Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone can signup and vote, so I assume it tends towards the majority option tbh. Seems like obviously noisy data.
The Metaculus prediction weights predictors by how accurate they've been.
[deleted]
The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
51–60 of 85 posts
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#52Its depressing to go over all this ultra-shallow chit-chat that has short-circuited any intelligent discussion about the role and trajectory of information technology (let alone any more serious problem or opportunity of the current times). Talking about AI (and AGI) as if its some xenomorph lurking somewhere in silicon, waiting for its inevitable escape from its human prison. AI will not bootstrap itself with some e…
"We have to learn the bitter lesson that building in how we think we think does not work in the long run. The bitter lesson is based on the historical observations that 1) AI researchers have often tried to build knowledge into their agents, 2) this always helps in the short term, and is personally satisfying to the researcher, but 3) in the long run it plateaus and even inhibits further progress, and 4) breakthrough…
I'm a little bit tired of the Bitter Lesson copypasta.
It doesn't seem to me like point 1 to 3 have been proven to be true about ConvNets. Sure, scaling convnets further help, I don't think anyone would argue that training a big model on more data would not at least see some improvement.
I also think there are irrefutable lower bounds of computation that it would be important to consider when building these meta-methods. If your problem requires N steps of computation for a problem of N size, but your method can only always perform at most K steps of computation, no amount of data or compute you throw at it will result in the right solution.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#53Where'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.
It sure seems like people are getting value from the current crop of tools: https://fortune.com/2023/06/15/nine-of-ten-developers-using-...
Cool, now try it with a knowledge field that isn't code that can be tested for the proper output.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#54Its depressing to go over all this ultra-shallow chit-chat that has short-circuited any intelligent discussion about the role and trajectory of information technology (let alone any more serious problem or opportunity of the current times). Talking about AI (and AGI) as if its some xenomorph lurking somewhere in silicon, waiting for its inevitable escape from its human prison. AI will not bootstrap itself with some e…
"We have to learn the bitter lesson that building in how we think we think does not work in the long run. The bitter lesson is based on the historical observations that 1) AI researchers have often tried to build knowledge into their agents, 2) this always helps in the short term, and is personally satisfying to the researcher, but 3) in the long run it plateaus and even inhibits further progress, and 4) breakthrough…
I don't think the parent comment is irreconcilable with the Bitter Lesson. I don't think transformers are a path to AGI, but that doesn't mean we need to go back to symbolic AI. We need to iterate on the meta-methods we use to search for and encapsulate the complexity of intelligence.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the problem here. A Claim is made. "GPT isn't general" or "GPT isn't Intelligent" or whatever but a testable definition is not made. That is, what is generality to you and what bar need be passed ? Or What Intelligence is and what competence level need be surpassed ? Without clearly stating those things, Intelligence may well be anything or any goal and your posts could shift to anywhere. I'm just going to te…
> Any testable definition of AGI that GPT-4 fails would also be failed by a significant chunk of the human population. GPT cannot function in any environment on its own. Except in response to a direct instruction it cannot plan, it cannot take action, it cannot learn, it cannot adjust to changing circumstance. It cannot acquire or process energy, it has no intentionality, it has no purpose beyond generating new text.…
>GPT cannot function in any environment on its own. Except in response to a direct instruction it cannot plan, it cannot take action, it cannot learn, it cannot adjust to changing circumstance.
Sure it can. It's not default behavior sure but it's fairly trivial to set up, just expensive. Gpt-4 can loop on its "thoughts" and reflect, it can take actions in the real world.
https://tidybot.cs.princeton.edu/ https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03442 https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03629 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11366
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.metaculus.com/questions/track-record/ Only 13 resolved binary questions where you had longer prediction horizons (1+ year), the accuracy is zilch in AI category - Brier score of 0.25 which is akin to just guessing out 50% for all questions. Generally overconfident. (Other categories much better - Brier of 0.14 1 year out)
There are several AI categories on the track record page; make sure you're not just selecting the one or you'll miss a lot. There's a careful analysis of the overall track record on AI questions here: https://www.metaculus.com/notebooks/16708/exploring-metaculu... The short version is that the Brier score is much better than .25 for AI questions, and the weighted Metaculus Prediction is more accurate still.
Good call on the categories.
> The short version is that the Brier score is much better than .25 for AI questions, and the weighted Metaculus Prediction is more accurate still.
Added more categories. 1 year out is 0.217. I agree that's better than chance, though "much better"?
That said, this is dominated by bad community predictions pre-2020 and there's not much data recently for binary questions. I agree that CRPS is better - but it's not clear to me from that link how early they are looking at questions - accuracy gets better closer to resolve date -- I'm claiming that longer-term predictions are shakier.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the problem here. A Claim is made. "GPT isn't general" or "GPT isn't Intelligent" or whatever but a testable definition is not made. That is, what is generality to you and what bar need be passed ? Or What Intelligence is and what competence level need be surpassed ? Without clearly stating those things, Intelligence may well be anything or any goal and your posts could shift to anywhere. I'm just going to te…
> Any testable definition of AGI that GPT-4 fails would also be failed by a significant chunk of the human population. GPT cannot function in any environment on its own. Except in response to a direct instruction it cannot plan, it cannot take action, it cannot learn, it cannot adjust to changing circumstance. It cannot acquire or process energy, it has no intentionality, it has no purpose beyond generating new text.…
> Here's a testable definition of AGI - any combination of software and hardware that can function independently of human supervision and maintenance, in response to circumstance that have not been preprogrammed.
Not sure how I feel about a significant portion of the population already not meeting that threshold. The elderly? The disabled? I think you're proving the parent's point.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Metaculus prediction weights predictors by how accurate they've been.
Yes, but if voters are voting the majority (and probable) decision, that just continues the trend of predicting obvious outcomes. It’s not something to do with understanding domain knowledge and voting based on scientific research.
I wouldn't say AGI in 10 years is predicting an obvious outcome. And the same goes for many other questions on the site.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chatgpt 4 is amazing. Still cant comprehend they build this. 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 h…
Is it surprising that a system that was exclusively trained on emitted language will only do well on language? I don't see how I can extrapolate to anything beyond that. I certainly can't extrapolate that it would be unable to learn other tasks.
Everything is defined in language. As a system is able to learn from the corpus of texts, it also builds reasoning to a large extent. For example, GPT4 can guide you through solving a problem like building a flying and crawling drone for inspecting an attic. Or, watering plants. So this goes beyond language, unless I missed your point.
Re: The future of AI according to thousands of forecasters
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sure seems like people are getting value from the current crop of tools: https://fortune.com/2023/06/15/nine-of-ten-developers-using-...
Cool, now try it with a knowledge field that isn't code that can be tested for the proper output.
I find it useful for a few different non-coding work tasks, and I don't think I'm unusual there.