The bigger question is whether the paper reflects the views of insiders at OpenAI.
[deleted]
Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
51–60 of 70 posts
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#52The bigger question is whether the paper reflects the views of insiders at OpenAI.
Scott worked at OpenAI Safety and he likes it: https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8047
But is the "-ed" in worked a problem?
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought it was extremely thought provoking. Are you overconfident in your weights perhaps?
Thank you.
The irony of these conversations is bizarre.
As the (tautological) saying goes: everyone is doing their best. My interest is whether this can be improved - perhaps at some point when AI gets closer to challenging us for cognitive supremacy we will awake from our slumber.
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#54So if we supposedly already have passed the point where LLMs are at the level of high schoolers, how comes that almost no tasks or jobs that high-schoolers are capable of doing have been replaced by LLMs? Neither will more advanced work be replaced by 2027. End of story.
I'm not on board the hype train either, but I don't think that's the right way to look at it.
High schoolers are already not widely employed for knowledge-based work. It's almost all physical labor. The few knowledge jobs among my peers in high school were tutoring and call centers, both of which are arguably replaceable with LLMs today.
But "replaced" isn't really the right frame either. In my very physically-constrained industry I can't point to any specific job titles that have been replaced by "AI" but I do see a meaningful volume of labor being taken on by ML-dependent technologies like robotics and AR, which leads to increased productivity overall which leads to bottom line results that the users are seeking.
So to me it seems reasonable that we will see this with more advanced work. The better the AI tools get the more work they will be able to assist with, including the making of better AI tools.
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#55These guys have been waiting for their god a long time, finally they see the eclipse and believe it is the end of times
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#56It’s pretty bizarre how SV decision makers have shifted from talking about ML to LLMs to straight up Artificial Intelligence. I think one of the reasons is that LLMs are very good at what the execs do every day for a living and because of that, use as a way of assessing each other’s mental capacity: producing coherent-sounding speech (1). Now that the LLM can do what any VP has dedicated their entire life to masterin…
5 years ago we felt like we had to write programs that always get the right answer. We never realized that all it had to do was apologize and people wouldn’t mind. Eliezer Yudkowsky is up in arms about it because it can bullshit better than he can and never has to take a break. It can replace the authors of The New York Times opinion page if not the actual reporters. Can it replace the CEO?
Why not the presidency. Every four years there is a battle to fine tune the executive LLM, but a secret deep state controls the actual code running and so the LLM is modified to fake partisan fights.
p.s. only slightly tongue in cheek. Use of AI by state to manage social perception is on my bingo card. It will be very effective.
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#57I love how he's got the smartest person tick on his y-axis for an "AI researcher" [in the paper]. )) These people are narcissists of the first caliber. Can we graph that?
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
5 years ago we felt like we had to write programs that always get the right answer. We never realized that all it had to do was apologize and people wouldn’t mind. Eliezer Yudkowsky is up in arms about it because it can bullshit better than he can and never has to take a break. It can replace the authors of The New York Times opinion page if not the actual reporters. Can it replace the CEO?
Why not the presidency. Every four years there is a battle to fine tune the executive LLM, but a secret deep state controls the actual code running and so the LLM is modified to fake partisan fights. p.s. only slightly tongue in cheek. Use of AI by state to manage social perception is on my bingo card. It will be very effective.
I've thought a bit about the practicality of using an LLM for a president type job. I think it could work ok with some manual override. You'd need documents with the plans and principles to follow but they'd be open source so the people could see what was going on, and if it said something silly the human leader could override but it would be public so the voters could see the LLM said do this but the humans said no that so you could keep tabs. It would make the process more open than the present system where politicians lie to get elected and then do other stuff behind closed doors.
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#59Was expecting a little more analysis of or at least information about the content of the paper itself.
Sabine has a summary and opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm1B3Y3ypoE
Re: Is Aschenbrenner's 165 page paper on AI the naivety of a 25 year old?
#60It’s pretty bizarre how SV decision makers have shifted from talking about ML to LLMs to straight up Artificial Intelligence. I think one of the reasons is that LLMs are very good at what the execs do every day for a living and because of that, use as a way of assessing each other’s mental capacity: producing coherent-sounding speech (1). Now that the LLM can do what any VP has dedicated their entire life to masterin…
After being initially dazzled, I've drifted firmly into the camp of "this hype cycle is nonsense". I get why VCs/Startups/investors/legislators want (or even need) a hype cycle in a post-ZIRP economy, in an election year, with geo instability. But there's nothing, neither data/evidence that LLM === AGI or even a path that points towards LLM → AGI. AFAICT, LLMs are stochastic predictors of words within a large context…
From the article
>...The smartest people I have ever met—and they are the ones building this technology.
That's how you go beyond current LLMs. They'll figure something.