Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

dwarkesh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 394 posts

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#231

Post by timewizard »

threatofrain wrote: post #205
timewizard wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That we don't have a single unified explanation doesn't mean that we don't have very good hints, or that we don't have very good understandings of specific components. Aside from that the measure really, to me, has to be power efficiency. If you're boiling oceans to make all this work then you've not achieved anything worth having. From my calculations the human brain runs on about 400 calories a day. That's an absur…

We'll be experiencing extreme social disruption well before we have to worry about the cost-efficiency of strong AI. We don't even need full "AGI" to experience socially momentous change. We might even be on the verge of self driving cars spreading to more cities. We don't need very powerful AI to do very powerful things.

> experiencing extreme social disruption

I think this just displays an exceptionally low estimation of human beings. People tend to resist extremities. Violently.

> experience socially momentous change

The technology is owned and costs money to use. It has extremely limited availability to most of the world. It will be as "socially momentous" as every other first world exclusive invention has been over the past several decades. 3D movies were, for a time, "socially momentous."

> on the verge of self driving cars spreading to more cities.

Lidar can't read street lights and vision systems have all sorts of problems. You might be able to code an agent that can drive a car but you've got some other problems that stand in the way of this. AGI is like 1/8th the battle. I referenced just the brain above. Your eyes and ears are actually insanely powerful instruments in their own right. "Real world agency" is more complicated than people like to admit.

> We don't need very powerful AI to do very powerful things.

You've lost sight of the forest for the trees.

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#232

Post by alecco »

Is it me or the signal/noise is needle in a haystack for all these cheerleader tech podcasts? In general, I really miss the podcast scene from 10 years ago, less polished but more human and with reasonable content. Not this speculative blabber that seems to be looking to generate clickbait clips. I don't know what happened a few years ago, but even solid podcasts are practically garbage now.

I used to listen to podcasts daily for at least an hour. Now I'm stuck with uploading blogs and pdfs to Eleven Reader. I tried the Google thing to make a podcast but it's very repetitive and dumb.

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#234

Post by Philpax »

Nevermark wrote: post #211
Philpax wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A technology that can create new technology is quite important for technologists to keep abreast of, I'd say :p

You get to say “Checkmate” now! Another end game is: “A technology that doesn’t need us to maintain itself, and can improve its own design in manufacturing cycles instead of species cycles, might have important implications for every biological entity on Earth.”

This is true, but one must communicate the issue one step at a time :-)

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#235

Post by lolinder »

sebastiennight wrote: post #173

The thing is, AGI is not needed to enable incredible business/societal value, and there is good reason to believe that actual AGI would damage both our society, our economy, and if many experts in the field are to be believed, humanity's survival as well. So I feel happy that models keep improving, and not worried at all that they're reaching an asymptote.

Really the only people for whom this is bad news is OpenAI and their investors. If there is no AGI race to win then OpenAI is just a wildly overvalued vendor of a hot commodity in a crowded market, not the best current shot at building a money printing machine.

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#237

Post by ggreer »

dmwilcox wrote: post #213

I've been saying this for a decade already but I guess it is worth saying here. I'm not afraid AI or a hammer is going to become intelligent (or jump up and hit me in the head either). It is science fiction to think that a system like a computer can behave at all like a brain. Computers are incredibly rigid systems with only the limited variance we permit. "Software" is flexible in comparison to creating dedicated ci…

Is there any specific mental task that an average human is capable of that you believe computers will not be able to do?

Also does this also mean that you believe that brain emulations (uploads) are not possible, even given an arbitrary amount of compute power?

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#238

Post by biophysboy »

CooCooCaCha wrote: post #221
dmwilcox wrote: post #213

I've been saying this for a decade already but I guess it is worth saying here. I'm not afraid AI or a hammer is going to become intelligent (or jump up and hit me in the head either). It is science fiction to think that a system like a computer can behave at all like a brain. Computers are incredibly rigid systems with only the limited variance we permit. "Software" is flexible in comparison to creating dedicated ci…

This is why I think philosophy has become another form of semi-religious kookery. You haven't provided any actual proof or logical reason for why a computer couldn't be intelligent. If randomness is required then sample randomness from the real world. It's clear that your argument is based on feels and you're using philosophy to make it sound more legitimate.

Brains are low-frequency, energy-efficient, organic, self-reproducing, asynchronous, self-repairing, and extremely highly connected (thousands of synapses). If AGI is defined as "approximate humans", I think its gonna be a while.

That said, I don't think computers need to be human to have an emergent intelligence. It can be different in kind if not in degree.

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#239

Post by lolinder »

nextaccountic wrote: post #136
ksec wrote: post #24

Is AGI even important? I believe the next 10 to 15 years will be Assisted Intelligence. There are things that current LLM are so poor I dont believe a 100x increase in pref / watt is going to make much difference. But it is going to be good enough there wont be an AI Winter. Since current AI has already reached escape velocity and actually increase productivity in many areas. The most intriguing part is if Humanoid f…

AGI is important for the future of humanity. Maybe they will have legal personhood some day. Maybe they will be our heirs. It would suck if AGI were to be developed in the current economic landscape. They will be just slaves. All this talk about "alignment", when applied to actual sentient beings, is just slavery. AGI will be treated just like we treat animals, or even worse. So AGI isn't about tools, it's not about…

Why do you believe AGI is important for the future of humanity? That's probably the most controversial part of your post but you don't even bother to defend it. Just because it features in some significant (but hardly universal) chunk of Sci Fi doesn't mean we need it in order to have a great future, nor do I see any evidence that it would be a net positive to create a whole different form of sentience.

Re: AGI Is Still 30 Years Away – Ege Erdil and Tamay Besiroglu

#240

Post by titzer »

codingwagie wrote: post #99
csto12 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just asked it to design or implement? If o3 can design it, that means it’s using open source schedulers as reference. Did you think about opening up a few open source projects to see how they were doing things in those two weeks you were designing?

why would I do that kind of research if it can identify the problem I am trying to solve, and spit out the exact solution. also, it was a rough implementation adapted to my exact tech stack

Who hired you and why are they paying you money?

I don't want to be a hater, but holy moley, that sounds like the absolute laziest possible way to solve things. Do you have training, skills, knowledge?

This is an HN comment thread and all, but you're doing yourself no favors. Software professionals should offer their employers some due diligence and deliver working solutions that at least they understand.

Post reply on HN