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

AI 2040: Plan A

ai-2040.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 567 posts

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#411

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

derektank wrote: post #360
27183 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used the example of 1G constant acceleration space flight in another thread which got downvoted to oblivion, but I think it's a good one. That's a technology we know how to build. We just need superconducting electronics and miniaturized fusion reactors, or a ship which is built like Project Orion to use nuclear bombs for propulsion. Now write down a blueprint for superintelligence. So I've given you two impossible…

As early as the late 19th century, Louis Pasteur’s work had inspired a belief in the scientific community that it must, in principle be possible to selectively exterminate bacteria. The German physician Paul Ehrlich expounded on this in greatest detail in 1907 when he described his “magic bullet” (or Zauberkugel) theory for effectively targeting pathogens without harming the human host, similar to the immune system.…

The parent poster argument boils down to "[something] is theoretically possible, therefore 1) it is guaranteed to practically implementable 2) in the reasonably near future". Both are simply prima facie false; one can ask an LLM to explain why if there's any doubt.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#412

Post by alex_young »

aesthesia wrote: post #282
alex_young wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did it not burn? Was it not the most extensive library of human writing at that time? Please help us all understand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria

From the article you link: > Scholars have interpreted Cassius Dio's wording to indicate that the fire did not actually destroy the entire Library itself, but rather one or more Library warehouses near the docks.[87][81][8][89] Whatever damage Caesar's fire may have caused, evidently the Library was not completely destroyed.[87][81][8][89][3] The geographer Strabo (c. 63 BC – c. 24 AD) mentions visiting the Mouseion,…

  The Library, or part of its collection, was accidentally burned by Julius Caesar during his civil war in 48 BC, but it is unclear how much was actually destroyed

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#413

Post by IshKebab »

danbruc wrote: post #410
fwipsy wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember thinking exactly the same thing around 5-7 years ago, in the GPT-2/GPT-3 era. "Oh sure they can produce semi-coherent output, but truly intelligent behavior is still far away. This isn't science fiction, they're just falling prey to Pascal's Mugging same as my religious friends did." Now I'm not so sure. I give the AI safety subculture as a whole a lot of credit for putting it on my radar back when it was…

I remember thinking exactly the same thing around 5-7 years ago, in the GPT-2/GPT-3 era. ChatGPT was announced three and a half years ago, 30-11-2022.

And GPT-3 was released 6 years ago in 2020... What's your point?

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#414

Post by thegrim33 »

pibaker wrote: post #312
taurath wrote: post #267

This is religious fervor folks, as AI 2027 was. I grew up in evangelical christianity, and to them the end of the world is just around the corner, the same way it has been since I was a small child and likely will be when we are all gone. This isn't science. This isn't hypothesis experiment record results. This is very expensive astrology, shiny rock collecting, ritualistic meaning-making and self-justification. Yall…

When I learned that this website is by the same people who gave us AI 2027, I immediately thought about the Wikipedia page on doomsday predictions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_ap... Notice the many times when a prediction failed and the so called prophet would come back in a few years and give you a new date. And they would tell you, well, this time it's real. I do find it ironic that ma…

They gave a ~2 year timeframe for their predictions in this one (tied to the next presidential election), so in 2 years when none of this has happened will they then switch over to a new AI 2044 Plan? Where's the accountability? Where's the followup or retrospective? What if there was some mechanism that branded these people so that when they made claims in the future people could clearly see the authors labeled as "made completely wrong fantastical claims in the past"?

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#415

Post by 27183 »

sudb wrote: post #409
27183 wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we must be talking past eachother. I define stochastic search as a search process with randomness injected into it that can return the following things: - Something contained in the data set, not necessarily the same thing for every iteration of a given query - Something not contained the data set (hallucination), not necessarily the same thing for every iteration of a given query Does that clear it up? > Wha…

Ah it seems you are a stochastic parrot believer ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_parrot ). What are your responses to the Expert Rebuttals section? I find the rebuttals pretty convincing - that there seems to be some emergent behaviour that is not simply just next-token-prediction, or that the ability to do accurate next-token-prediction requires something "extra" that LLMs have. > All the ways they fail t…

> there seems to be some emergent behaviour that is not simply just next-token-prediction, or that the ability to do accurate next-token-prediction requires something "extra" that LLMs have.

