Trying to drum up interest in Google!
Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
141–150 of 388 posts
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
[flagged]
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#143I think that AGI may already exist, perhaps on OpenAI's servers
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#144Earlier 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 ?
Calling them "hallucinations" is a shoddy piece of terminology by the community which anthropomorphises them.
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#145Earlier 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? What evidence do we have that this is how intelligence works?
A transformative aspect of human verbal intelligence involves dealing with concepts and their combinations intersection. ChatGPT does this very well. I think we can agree that ChatGPT provides intelligent completions for an astonishing range of human concepts?
It seems appropriate to describe what ChatGPT understands and what it doesn’t understand through evals or assessments (in the same way that we can use assessments to determine what a student understands or doesn’t). So if we have to call it “computational understanding”, fine —- but clearly ChatGPT understands an incredible range of concepts and their combinations.
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#146I predict that the fight will be more about defining intelligence than inventing it. No one knows what AGI is. There isn't going to be some switch that flips to take us from AI to AGI. These tools we have today will just keep getting incrementally better, and some new ones will pop up, and at some point we'll have to stop and say "yeah, this is good enough to qualify". And everyone will have their own opinion on what…
[deleted]
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#147These people are confusing learning with intelligence. The latter is a property of a conscious being while a lot more beings have the ability to learn, a basic example would be genetic adaptation or immediate environmental adaptations in plants, neither of which could be considered intelligence.
Learning is an automating activity, when you've learnt something it means you can do it without being intelligent about it, on 'autopilot' as it were.
A crucial aspect of intelligence is the denial of learning when appropriate, i.e. not acting according to learning, which seems to be a conscious, prefrontal cortex related ability, and hence closely connected with anxiety and suspicion.
Evolutionarily learning works well with slow changes in evolutionary pressure, intelligence gets useful when the pressure is erratic and evolutionary signals are unreliable in mediating information about how to survive and reproduce efficiently.
The AGI believers in the capitalist class aren't alone in confusing this, learning is much simpler and more immediately rewarding than intelligence so the bourgeoisie has made learning their ideal for all of modernity and replaced educational exams based on more or less intelligent conversation with formal measurements of learning.
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#148The 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…
Fusion by 1990 with a bit of extra investment promised in 1972 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.175.4027.1194.b I remember tons of articles from that time arguing the same. Then the attention shifted to "fifth-generation computers".
I don't think this contradicts the AGI prediction though (nor the "Fusion by 1990 with a bit of extra investment" prediction for that matters)
https://external-preview.redd.it/LkKBNe1NW51Wh-8nLSTRdQtTha2...
This chart shows how much people in the 1970s estimated should be invested to have fusion by 1990, to have it by 2000s and to "never" have it. We ended up spending below the "never" amount for research over four decades so of course fusion never happened exactly as predicted.
I think the main difference is that no one was interested in investing in fusion back then, while everyone is interested in investing in AGI now.
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fusion by 1990 with a bit of extra investment promised in 1972 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.175.4027.1194.b I remember tons of articles from that time arguing the same. Then the attention shifted to "fifth-generation computers".
That is actually a really interesting find. Some of the verbiage is parallel to the hype we have around AGI right now too "fusion by 1990 instead of 2000..." does that not sound exactly like AGI in X year up from Y year that we read now?
Please see my reply to parent.
> "fusion by 1990 instead of 2000..." Those three dots are omitting the most important part of the issue if we spend that much extra money on R&D
In the fusion case no one was willing to spend the money, in AGI's case it looks like everyone seems to be willing to spend the money.
I personally hope they won't, but that is a crutial point not to be overlooked.
Re: Google DeepMind CEO says some form of AGI possible in a few years
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hallucinations are an indication that something is missing, surely? Does chatGPT need a way to verify reality for itself to become truly intelligent ?
Calling them "hallucinations" is a shoddy piece of terminology by the community which anthropomorphises them.
We're building human-like intelligence, so this seems quite apt?