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

AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

vincirufus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 442 posts

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#21

Post by tshaddox »

glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

> We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key.

A discovery that AGI is impossible in principle to implement in an electronic computer would require a major fundamental discovery in physics that answers the question “what is the brain doing in order to implement general intelligence?”

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#22

Post by [deleted] »

sixo wrote: post #11
glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

On the contrary, we have one working example of general intelligence (humans) and zero of quantum computing.

[deleted]

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#23

Post by epiccoleman »

tshaddox wrote: post #21
glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

> We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. A discovery that AGI is impossible in principle to implement in an electronic computer would require a major fundamental discovery in physics that answers the question “what is the brain doing in order to implement general intelligence?”

Would that really be a physics discovery? I mean I guess everything ultimately is. But it seems like maybe consciousness could be understood in terms of "higher level" sciences - somewhere on the chain of neurology->biology->chemistry->physics.

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#24

Post by [deleted] »

andy99 wrote: post #19

If you believe the bitter lesson, all the handwavy "engineering" is better done with more data. Someone likely would have written the same thing as this 8 years ago about what it would take to get current LLM performance. So I don't buy the engineering angle, I also don't think LLMs will scale up to AGI as imagined by Asimov or any of the usual sci-fi tropes. There is something more fundamental missing, as in missing…

[deleted]

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#27

Post by bee_rider »

sixo wrote: post #11
glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

On the contrary, we have one working example of general intelligence (humans) and zero of quantum computing.

Do we have a specific enough definition of general intelligence that we can exclude all non-human animals?

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#28

Post by Bukhmanizer »

andy99 wrote: post #19

If you believe the bitter lesson, all the handwavy "engineering" is better done with more data. Someone likely would have written the same thing as this 8 years ago about what it would take to get current LLM performance. So I don't buy the engineering angle, I also don't think LLMs will scale up to AGI as imagined by Asimov or any of the usual sci-fi tropes. There is something more fundamental missing, as in missing…

This isn’t really what the bitter lesson says.

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#29

Post by [deleted] »

tshaddox wrote: post #21
glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

> We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. A discovery that AGI is impossible in principle to implement in an electronic computer would require a major fundamental discovery in physics that answers the question “what is the brain doing in order to implement general intelligence?”

[deleted]

Re: AGI is an engineering problem, not a model training problem

#30

Post by throwaway31131 »

tshaddox wrote: post #21
glitchc wrote: post #10

We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. Can we land on AGI without some clear indication of possibility (aka Chappie style)? Possibly, but the likelihood is low. Quite low. It's essentially groping in the dark. A good contrast is quantum computing. We know that's possible, even feasible, and now are trying to overcome the engineering hurdles. And people still think th…

> We don't know if AGI is even possible outside of a biological construct yet. This is key. A discovery that AGI is impossible in principle to implement in an electronic computer would require a major fundamental discovery in physics that answers the question “what is the brain doing in order to implement general intelligence?”

We would also need a definition of AGI that is provable or disprovable.

We don’t even have a workable definition, never mind a machine.

Post reply on HN