261–270 of 303 posts
More or less every person owns a GPU (mobile) already. They use it for rendering your stupid website. In addition, many have desktop GPUs. Which they use for gaming. Miss me with your 1-per-person not-Graphics Processing Unit setup. Especially when a B300 can't run a whole lot on its own.
someone woke up on the wrong side of the AI revolution
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it is impossible to describe the universe and compress it into few terabytes Why? I'm not an expert, but from my understanding, there say species that function well in their ecological niches with significantly smaller cognitive capacities. And we already have autonomous cars and drones navigate and function reasonably well. So I don't see any reason to believe it's impossible. And even if terabytes aren't sufficie…
> there say species that function well in their ecological niches with significantly smaller cognitive capacities Yes, but LLMs are not animals, animals learn from experience and LLMs don't. Btw I meant bigger and bigger amount of data of extracted reasoning chains when you go deeper and generate more and more of them in your attempt to describe the universe, the amount of permutations explodes. And it seems LLMs can…
I mean they kind of do by distilling said experience and putting it in the next model.
Current LLMs can't do it because building said world model is super expensive, anything that lowers that requirement brings us closer to continuous learning.
Also the models we train these days are typically generalized human text models. Animal models are a bit different because they won't be "word" models and they aren't going to be generalized text models like us humans use. In fact there is a story just today on HN about a user creating some rather simple transformer models to solve a number of the Arc-AGI problems not using (human) words at all. The reason you don't see more of this is most people aren't dumping compute into these kinds of issues, but instead going for the AGI prize.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the first parent post all this conversation originated from, pointed that LLMs are not groundbreaking inventions. If people use it to replace voice assistants or search engines, you can see how this new invention is not really adding anything you already hadn't. AIs in general are very useful, but apart from the campaign they did to change everything's name into AI (also well known algorithms and "old" machin…
If people use [the Internet] to replace [Sears catalogs] or [paper mail], you can see how this new invention is not really adding anything you already hadn't.
They basically invented teleportation for sear catalogs and paper mail, can you see how this is different? Also, Internet was built to solve a problem we had, and it solved it beautifully and at reasonable prices.
I for sure can understand it introduced different issues, buy this is another topic.
I just finished reading Service Model by Adrian Tchaikovsky [1], a really timely novel that deals with lots of open ended questions of AI, robots, humanity, control, self determination, and so on. Really recommend it if you're into these kinds of things. > Premise Imagine that AI frontier progress stops as of 1 September 2026: AI becomes faster and cheaper, but it never becomes superhuman or improves considerably acr…
With were AI agent clusters already are I'd say they have reached superhuman capabilities in a number of metrics. I for example am not going to go toe to toe writing exploits against the best models we have out. Faster and cheaper just means they can pear down and explore the problem space even faster than I already can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you share your human piece that got flagged? And the AI piece that didn't? (Or snippets?) I've found pangram to be very accurate, so I'm curious.
I just posted it above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49524889 Edit: It was removed. Here is a gist: https://gist.github.com/jedberg/e24124e577c0da1c8445c22798eb...
This is a great contest. > never becomes superhuman Arguably, we are already there. I think the idea of the intelligence not scaling far beyond what we have now is worth considering, though doubtful.
The question really boils down to just how far is really really far? If the intelligence problem gets big-O notation hard as you climb the scale then something just a itty-bitty-bit smarter than you might as well be a million miles past you.
I also wonder about different directions of scaling too. For example humans aren't getting much smarter over time and we've started horizontal scaling. Governments and corporations for example. All the richest people in the world are heads of corporations or governments that gain wealth on the concentration of that power. It doesn't seem beyond imagination that AI could expand into that market and fit very well.
If there was a continuous 500 watt GPU per person we'd increase energy consumption by more than double. The continuous energy footprint per person globally averages to 356 watt currently.
500 watts continuous isn't realistic, unless you foresee a 24/7 digital shadow society where AIs interact continuously without user input.
I think the AI's would only do a tiny percent of their talking to their human. Voice itself is only a limited method that we interact with the world. Imagine the LLM seeing what you see, monitoring your health, monitoring your interactions with the world around you and then optimizing around that. For these things it will be talking to its own agents/subagents and the AI agents that operate the services of the world in this imaginary world.
Maybe you also think of it as a self contained business that provides services to you. Even when you're not busy consuming services from that business, that business typically keeps running and doing things for when you need it next.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there are scenarios, however (un)likely that will lead us to this point. Imaging them and spreading such ideas can make that more likely.
This is kind of why we need more Star Trek. Not that I don’t enjoy others, but I prefer space communism to almost any other possible future, especially the ones Peter Thiel has reserved for us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just posted it above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49524889 Edit: It was removed. Here is a gist: https://gist.github.com/jedberg/e24124e577c0da1c8445c22798eb...
The link says [dead]