91–100 of 267 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that it's a big open question how to control an AGI. So the choice may not be between which entity controls it, but whether it is created by an entity that is able to control it at all.
Governments are reasonably good at controlling humans.
Isn't GPT-4 already over 1T parameters? And GPT-5 should be even "an order of magnitude" bigger than GPT-4...
Was thinking the same, so 1T might bring you to the league of GPT-4. Actually in the best case, since it seems that meta, google, openai and so on have the most talent. Anyway, to bring it to the next level, how big should it be? Maybe 10T? 100T?
I don't think we have enough training data to train models so big in a way to efficiently use all the params. We would need to generate training data, but then I don't know how effective it would be.
I'm sure the government's mission is also to develop an AGI that benefits us all.
Ideally no one person or entity controls such a thing. But, would I rather have a Government, or a corporation control AGI? If I had to pick one of two evils, the Government would be the lesser of the two.
I'm sure the government's mission is also to develop an AGI that benefits us all.
The solution won't be just "bigger". A model with a trillion parameters will be more expensive to train and to run, but is unlikely to be better. Think of the early days of flight, you had biplanes; then you had triplanes. You could have followed that farther, and added more wings - but it wouldn't have improved things. Improving AI will involve architectural changes. No human requires the amount of training data we…
First, yes, bigger appears to be better so far. We haven't yet found the plateau. No, bigger won't solve the well known problems, but it's absolutely clear that each time we build a bigger model it is qualitatively better.
Second, it's not clear that this work is trying to build AGI, which I assume you are referring to when you say "the solution." Of all the use case for language models, building one off all the worlds scientific data like they are doing in this project is probably the most exciting to me. If all it can do is dig up relevant work for a given topic in the entire body of scientific literature, it will be revolutionary for science.
I'm sure the government's mission is also to develop an AGI that benefits us all.
This is a particular interesting part of American culture: The sentiment is that it is problematic when the government develops these technologies, but it is completely OK to let private entities develop them.
I'm sure the government's mission is also to develop an AGI that benefits us all.
Ideally no one person or entity controls such a thing. But, would I rather have a Government, or a corporation control AGI? If I had to pick one of two evils, the Government would be the lesser of the two.
People elected to government often seem to seek power for powers sake and I have less faith that they'll not harm us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ideally no one person or entity controls such a thing. But, would I rather have a Government, or a corporation control AGI? If I had to pick one of two evils, the Government would be the lesser of the two.
Governments have killed more people than any other institution. Corporations have largely made our lives better.
Corporations also enable government actions by developing the tech and tools/weapons needed.