The next step then would be to design and conduct experiments that isolate this effect. Figure out how to make it happen reliably and in such a way that you know it's actually happening as opposed to just something you're imagining. Isolate it or distill it so it can be studied directly. Until then, it's easiest to dismiss it as imaginary.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#416

Post by thegrim33 »

dheera wrote: post #397
pibaker wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I learned that this website is by the same people who gave us AI 2027, I immediately thought about the Wikipedia page on doomsday predictions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_ap... Notice the many times when a prediction failed and the so called prophet would come back in a few years and give you a new date. And they would tell you, well, this time it's real. I do find it ironic that ma…

... and then there are the actual planet-threatening astronomical events that humanity should think about ways to mitigate but I'm worried that human lifespans and capitalism prevent us from working towards mitigations. Everyone will just say "meh, 1 million years is a long time, I won't be around" and a million years will go by. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future

Capitalism, in particular NASA's commercial space development program, have already provided and demonstrated initial asteroid redirect capability via the DART mission launched by SpaceX, which impacted an asteroid and measured the changes to its trajectory.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#417

Post by skybrian »

nullandvoid wrote: post #260
skybrian wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say "just" 15 years, but Waymo is still only available in a few cities. That seems more like a slow, cautious rollout to me, not a fast takeoff. Society has had a lot of time to get used to (and tired of) the idea and come up with regulations. My guess is that the deployment of other types of robots will often be a similarly slow grind. That's unlike the Internet, smart phones, and coding agents, which got user a…

Waymo was largely built pre-LLM and AI level funding - I think it might be a somewhat apple and pairs comparison.

Maybe research and development will speed up a bit, but I think it’s still going to require a lot of expensive experimenting in the real world.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#418

Post by semiquaver »

danbruc wrote: post #410
fwipsy wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember thinking exactly the same thing around 5-7 years ago, in the GPT-2/GPT-3 era. "Oh sure they can produce semi-coherent output, but truly intelligent behavior is still far away. This isn't science fiction, they're just falling prey to Pascal's Mugging same as my religious friends did." Now I'm not so sure. I give the AI safety subculture as a whole a lot of credit for putting it on my radar back when it was…

I remember thinking exactly the same thing around 5-7 years ago, in the GPT-2/GPT-3 era. ChatGPT was announced three and a half years ago, 30-11-2022.

Do you think that ChatGPT is when people on hacker news first became aware of the GPT series of models?

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1594339200&dateRange=custom&...

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#419

Post by grey-area »

fwipsy wrote: post #381
taurath wrote: post #267

This is religious fervor folks, as AI 2027 was. I grew up in evangelical christianity, and to them the end of the world is just around the corner, the same way it has been since I was a small child and likely will be when we are all gone. This isn't science. This isn't hypothesis experiment record results. This is very expensive astrology, shiny rock collecting, ritualistic meaning-making and self-justification. Yall…

I remember thinking exactly the same thing around 5-7 years ago, in the GPT-2/GPT-3 era. "Oh sure they can produce semi-coherent output, but truly intelligent behavior is still far away. This isn't science fiction, they're just falling prey to Pascal's Mugging same as my religious friends did." Now I'm not so sure. I give the AI safety subculture as a whole a lot of credit for putting it on my radar back when it was…

Effective altruism is also very attractive to manipulative sociopaths who want to maximise their power over others whilst appearing virtuous and hoarding wealth and power. Poster boy for this movement is the convicted fraudster SBF. I believe Altman is also a fan.

As to a better world or super intelligence, I’ll believe it may be possible when I see some signs of intelligence from what people are calling AI, instead of plausible text and image generation based on a very large corpus.

Post reply on HN