101–110 of 1001 posts
Can someone explain how their singular focus means they won't have product cycles or management overhead?
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
Honestly, what does it matter. We're many lifetimes away from anything. These people are trying to define concepts that don't apply to us or what we're currently capable of. AI safety / AGI anything is just a form of tech philosophy at this point and this is all academic grift just with mainstream attention and backing.
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/1/10/24032987/ai-imp...
Given that GenAI is a statistical approach from which intelligence does not emerge as ample experience proves, does this new company plan to take a more human approach to simulating intelligence instead?
What about a more rational approach to implementing it instead.
(Which was not excluded from past plans: they just simply admittedly did not know the formula, and explored emergence. But the next efforts will have to go in the direction of attempting actual intelligence.)
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
Honestly, what does it matter. We're many lifetimes away from anything. These people are trying to define concepts that don't apply to us or what we're currently capable of. AI safety / AGI anything is just a form of tech philosophy at this point and this is all academic grift just with mainstream attention and backing.
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
I know it is a difficult subject but whichever country gets access to this superintelligence will certainly use it for "safety" reasons. Sutskever has lived in israel and now has a team there , but israel doesnt strike me as a state that can be trusted with the safety of the world. (many of the AI business leaders are of jewish descent, but not sure if they have half their team there). US on the other hand is a known…
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
the first step of safe superintelligence is to abolish capitalism
Racism, unsafe roads, hunger, bad weather, good weather, stubbing toes on furniture, etc.
Don't believe me?
See https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
Are there any non-capitalist utopias out there without any problems like this?
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
Honestly, what does it matter. We're many lifetimes away from anything. These people are trying to define concepts that don't apply to us or what we're currently capable of. AI safety / AGI anything is just a form of tech philosophy at this point and this is all academic grift just with mainstream attention and backing.
ENIAC was built in 1945, that's roughly a lifetime ago. Just think about it