311–320 of 644 posts
Related (possibly): OpenAI to remove non-profit control and give Sam Altman equity https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41651548
If OpenAI is the foremost in solving the AGI - possibly the biggest invention of mankind - it's a little weird that everyone's dropping out. Does it not look like that no one wants to work with Sam in the long run?
Advances in AI even without AGI will lead to unemployment, recession, collapse of our economic structure, and then our social structure. Whatever is on the other side is not pretty.
If you are on the forefront, know it’s coming imminently, and made your money, it makes perfect sense to leave and enjoy money and leisures money allows while money still worth something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like this is stating the obvious - but i guess not to many - but a probabilistic syllable generator is not intelligence, it does not understand us, it cannot reason, it can only generate the next syllable It makes us feel understood in the same ways John Edward used to in daytime tv, its all about how language makes us feel true AGI...unfortunately we're not even close
While it's true that language models are fundamentally based on statistical patterns in language, characterizing them as mere "probabilistic syllable generators" significantly understates their capabilities and functional intelligence. These models can engage in multistep logical reasoning, solve complex problems, and generate novel ideas - going far beyond simply predicting the next syllable. They can follow intrica…
Not only are we within eyesight of the end, we're more or less there. o1 isn't just scaling up parameter count 10x again and making GPT-5, because that's not really an effective approach at this point in the exponential curve of parameter count and model performance.
I agree with the broader point: I'm not sure it isn't consistent with current neuroscience that our brains aren't doing anything more than predicting next inputs in a broadly similar way, and any categorical distinction between AI and human intelligence seems quite challenging.
I disagree that we can draw a line from scaling current transformer models to AGI, however. A model that is great for communicating with people in natural language may not be the best for deep reasoning, abstraction, unified creative visions over long-form generations, motor control, planning, etc. The history of computer science is littered with simple extrapolations from existing technology that completely missed the need for a paradigm shift.
It is hard for me to square "This company is a few short years away from building world-changing AGI" and "I'm stepping away to do my own thing". Maybe I'm just bad at putting myself in someone else's shoes, but I feel like if I had spent years working towards a vision of AGI, and thought that success was finally just around the corner, it'd be very difficult to walk away.
I feel like this is stating the obvious - but i guess not to many - but a probabilistic syllable generator is not intelligence, it does not understand us, it cannot reason, it can only generate the next syllable It makes us feel understood in the same ways John Edward used to in daytime tv, its all about how language makes us feel true AGI...unfortunately we're not even close
I think it's more productive to think about AI in terms of "effectiveness" or "capability". If you ask it, "what is the capital of France?", and it replies "Paris" - it doesn't matter whether it is intelligent or not, it is effective/capable at identifying the capital of France.
Same goes for producing an image, writing SQL code that works, automating some % of intellectual labor, giving medical advice, solving an equation, piloting a drone, building and managing a profitable company. It is capable of various things to various degrees. If these capabilities are enough to make money, create risks, change the world in some significant way - that is the part that matters.
Whether we call it "intelligence" or "probabilistically generaring syllables" is not important.
It is hard for me to square "This company is a few short years away from building world-changing AGI" and "I'm stepping away to do my own thing". Maybe I'm just bad at putting myself in someone else's shoes, but I feel like if I had spent years working towards a vision of AGI, and thought that success was finally just around the corner, it'd be very difficult to walk away.
> we fundamentally changed how AI systems learn and reason through complex problems I'm not an AI researcher, have they done this? The commentary I've seen on o1 is basically that they incorporated techniques that were already being used. I'd also be curious to learn: what fundamental contributions to research has OpenAI made? The ChatGPT that was released in 2022 was based on Google's research, and IMO the internal…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because if you are a high level executive and you are transparent on those things, and if it backfires, it will backfire hard for your future opportunities, since all the companies will view you as a potential liability. So it is always safer and wiser option to not say anything in case of any risk of it backfiring. So you do the polite PR messaging every single time. There's nothing to be gained on the individual le…
I doubt someone with Mira or Ilya’s calibre have to worry about future opportunities. They can very well craft their own opportunities. Saying I was wrong should not be this complicated, or saying we failed. I do however agree that there is nothing to be gained and everything to be risked. So why do it.
I will never understand why people still take statements like these at face value. These aren't her personal thoughts and feelings. The letter was carefully crafted by OpenAI's PR team under strict direction from Sam and the board. Whatever the real story is is sitting under many layers of NDAs and threats of clawing back/diluting her shares, and we will not know it for a long time. What I can say for certain is no e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With multiple correct predictions, do you think the rest of HN will start to listen to Gwern’s beliefs about OpenAI / AGI problems? Probably not.
I’m not aware of those beliefs. Could you provide a link to an article/ comment?
TL;DR spoiler from someone else is: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/a5e9arCnbDac9Doig/it-looks-l...
I've forgotten, did she play a role in the attempted Sam Altman ouster?