And that's completely fine.

Or you can say the opposite and claim that there is soul, creativity, or inspiration in everything, even in inanimate objects (basically panpsychism, in contrast to materialism). But regardless of what kind of monism you take, the advent of current statistical AI models forces us to reconsider the Cartesian dichotomy between body and mind, which forms the basis of liberal thought.

Re: There is no A.I.

#135

Post by cosmojg »

Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

LLMs are linguistic mirrors, after all.

Re: There is no A.I.

#136

Post by whitemary »

Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

> The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation

*the concept of capitalism

Re: There is no A.I.

#137

Post by HyperSane »

wefarrell wrote: post #117
Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

We will always need a charismatic human being to be the figurehead of an organization, so I don’t think AI will ever replace CEOs. They will wind up making the important decisions though.

Charismatic like the CEO of Herman Miller?

Re: There is no A.I.

#138

Post by HyperSane »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #113
Animats wrote: post #68

The elephant in the room in these discussions of AI is the concept of the corporation. Most of the things people are worried about AI doing are things corporations already do. Deceptive marketing, exploiting customer information, conspiring to keep prices high, creating distractions from things companies are doing, setting up monopolies, lying to customers - the usual. With AI, this can be automated. Most of this is…

I don't really agree with this... there is a parallel issue. If AIs are doing most of the work in megacorps (especially if robotics take off), then basically all profit is going to the owners and tiny groups of executive AI "managers." Even the most staunch (but sane) capitalist libertarian will admit mega income inequality is baaad juju.

AI really just amplifies the inherent flaw of capitalism in that wealth allows the wealthy to live on the labor of the workers.

Re: There is no A.I.

#139

Post by HyperSane »

counttheforks wrote: post #94
eternalban wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This then is the perfect historic opportunity to revist granting personhood to corporations. p.s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood Almost all such legal framings have been motivated by the legal difficulties of applying laws to organized groups of individuals. For example, entering into contracts is legally between two parties. Presumably, the sheer amount of legal reworking necessary to actually cr…

I never really understood this. Can a company go to prison or get the death penalty?

Arthur Andersen was basically executed.

Re: There is no A.I.

#140

Post by dragonwriter »

tracerbulletx wrote: post #27

All of these arguments seem to think that the brain isn't also generating a statistical ordering of semantic words and actions. Obviously the brain has a way more complex network of subsystems with various specialties than the artificial models we have today and is able to generalize language, math, and positional reasoning and mix it with the older parts of the brain for reward and training mechanisms and it can do…

> All of these arguments seem to think that the brain isn’t also generating a statistical ordering of semantic words and actions.

There may be a part of the brain that is modelled well by an LLM, but if so, there seem to also be parts that aren’t, or even existing “multimodal” models like GPT-4, which is more than an LLM.

Humans, including their brains (both in the narrow sense and in the broader sense of “everything that contributes to cognition”, which may extend beyond the brain proper) are machines, and their function probably will, someday, be mimicked by machines. But they are still more complex machines that modern “AI” systems

Post reply on HN