Live data from Hacker News

Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

dwarkesh.com

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#121

Whenever someone brings up "AI", I tell them AI is not real AI. Machine learning is a more apt buzzword. And real AI is probably like fusion. Its always 10 years away.

AI is whatever is SOTA in the field, has always been.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#123
post #77

I think it's a shame that a 146 minute podcast released ~55 minutes ago has so much discussion. Everybody here is clearly just reacting to the title with their own biases. I know it's against the guidelines to discuss the state of a thread, but I really wish we could have thoughtful conversations about the content of links instead of title reactions.

Maybe they used AI to transcribe and summarize the podcast

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#124
A definition of AGI: https://www.agidefinition.ai/

A new contribution by quite a few prominent authors. One of the better efforts at defining AGI *objectively*, rather than through indirect measures like economic impact.

I believe it is incomplete because the psychological theory it is based on is incomplete. It is definitely worth discussing though.

—-

In particular, creative problem solving in the strong sense, ie the ability to make cognitive leaps, and deep understanding of complex real-world physics such as the interactions between animate and inanimate entities are missing from this definition, among others.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#126
post #77

I think it's a shame that a 146 minute podcast released ~55 minutes ago has so much discussion. Everybody here is clearly just reacting to the title with their own biases. I know it's against the guidelines to discuss the state of a thread, but I really wish we could have thoughtful conversations about the content of links instead of title reactions.

Eh, Dwarkesh has to market the podcasts somehow. I think it's fine for him to use hooks like this and for HN threads to respond to the hooks. 99% of HN threads only ever reply to the headline and that's not changing anytime soon. This will likely cause many people (including myself) to watch the full podcast when we otherwise might not have.

The criticism that people are only replying to a tiny portion of the argument is still valid, but sometimes it's more fun to have an open-ended discussion rather than address what's in the actual article/video.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#127

AGI is already here if you shift some goal posts :) From skimming the conversation it seems to mostly revolve around LLMs (transformer models) which is probably not going to be the way we obtain AGI to begin with, frankly it is too simple to be AGI, but the reason why there's so much hype is because it is simple to begin with so really I don't know.

LLMs are close enough to pass the Turing Test. That was a huge milestone. They are capable of abstract reasoning and can perform many tasks very well but they aren't AGI. They can't teach themselves to play chess at the level of a dedicated chess engine or fly an airplane using the same model they use to copypasta a React UI. They can only fool non-proficient humans into believing that they might be capable of doing those things.

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#129
post #58

I would bet all of my assets of my life that AGI will not be seen in the lifetime of anyone reading this message right now. That includes anyone reading this message long after the lives of those reading it on its post date have ended. Which of course raises the interesting question of how I can make good on this bet.

Should probably just short nvidia

Re: Andrej Karpathy – It will take a decade to work through the issues with agents

#130

Am I dating myself by thinking Kurzweil is still relevant? 2029: Human-level AI 2045: The Singularity - machine intelligence 1 billion times more powerful than all human intelligence Based on exponential growth in computing. He predicts we'll merge with AI to transcend biological limits. His track record is mixed, but 2029 looks more credible post-GPT-5. The 2045 claim remains highly speculative.

I lost all respect for him after reading about his views on medical immortality. His argument is that over time human life expectancy has been constantly increasing * and he calculated that based on some arbitrary rate of acceleration, that science would be expanding human life expectancy by more than a year, per year - medical immortality in other words, and all expected to happen just prior to the time he's reaching his final years.

The overwhelming majority of all gains in human life expectancy have come due to reductions in infant mortality. When you hear about things like a '40' year life expectancy in the past it doesn't mean that people just dropped dead at 40. Rather if you have a child that doesn't make it out of childhood, and somebody else that makes it to 80 - you have a life expectancy of ~40.

If you look back to the upper classes of old their life expectancy was extremely similar to those of today. So for instance in modern history, of the 15 key Founding Fathers, 7 lived to at least 80 years old: John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Samuel Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, John Jay. John Adams himself lived to 90. The youngest to die were Hamilton who died in a duel, and John Hancock who died of gout of an undocumented cause - it can be caused by excessive alcohol consumption.

All the others lived into their 60s and 70s. So their overall life expectancy was pretty much the same as we have today. And this was long before vaccines or even us knowing that surgeons washing their hands before surgery was a good thing to do. It's the same as you go back further into history. A study [1] of all men of renown in Ancient Greece was 71.3 [1], and that was from thousands of years ago!

Life expectancy at birth is increasing, but longevity is barely moving. And as Kurzweil has almost certainly done plentiful research on this topic, he is fully aware of this. Cognitive dissonance strikes again.

[1] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18359748/

Post reply on HN