11–20 of 85 posts
The numbers there seem odd (or did before the page broke, possibly due to the HN 'hug of death') 90% chance of near term "human level" AI but only a 75% chance someone tries to influence the US election with "AI driven misinformation" which for most definitions of "AI" and "misinformation" is already happening?
Something about the page is certainly broke. I don't get the graphs to load until I use the mouse wheel on their ui elements
Nowhere do they define "AGI". I guarantee that is a big reason why the predictions have so much variance. For many people, what GPT-4 does qualified as AGI -- up until GPT-4 came out and then everyone seemed to decide that AGI meant ASI. I am guessing for many people answering this poll it means "a full emulation of a person". Or maybe it had to be "alive". The thing that irritates me so much is that there is this la…
> Nowhere do they define "AGI" Ummm, maybe you should have looked? At the top of the very first prediction, here: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/5121/date-of-artificial-... We will thus define "an AI system" as a single unified software system that can satisfy the following criteria, all completable by at least some humans. Able to reliably pass a 2-hour, adversarial Turing test during which the participants can…
You can surely get a indistinguishable imitation of human text from including things like Reddit comments in the LLM training data. Correctness is a hurdle I am not convinced will be surpassed.
Nowhere do they define "AGI". I guarantee that is a big reason why the predictions have so much variance. For many people, what GPT-4 does qualified as AGI -- up until GPT-4 came out and then everyone seemed to decide that AGI meant ASI. I am guessing for many people answering this poll it means "a full emulation of a person". Or maybe it had to be "alive". The thing that irritates me so much is that there is this la…
However if you work with it a lot you realize it doesn't understand reality, it predicts language.
It reminds me of YouTube videos of chess when human start to figure out chess bots and the tricks they use to draw out time.
Understanding language is super impressive, but a far cry from general intelligence. Maybe from here open ai can build further. But I have a hard time believing that this will be a foundation for general intelligence.
A lot of animals have a form of general intelligence but cant do math or language. Yet in some ways are more capable then the latest self driving cars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nowhere do they define "AGI" Ummm, maybe you should have looked? At the top of the very first prediction, here: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/5121/date-of-artificial-... We will thus define "an AI system" as a single unified software system that can satisfy the following criteria, all completable by at least some humans. Able to reliably pass a 2-hour, adversarial Turing test during which the participants can…
You do realize that many, if not most, humans would fail this test, right?
Individual humans are not exactly the best of all possible tests for AGI.
Nowhere do they define "AGI". I guarantee that is a big reason why the predictions have so much variance. For many people, what GPT-4 does qualified as AGI -- up until GPT-4 came out and then everyone seemed to decide that AGI meant ASI. I am guessing for many people answering this poll it means "a full emulation of a person". Or maybe it had to be "alive". The thing that irritates me so much is that there is this la…
> Nowhere do they define "AGI" Ummm, maybe you should have looked? At the top of the very first prediction, here: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/5121/date-of-artificial-... We will thus define "an AI system" as a single unified software system that can satisfy the following criteria, all completable by at least some humans. Able to reliably pass a 2-hour, adversarial Turing test during which the participants can…
AGI by 2040 huh. I bet it won’t happen by 2100, and I’m young enough that I can look back on this at 2040 and see how wrong/ correct I was. Future me, don’t forget!
Where's the poll option for "it continues to be overhyped junk spewing misinformation, then arguing with the user (Bard) or acquiescing when pressed regardless of the correctness of the rebuttal (ChatGPT)"? You can surely get a indistinguishable imitation of human text from including things like Reddit comments in the LLM training data. Correctness is a hurdle I am not convinced will be surpassed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nowhere do they define "AGI" Ummm, maybe you should have looked? At the top of the very first prediction, here: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/5121/date-of-artificial-... We will thus define "an AI system" as a single unified software system that can satisfy the following criteria, all completable by at least some humans. Able to reliably pass a 2-hour, adversarial Turing test during which the participants can…
You do realize that many, if not most, humans would fail this test, right?
The AGI will need to look at all of the tasks written, determine what the success criteria is, and then combine that that into a single set of answers. With the instructions in human-readable form, not machine readable. It can use as many or as few AGIs as it needs to accomplish this.
It's the same as if we gave these instructions to a human with sufficient skill and resources to delegate.