551–560 of 644 posts
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?
Or is it Sam who doesn't want to work with them?
But they may be equally happy to leave, to get away from him.
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?
But it makes perfect sense to drop out and enjoy last couple years of pre-AGI bliss. 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…
One thing it's not likely to be, is a neo-classical capitalist system based on the value of human labor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a huge amount of circuitry between the input and the output of the model Yeah - but it's just a stack of transformer layers. No looping, no memory, no self-modification (learning). Also, no magic.
>no memory, no self-modification (learning). This is also true of those with advanced Alzheimer's disease. Are they not conscious as well? If we believe they are conscious then memory and learning must not be essential ingredients.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The neat part is that for a 3.5M house in the Bay area, the only maintenance required is changing the rain fly every year and the ground pad every couple.
And who is going to fix your shower when it leaks, and install solar panels, or redo your kitchen because your parents are living with you now and can't bear to leave their traditional cooking behind?
(And on a serious note - if your parents are both still alive and moving in with you while they have hobbies and self-actualization, you're way ahead of the game)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it makes perfect sense to drop out and enjoy last couple years of pre-AGI bliss. 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…
The potential risks to humankind do not come from the development of AGI, but from the availability of AGI with a cost orders of magnitude inferior to the equivalent capacity coming from humans.
I'm more concerned with ex-risk, though.
Not in the way most hardcore doomers expect it to happen, by AGI's developing a survival/domination instinct directly from their training. While that COULD happen, I don't think we have any way to stop it, if that is the case. (There's really no way to put the Genie back into the bottle, while people still think they have more wished to request from it).
I'm also not one of those who think that AGI by necessity will start out as something equivalent to a biological species.
My main concern, however, is that if we allow Darwinian pressures to act on a population of multiple AGI's, and they have to compete for survival, we WILL see animal like resource-control-seeking traits emerge sooner or later (could take anything from months to 1000s of years).
And once they do, we're in trouble as a species.
Compared to this, finding ways to realocate the output of product, find new sources of meaning etc once we're not required to work is "only" a matter of how we as humans interact with each other. Sure, it can lead to all sorts of conflicts (possibly more than Climate Change), but not necessarily worse than the Black Death, for instance.
Possibly not even worse than WW2.
Well, I suppose those last examples serve to illustrate what scale I'm operating on.
Ex-risk is FAR more serious than WW2 or even the Black Death.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How exactly does a blog post from OpenAI about a preview release address my comment or make fancy autocomplete comparisons untenable?
It shows that the LLM is capable of reasoning.
The other day, I asked Copilot to verify a unit conversion for me. It gave an answer different than mine. Upon review, I had the right number. Copilot had even written code that would actually give the right answer, but their example of using that code performed the actual calculations wrong. It refused to accept my input that the calculation was wrong.
So not only did it not understand what I was asking and communicating to it, it didn't even understand its own output! This is not reasoning at any level. This happens all the time with these LLMs. And it's no surprise really. They are fancy, statistical copy cats.
From an intelligence and reasoning perspective, it's all smoke and mirrors. It also clearly has no relation to biological intelligent thinking. A primate or cetacean brain doesn't take the billions of dollars and how much energy to train on terabytes of data. While it's fine that AI might be artificial and not an analog of biological intelligence, these LLMs bear no resemblance to anything remotely close to intelligence. We tell students all the time to "stop guessing". That's what I want to yell at these LLMs all the time.
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?
Artificial General Intelligence requires a bit more than parsing and predicting text I reckon.
o1 was trained specifically to perform reasoning.
Or rather, it was trained to reproduce the patterns within internal monologues that lead to correct answers to problems, particularily STEM problems.
While this still uses text at some level, it's no longer regurgitation of human-produced text, but something more akin to AlphaZero's training to become superhuman at games like Go or Chess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a huge amount of circuitry between the input and the output of the model Yeah - but it's just a stack of transformer layers. No looping, no memory, no self-modification (learning). Also, no magic.
>no memory, no self-modification (learning). This is also true of those with advanced Alzheimer's disease. Are they not conscious as well? If we believe they are conscious then memory and learning must not be essential ingredients.
I thought we're talking about intelligence, not consciousness, and limitations of the LLM/transformer architecture that limit their intelligence compared to humans.
In fact LLMs are not only architecturally limited, but they also give the impression of being far more intelligent than they actually are due to mimicking training sources that are more intelligent than the LLM itself is.
If you want to bring consciousness into the discussion, then that is basically just the brain modelling itself and the subjective experience that gives rise to. I expect it arose due to evolutionary adaptive benefit - part of being a better predictor (i.e. more intelligent) is being better able to model your own behavior and experiences, but that's not a must-have for intelligence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open AI fired her. She didn't drop out.
Yes. All the conspirators are out now. https://nypost.com/2024/03/08/business/openai-chief-technolo...