[deleted]
Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
31–40 of 208 posts
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#32Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#33The leak about Q* feels like an olive branch to let the former OpenAI board and Ilya save a bit of face, probably part of the terms for Sam coming back plus it distracts from all the drama and puts a positive spin on things.
>"The board didn't handle things well, but they were right to be concerned because OpenAI did have some sort of research breakthrough"
Not coincidence that this leaks after Sam comes back, rather than before when it could have made the board look more justified in their decision. This changes the story from incompetence to "it's a problem only OpenAI has because they are so far ahead and close to AGI". Masterful PR move to leak this and shift the narrative
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#34So Q* is just A* for neural networks?
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#35I took an AI course in college back around 2015. Just a bit before AlphaGo. One project was to implement a simple Q-learning action/value system to play simple games, like Pacman. The crypto-bros-turned-AGI-experts on twitter are spouting the most uninformed, misguided garbage about this whole thing, it's quite amazing to watch. And I'm not saying that I am smart or an expert about Q* because I took an introductory c…
> these people have no clue what they are talking about, and yet the have this incredible talent of speaking in such an authoritative and faux-intelligent tone.
I miss the good old days with those idiots were mostly stuck to the honeypot that is/was cryptocurrencies.
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#36A conspiracy minded me may see all that saga of the last week as a marketing campaign to generate excitement for the GPT-5-now-with-30%-more-Q release.
Ane even more conspiracy-minded take - from the Russian news naturally - is that it is the Great Battle for the future of humanity between "doomers" (Oh, no! the AI is going to kill us all, we need to stop all the work and control the GPUs like guns) and "Effective Altruists" (We can do all the evil today in order to achieve greater good tomorrow)
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#37What are the more popular themes of the complete nonsense about Q*? Anyone know? I deleted my twitter account.
[flagged]
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
People like his takes because he gives an authoritative gloss to what they already believe. But his points are usually lacking in argument or rigor. Anyone that essentially expects the public to trust them when it comes to the outcome of AI/AGI should be view with suspicion.
On the contrary, he gives good arguments about why open is safer and closed is more dangerous whereas other side gives, imho, convoluted arguments and asks for them to be proven wrong (as opposed to trying to prove themselves right).
His arguments in defense of barreling forward with AI are terrible. They have zero chance to convince someone who doesn't share his intuitions/interests. For example: https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1718764953534939162
How easily smart people convince themselves of what they want to be true with zero self-awareness makes me much more fearful of what's to come.
>other side gives, imho, convoluted arguments and asks for them to be proven wrong (as opposed to trying to prove themselves right).
The question is what should our default stance be until proven otherwise? I submit it is not to continue building the potentially world-ending technology.
Re: Please ignore the deluge of complete nonsense about Q*
#39It's hard to call anything that comes from LeCun "news": any time you hear of a phenomenon in the ML/AI space, you know pretty much exactly the sentiment he's going to express. His entire brand is "doomers are wrong, you can trust me, I am AI daddy".
Doomers thought GPT-2 was too dangerous to release. I guess one can be Dalio successful by calling doom at every instant like Dalio.
Well, GPT-2 led directly to GPT-3. GPT-3 led to GPT-3.5 and then to GPT-4. GPT-4 might lead to all of us losing our source of income, so they may yet be proven right (economic turmoil can be an x-risk if it's large enough).