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

Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 388 posts

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#131

Post by jabradoodle »

agentultra wrote: post #67

It seems to me that software developers are all too eager to attribute properties such as “intelligence,” to LLM’s which lead to strange, reductive conclusions that this is all humans are: token matching algorithms. There is much to intelligence that those who’ve been studying it in areas such as biology and ecology still do not understand. The role of emotions and how they work have a strong influence on our cogniti…

I don't think it is necessarily important how the human brain works.

An interesting metaphor here is that aeroplanes don't work in a similar way to birds, the end goal is flight, not having wings that flap and are covered in feathers.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#132

Post by misnome »

earthnail wrote: post #123
PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

> I think ChatGPT is good evidence of this. What evidence do we have that this isn't how intelligence works?

What evidence do we have that this is how intelligence works?

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#133

Post by goatlover »

FredPret wrote: post #113
HKH2 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite our best efforts, we are deeply irrational. Our thinking is based on instinct, not on core principles; it's a top-down approach driven by feelings.

Everything in the universe must by definition be rational. Chemical reactions always happen a certain way, physics always works a certain way, numbers add up the same every time. If something seems irrational, that's because there are rational things layered on top of one another in a way that creates a misapprehension in a partially-informed observer.

> Everything in the universe must by definition be rational.

Why? You assume nature must be comprehensible to us because you define it that way? Nature's not under any obligation to us.

> If something seems irrational, that's because there are rational things layered on top of one another in a way that creates a misapprehension in a partially-informed observer.

Possible irrational things: Collapse of the wave function, consciousness, why anything exists. There's also non-computable functions, paradoxes like the liar paradox, and the inability to refute various skeptical possibilities like living in a simulation.

Combine that with the fact that all models are wrong, some are just more useful. We can't model the entire universe with perfect accuracy without the model being the universe, which means there are always things left out. Our rational explanations are approximations.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#134

Post by superzamp »

kranke155 wrote: post #126
earthnail wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

Hallucinations are an indication that something is missing, surely? Does chatGPT need a way to verify reality for itself to become truly intelligent ?

Just the other day, my friend asked me if I knew what this bug she took a picture of was. I replied it looked like a house centipede, and it was indeed one. Two things:

1) My confidence was around 80%, without any sense of absolute certainty. 2) I had no idea why I knew that, and where did I originally learned about what a house centipede looks like.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#135

Post by streakfix »

depr wrote: post #129
earthnail wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

>I think ChatGPT is good evidence of this. What evidence do we have that this isn't how intelligence works? People don't need the gigantic amount of input data that ChatGPT needs to learn. However I'm not sure what exactly "this" is you and GP are referring to, and it may be possible to improve existing ideas so that it works with less input data.

``` USER: If a = 33223 and b = 22335, what is a + b? ASSISTANT: a + b = 55558. ```

The training data isn't the input. It's a part of the algorithm.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#136

Post by streakfix »

goatlover wrote: post #128
earthnail wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

> I think ChatGPT is good evidence of this. What evidence do we have that this isn't how intelligence works? Animals have bodies and have to survive in an environment. They're not just sitting there waiting on a prompt to generate text. They do things in the real world. Language is later invention by one particular social animal which serves our needs to communicate, which is different than waiting on prompts.

Reinforcement learning emulates survival of the fittest, in that smarted algorithms/parameters survive.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#137

Post by gumballindie »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #26
wg0 wrote: post #13

The other few things possible in next few years for past few years are: 1. Fusion 2. Self driving cars. 3. Ubiquitous, generally available and stable 8192 bit quantum computers. 4. High energy density grid scale batteries. Just few more "this maybe the... what could revolutionize..." articles away. What we forget is that it is in these people's business interest (executives making such statements) to state the exagge…

I think we'll have full-blown AGI before fusion and before world-changing levels of quantum computing. Which is to say, we won't be around to see fusion and world-changing quantum :( But there's still time for robo-taxis!

You may be onto something. AGI is one or two marketing campaigns away while fusion is hard science - difficult to fake.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#138

Post by GaggiX »

blast wrote: post #100
PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

"We dont have better algorithms, we just have more data" - Peter Norvig

What about AlphaZero? No prior data.

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#139

Post by amitport »

depr wrote: post #129
earthnail wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

>I think ChatGPT is good evidence of this. What evidence do we have that this isn't how intelligence works? People don't need the gigantic amount of input data that ChatGPT needs to learn. However I'm not sure what exactly "this" is you and GP are referring to, and it may be possible to improve existing ideas so that it works with less input data.

"People don't need the gigantic amount of input data that ChatGPT needs to learn"

Sure they do. Humans rely on tons of audio and video before they can even read (or walk).

Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years

#140

Post by wesammikhail »

earthnail wrote: post #123
PheonixPharts wrote: post #41

As someone who has worked in the field of AI/ML for quite awhile now, the problem with current AGI predictions is ML hasn't done anything new since the 80s (or arguably earlier). At the end of the day all ML is using gradient descent to do some sort of non-linear projection of the data on to a latent space, then doing some relatively simple math in this latent space to perform some task. Personally I think the limits…

I disagree with you. > Essentially all we've done is pushed the basic model proposed by linear regression to it's absolutely limits No, we haven't pushed linear regression to its limits. If it was only linear regression, it wouldn't work. Neural networks need a non-linearity to model complex things. The beauty is that given an infinite series of nonlinearities, one can model any mathematical function. In practice we…

Andrej Karpathy, the director of AI at tesla, published an AMAZING video about how the current models are built which I think everyone in the tech space should watch. It is intuitive, easy to follow and quite frankly the best video I have seen on the topic. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCc8FmEb1nY&list=FL2tbfd7UpJ...

If you conclude, after watching this, that this is all intelligence is - namely cascading optimization and data structure problems chained in a row, then you and a fair number of people here wont ever find common ground. That is not to say that you're wrong, it just seems as if there is a missing component here that we haven't yet discovered.

Post reply on HN