241–250 of 297 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I'm not mistaken, he's either affiliated with or otherwise connected to the effective altruist movement, hence he can't be unbiased. I find this article tells an interesting perspective on it: https://www.noemamag.com/the-politics-of-superintelligence/
Nobody's unbiased.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI boosters really are detached from reality. LLMs are nothing close to AGI and not going to lead to it, they can’t distinguish right from wrong, they can’t count, they can’t reason, they generate plausible text from a vast databank of connected text. Apparently that is enough to fool many people but it’s nothing close to AGI which would require internal models of the world, reasoning etc. We are nowhere close to AGI…
This is all speculative. We don't understand intelligence, so you literally have no idea whether what we recognize as intelligence is some suitable arrangement of "statistical token generation", especially once you add feedbacks loops.
They can predict likely sentences but not evaluate truth or logic. They can fairly reliably record facts about the world but not construct internal models of the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You want to go to the store to get ice cream. Ice cream is delicious and the value of eating ice cream is a small positive, let's say x. There's a one in ten million chance you'll get hit by a car on the way and die, and your life is infinitely precious, therefore the expected value of going is x times 1 = x, and the one of not going is 1/10m times negative infinity which is negative infinity. You are a rational pers…
Aside: The singularity framing is really tough here, right? It comes from black hole physics. Essentially, at the event horizon, the way we know how to do physics stops working, and we rightly conclude that we can't currently say anything about the other side of the event horizon. It is not saying that nothing is occurring there. Matter, time, space, energy, whatever, that still is there (maaaaybe?) and is still unde…
So there are a couple interesting and meaningful changes at the event horizon, but it's not a mathematical singularity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Coding is anything but “easily” verifiable.
It's extremely verifiable. The reinforcement finetuning strategy I'm referring to involves LLM creating coding tasks with an expected output, implementing the code, and then having a compiler (or interpreter in the case of languages like python) succeed or fail to run the code. Then compare the output to expected output. The verification process (run interpreter + run test) can be done in seconds. One can generate mi…
> research showing with the right policy, Rest of the owl.
FYI: The author has predicted that "AGI" will be here in 1-2 years and has staked his public reputation on it. He is personally invested in trendlines being lindy rather than sigmoid. I don't think you can use lindy on trends as if trends are static objects, but that's another conversation.
He only has 1.5 more months. If he's wrong he needs to own it. Same for Eliezer Yudkowsky. But these people have too much riding on their brands. No one has the courage to fess up to being wrong. Given how many podcasts he and others have been on professing this belief, it will be hard to just pretend otherwise.
What has he been up to since finishing the finest work of literature ever produced, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality? I’ve been patiently awaiting a sequel!
FYI: The author has predicted that "AGI" will be here in 1-2 years and has staked his public reputation on it. He is personally invested in trendlines being lindy rather than sigmoid. I don't think you can use lindy on trends as if trends are static objects, but that's another conversation.
If I'm not mistaken, he's either affiliated with or otherwise connected to the effective altruist movement, hence he can't be unbiased. I find this article tells an interesting perspective on it: https://www.noemamag.com/the-politics-of-superintelligence/
It's not at all surprising that they are increasingly getting labeled a cult (they aren't by traditional definition but there are a lot similarities). I'm really surprised it hasn't hit the mainstream yet given the connections to Elon, Thiel, frontier labs, dark crypto funding, FTX/SBF, some suicides and some murders. It's all a little nuts.
Meanwhile you got all the anti-democratic NRx people on the other side of it.
I suspect this new doc coming out on HBO will spark a media frenzy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's literally the singularity though - the point past which predictions are meaningless. My "plan" is hope for a benevolent intelligence that establishes a post-human government and then enjoy poat-scarcity society doing wood working or something. Billionaires should probably be more worried.
On our present trajectory, any new super intelligence will be the billionaire’s plaything. Hope is indeed needed to see how it would benefit the common person.
News flash: predicting the future is hard
The individual who is the best at predicting the future is predicting ASI and full labor automation by 2040: https://xcancel.com/peterwildeford/status/202963666232244661...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to play devils advocate: are we sure humans have demonstrated the ability to go beyond their training data? Like.. are we sure-sure about that?
Idk, I mean, Shakespeare never read Shakespeare, so, I mean, unless aliens?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He only has 1.5 more months. If he's wrong he needs to own it. Same for Eliezer Yudkowsky. But these people have too much riding on their brands. No one has the courage to fess up to being wrong. Given how many podcasts he and others have been on professing this belief, it will be hard to just pretend otherwise.
Eliezer Yudkowsky, now there’s a name I haven’t heard in a while. What has he been up to since finishing the finest work of literature ever produced, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality ? I’ve been patiently awaiting a sequel!